The midland journal. (Rising Sun, Md.) 1885-1947, 1894-11-09
rIonev Can't be Ignored.

TlOney can't De ignored.
"The people of New Zealand" says a
contemporary, care fast destroying the
parent monopoly-private property in
land. That is why an application for
money in London would not be favorably
received. but such applications are
favorably received] If land were free
or, inversely stated-if labor were free to
apply itself to land to produce more
wealth there would be little need for so
much borrowing. Then labor would be
boss not capital. Labor produces all
wealth." etc.
That is not a fair statement of the case.
People who are poor do not borrow
money, but those who possess great stores
of undeveloped wealth, or wealth as raw
material. The material which constitutes
wealth in its crude state cannot be utilized
1t must be fitted for use and distributed,
and money is the only known medium of
distribution. The poorest people in the
world are the land poor. They cannot
utilize the land or distribute its products
without money. The Indians represented
landed people without money.
The unjust laws of nation are laws
which force labor to borrow money at
usurious rates to develop the wealth of the
land. When the rich mines of California
were discovered land was free. People
focked to it and produced fabulous guam
titles of wealth. In order to develop and
distribute these natural resources after
labor had been applied to them, and to
enable them to apply their labor most
successfully, money was i'll the greatest
demand at the highest rates of interest.
What is the situation now? Are the
wealth producers in possession of the
land Not at all. The majority of them
died poor and the men who controlled the
money now monopolize the land. The
single tax proposes to right this wrong by
taking the rent from these land monopo-
lists. That is good SO far as it goes. 1t
offers remedy for an evil but not pre-
tentative of a future similar evil. If the
money is left in control of law favored
money monopoly, that monopoly, when
deprived of its source of rent from the
land, will depend upon interest. The
rent of land will be abandoned for that of
money. The landlord will let the land go
and leave the occupier to settle with the
government. The user of the land must
have money to conduct his business. In
our present developed civilization land
alone will not suffice, and where can the
user of land go to procure money but to
the money monopoly, the men who hold
money out of use and control its hire
They will charge him all the business will
bear, the same as they do at present.
The taking of land rent for the public use
would discomfort the spectators tempo.
rarily, probably cause the exploiting of
labor to change hands to some extent,
but the money renter would speedily ad-
just matters and lay his sucking tubes
more firmly on the veins of labor. Gov
eminent must free the money as we'll as
the land or permanent reliefis impossible.
The single tax solitary and alone will not
do it. We know that it CRATES hard to
have their beautiful theory questioned,
but the logic of practice will have to be
submitted to when the day of trial arrives,
and the worshipers of the single tax who
revel in the sweet sentiment of Tom
Moore
every humble altar passed.
l now have reached the shrine at last
should climb out of their groove and view
the great economic realm that lies before
them, fertile as the land of Canaan be-
yond Jordan that greeted the eyes of the
Children of Israel. They have their
Moses who has led them up through the
wilderness of doubt and error, till they
have glimpse of the Promised Land |
where economic questions are as numerous
as the tribes i'll the land of milk and
honey. They now need a Joshua to lead
them to the conquest of these questions.
Henry George will never do it, but con-
tent himself with delivering the law and
writing on the single tax, me plus ultra"
as the old navigators wrote on the Pill
lars of Hercules. There was something