The representative., 1895-01-02
MIR. DONNELLY AND THE SINGLE
TAX.

lMlnneapOllS IflDune.
The Hon. Ignatius DoEHeliy in the last
issue of the Representative, takes up the
cudgel against the single tax, the much
ridden hobby of Henry George and it mus
be confessed that the sage wields his wea-
pom with terrific effect. He says the rea-
son he did not discuss the subject during
the campaign was that he knew that a
good many Populists We're tainted with
the heresy but it wasn't the immediate
issue he thought it best not to stir up
dissension in the ranks. But now the time
has come to clear the decks for action in
'96, and to meet the issue. If it proves to
be right, the party had better adopt it and
solidify its ranks; if not, reject it, and re-
fuse to nominate any more single tax can
didates for congress.
Is it right? Upon this point Mr.. Donnelly
seems to entertain no doubts whatever.
To the contention of one of it's advocates
that the great principle of the single tax
is that "every child born on the planet
have foothold the planet. he replies
That is all very pretty and very just;
but if it means that every child has the
right to go to raising crops on the land.
then the single takers proposition is:
+ Every child shall have the right, when it
gets big enough to become the owner of
apiece of land, provided he will agree to
pay his own taxes and the taxes of every
body else y
Mr.. Donnelly goes on to show that they
had the single tax in the middle ages,
and the people didn't like it, The lords
paid no taxes, neither did the money lend
ers; the farmers paid everything and fed
everybody; they worked day and night to
do it, and they were serfs, slaves, brutes-
degraded below the standard of humanity.
He claims that it was the single tax that
caused the French revolution. The farm
ers had the single taX-to pay-and not
another soul in the community, clerical
or laic, priest, baron, bishop or cardinal.
princes or the royal family, paid one penny
to support the prof1igacy and cruelty of
the upper classes. The peasants footed the
entire bill, and they became reduced to
such depths of wretchedness that at last
the single tax would not support the bur
den, and the government collapsed One
great financier urged the king, as a meas
ure of safety to request the church and
the aristocracy to pay some part of the
taxes, but they refused, and so the people
driven to utter desperation, rose in revolt
Thus the single tax ended in France and
it was never heard of agafn-Nr. Donnely
says--on this round earth until few years
ago California philosopher CHenry Georee)
suggested that the best way to get a poor
man a home was to tax it 50 heavily thai
rich man could afford to hold it! If the
poor man would get down under the load
he would have the pleasure of working like
munity, and in the meantime the owners
of the railroads, the banks, the trusts etc.,
would pay nothing. AS an illustration: A
lot on which bank stands, with
capital of a million dollars, and carrying
on a business of ten million dollars a year
is to be assessed if bare of all inn
provements, or for about the same as an
other lot which a poor man runs a
little grocery store cobbler's shop.
In brief the single takers propose that
there shall not be cent of tax collected
from the vast wealth of the country which
exists in the form of personal property
but that the poor wretches our frontier
and in the DakOtaS who have been burning
hay and weeds for fuel shall make up the
tax for the exempted capitalists. 1.-The
proposition" adds Mr.. Donnelly, sis simply
horrible
There have been more elaborate and la
bored refutati tions of the single tax fallacy
but rarely one more incisive convincing
to the class of people who are usually led
astray by it. If Mr. Donnelly were as sound
and logical upon the other prominent ques-
tions of the day, he would be pretty good