Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1895-02-10


For the Negative.
To the unbiased mind simple state
/ ment OF the New Zealand situation Is
an unanswcrible exposition Of the In
/ justice Of the system there and It's
| ephemcrol nature, but the single tax
! advocate utterly falls 10 comprehend
| the Significance Of the facts stated. The
present results there attract all his at
! tcntion. and he Is as delighted with
thine aa a child after butterfly,
| wholly obllvious to the wrong and
J robbery involved. ana unable to com
prehend that as soon as the large land
holdings shall be cut up into the nom
taxed, small holdings the system,
through It's own operation, will be COM
! netcly at an end.
/ The system there consists Of two parts
the contiscatlOn OF the large holdings
and the exemption from taxation OF the
small holdings. The combination Of
! these two certainly ought 20 make a
/ poor mans puiadlae as long as there Is
| fat to he fried out OF the large holdings.
| Since the law there eNcinpia from tax
/ alton $500 worth Of land, exclusive uf
/ the value OF its improvements. II FOL.
/ lows as night follows day that as soon
/ as HE large holdings are cut UP ara
converted into small holdings. thcre
| VIII be nothing further to be taxed
, under that system, all personal prop
crty being exempt and tho system win
| be functus oillcio, or, stated plainly.
utterly and totally defunct. school
girl IA her ny-fnp bonnet can figure
that out How, then, can the "ahund-
ant revenues continue under that sys-
tom?
That $4,000 exemption Is the milk in
the eocoanui, there even as the conhs-
cation Is It's meat BY virtue OF II
nearly nlnc-tenths OF the voters there
pay no taxes whatever, while the other
tenth pay them all out OF their lands.
No wonder II Is popular. with 81 sos
non-taN payers against only ia.h57 who
pay Prof. Buck does not realize how
badly his theory needs that $1,000 eN.
cinptlon as a bracCr. although another
singlc-tuNcr, Mr.. II Garland, already
urges II. With that provision added. II
public sentiment here can be debasn
and beclouded to every conception "
right and justice then nine-tenths 81
our American people may he induced
By popular vote 10 likewise EXEMPT
| ourselves from tnNutiOn and take the
property of large land owners for pub
! lie revenues, Then, when the lands are
distributed and become non-tnxnhle
under the system Itself. some other
scheme can he improvisod
While u law requiring Gould and a
Few othera to pay all the taxes of tho
country for a time would not. as stated,
be essentially different In lis principle
| of inequality and connscauuu-from
the New Zealand systcm yet II would
be radically different from Prof nuelNs
theory IN It's operation ON MIR Gould.
Such law would make no distinction
between land aud personal property.
but would merely require OF him the
amount OF money needed: while Prof.
Bucks theory would totally exempt his
| personal property and tax only hig
land. That his vast fortune consists
chiefly In railroads. which are personal
property Is not denied That these
railroad mlllionnirca, and the others as
Wen, are excellent fnanclers, ana that
| Mhen their real estate shall be heavily
single taxed they viii soon manage to
get rid OF II and convert its value Into
| personal property, no sensible man viii
deny, indeed, 1t IL the declared purpose
and object Of the single tax 10 make
them do this--turn looar their real en-
tate-and It's value then, of necessity,
must be converted Into personal prop
| cry, unless annihilated. All millions
aires VIII then. OF necessity, be per
sonm property mlllionaires, and eN-
| empt nom taxes under the single INK
| Ihht the ground rent single tax, az
| I1pf, Buck advocates It, will be vastly
to the advantage Of the millonntros
and the wealthy In eNempting their
| fi'f'hAef Nllh VIII pace nearly the
whole burden on the owners OF the
small holdings into which his theory
! proposes TO divide the lands, are so
clearly evident and undcnihble that no
| enort Is made 20 controvert them bv
any process of demonstration what
ever. General denlals and tho assor-
ton that land monopoly IL the chief
source or human Woe is all that the
case admits OF, and Henry GEORGE him
self could do no better on this point
than my distinguished opponent But
| our people Will never vote to cxcmnt
| the milllonarles aud take all the bur-
den ON themselves; and hence the $500
New Ienland feature must be adopted
by the single takers here. tia ground
to have Il. 90
u has been shown In many instances
u Is The owners Of the lands thar give
them their greatest value, and that or
ten communities receive more henoft
from land owners than they confer I'm
helping to Increase their vamos; and
mat inc poorer classes. the majority OF
the people In the large cities would not
be benented one whit In homes md
rents by the single tax, ana fhe rena-
onlng has not been answered, INT
whether i IL the owners OF CITY renI
estate In New York that give valuc 10
their property. or whether It IA the
tlheNrA SO lhlck IN inc tive Points or
the hordes OF foreign paupers daily un.
loaded there az part " the 'connti.
nifty" the nero putting OF a ouesfon an
a point OF that Kind Is not The presen,
ialion and development OF a proposl.
ton such as the negative should he
arorded opportunity to answer In tbla
discussion. As Prof Buck continues To-
reply 20 my replies, instead Of mr.
senting In detailed reasoning Some
Affirmative propositions, Will, In order
70 reach an end ~ this discussion pYior
To the millennium, here submit and dis.
cuss the proposition that there, is no
authority for the single tax in HOW
WIN, which expressly teaches and sanc.
land. Va
me single takers claim that God has
denied the right of private ownership
m lond, and a brief sentence u.ev. xxv
~ quoted without reference TO lis c,n-
text or connection. has been c,.as 81,
support Of the claim. The chaptcr
from which II Is taker affords tho
clearest evidence OF the divine sanction
riven to such right Under the inme-
| date direction OF tho Almighty. The