The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1895-01-30
THE SINGLE Tx
L. J. Buell. Makes a Reply to Mr..
DOnneliy on This Inter.
esting Subject.
SOME PERTINENT CASES OF
TAXATION ARE CITED
An Able Advocacy of the Doctrine
OF Henry George.

To the Editor:
1t would be very much more satisfactory
to discuss with Mr.. Donnelly if he would
stick more closely to his text But | sup
pose 1t is his all-encompassing genius that
causes him to get on all sides of a dozen
questions at one time. Like the Irish
mans flea, when you put your finger on
him he isn't there
Then Mr.. Donnelly has very breezy way
of referring to the propositions of his
opponents as "idotic'' "atrocious,'' "shock-
ing lunacy." 'abortive incrediblity" and
so on until he has exhausted the vocabu-
larry of abusive adjectives
Now may it not be just possible that
there may be some little knowledge and
some small degree of sincerely in the world
outside of Mr.. Donnelly? Modesty be
cometh even the greatest philosopher
Mr.. Donnelly admits that he was in err
ror when he said that three fourths of the
value of city real estate was in the i'm
provements. He now says: '.It is true
that in this state the assessed value of the
city and town lots is four times as great
as the structures" But here Mr.. Dorpel1,-
is again in error for in this statement
he has made the land value too high
little more care would obviate such blum
ders. The land value is, as taken from the
assessors books about three-fourths the
structures one-fourth, making the land
three times the value of the structures
not four
That the cities spread out over thous-
hnds OF acres of farm lands has nothing
to do with the facts in the case The
facts are that under the present system the
az hos
very little while those who have built
homes in the midst of these vacant acres
are taxed very much.
III we had the single tax for state and
local purposes the lots all about where |
live would be taxed about 81. so to s. each
annually, and that is all the homes own
erS would be taxed their homes Now
the home owners and vacant lot owners
are taxed rs follows:
Lot l, vacant, taxes 1893 .................$3. 90
Lot , W. 5. Harwoods home, taxes
1913
Lot = vacant taxes 1893. ................. SEQ
Lot 1. Geo. Sherriff's home, taxes 1893. "a SO
Lot 5, vacant taxes 1893. Observation-Disclosures. RAJ
Lot 6, Olwin Bakers home, taxes 1898. "a. 80
Under the single tax lots. / and would
be taxed SAGA each. Lots and 4, $3.50
each; lots and g. SSH each.
How that would crush the home owners
wouldn't it?
These are facts that 1 am prepared to
verify and l defy Mr. Donnelly or any
one else to disprove them.
Now word as to the awful burden of
taxes that would come crushing down on
our homes if the tariff We're abolished and
the same amount of revenue raised by
direct taxation.
Where does the tariff tax rest now? Is a
single cent of it assessed on the vacant
lots? Do the lots and land, mines and
forests held by spectators walk up and
pay any tariff taxes? The entire burden
falls upon consumers. A man may
be millionaire hundred times over and
pay not a cent to support the federal
government if only he chooses to live in
Europe. Does Lord Scully, who rack rents
the people Of several Illinois counties, pay
any taxes to support the government, cites,
state or federal, that protects and secures
his title to the land on which those rack
rented tenants live and labor, not for
themselves, but for Lord Scully?
1t has been estimated that the federal
taxes about equal in amount to the
state and local taxes. If that is correct
then the lots referred to above would be
taxed as follows under the single tax for
all purposes:
Lots l and ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Is each
Lots and OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES. 800 each
Lots and NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. 1000 each
In every case less than one-third what
the home owner on lots 2, and are now
paying for state and local taxes alone.
Now | am not at all frightened by Mr.
Donnelly's walls that extend through several
columns of valuable space weekly, and
from what l have heard them say, l am
many of his readers are not.
want to give Mr.. Donnelly a special in
vitation to disprove the facts and figures
given above then will turn my attention
to some more of his falacies. l frankly
confess that | can't cope with Mr.. Donnelly
in the production of works of the magma
ton. 1 have to keep somewhere near the
earth If Mr.. Donnelly desires to get at
the facts | will go with him to the assess
or will
anime facts.
MIR. Donnclly has bad time with Clay
county, because the exemptions under the
single tax would be larger in proportion in
Morehead and the other villages than in
the rural districts How could that hurt the
farmers of Clay county? Most of the taxes
now collected in Morehead and in the other
towns are for village purposes, and the eX-
emption of 1901 in the villages would all
have to be made up in the villages them
selves 1t would mean that the homo own
ers and business men of the village would
get reduction of 1852, 9O1 on their homes
and enterprises, and that the taxes on va
cant lots in Morehead and GAINESVILLE, etc,
would be a little more than twice what
they now are How could that hurt any one
but the vacant lot spectators? The taxes
on every improved lot would be less than
And just the same with the rural parts of
Clay county. The farmers would get an
exemption of $72l262, a large part of which
would tall on the land of the county now
held idle or held by non-occupyng land
lords The occupying farmers would be
greatly relieved.
But there is another feature of this casa
that Mr. d. seems to have overlooked. A
considerable part of the taxes now collect
eo In the towns are of the character that
are shifted. All taxes on merchandise ana
business In towns are paid by the consllm-
ers, Just as tariff taxes are. To take taxes
on store goods doesn't help the merchant
alone but 1t is a help to all who consume
those goods The farmers consume large
part OF such goods and hence under tho
present system, pay those taxes Under tbo
single tax they would not pay them. The
goods would be cheaper. Yours truly.
G. j. BUELL.,
SINGLE TAX.