The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-10-17
AN IMPRACTICABLE THEORY.

1t is said that the George theory of laying
all taxation upon land does not meet with
so universal approval among the workmen
of Greater New York as it was at first
thought it would. This is because many of
them own homes in the suburbs, and others
can see that any system which imposes all
taxation upon land will enhance the rental
of tenements. Still, it is one of the theories
which are frequently put forth by those
who desire to be progressive leaders in labor
organizations. The past week labor or
ganization declared in Indiana that the
money for all public expenditure should be
collected as tax for the use of lands. If
this is not favorite scheme with wage
earners in New York, it can scarcely be in
Indiana when made a real issue in an
election. A very large part of the property
of the people of Indiana is in land People
of limited means and incomes have more
value in farms and lots with houses than in
all other forms of property. More men and
women are striving to pay for farms and
homes in this State than to obtain value
elsewhere. Already the holders of farms
and lots complain of the unusual burden of
taxation and ask to have it placed upon
other forms of property What would be
the result if all taxation should be taken
from other property, all tariff duties and
tax on spirits abolished, all licenses re-
pealed and the total imposed upon land
BY the system referred to. lot occupied by
a thousand-dollar cottage would be taxed
the same as lot covered by a twenty-five
thousand-dollar mansion.
1t has been urged that the change would
make no difference with the thousands who
rent houses. This is a mistake. The tax on
land on which houses are built would be
doubled. This could not be done without
causing an advance in rentals. The only
class which would be benefited are those
who now pay licenses, the foreigners who
would have free markets, railroad corpora
tions which would pay for streaks of land
through the country, banks, insurance
companies and those who hold fortunes in
the many forms of personal property
Unless the theory involves a general con-
fiscation of all the property now held in
land, which means the confiscation of all
values in farms and lots, it is impracticable
since it would be impossible for the govern
ment to purchase of the actual owners these
farms and lots and pay for them any part
of the money and toll they have cost the
present possessors. Even if this were pos
sible all the expenditures upon farms like
buildings, drainage and the appurtenances
which make farms of any value would be
lost to the owners should the government
pay for the soil only.
There is still another consideration: Who
would invest money and labor in the i'm
provement of farms and of lots if the oc-
oupants were to become little better than
tenants at will? Who would plant orchards,
expend money in drainage or in higher
cultivation it, after few years, another
may come into possession of the land? The
result would be that those renting lands
of the government would make them sterile
and worthless in a few years. Few men
would put their earnings in homes in cities
could be taken from them by higher bidders
or failure to pay the heavy rentals of>the
land after a few years.
Mr.. George in his recent avowals in New
York has declared that street-railways
should be run free to all who wish to ride.
This additional expense would be put upon
the land upon which cities are built. When
this should be done there could be no rea-
son why free lunches should hot be pro-
vided for all who wish and the expense
added to the other burdens imposed upon
the ground.
1t is not probable that those persons who
committed the Indiana labor convention to
the theory of such taxation contemplated
the results which would come from it to the
thousands of wage earners and workers who
have property in land