The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1898-09-15

improvements in this State, and the to.
tai amount of the land values assessmenp
Tor 1897 was, believe, 1854, 900 GOETHE hg7
9res win be found in the reports of the
values assessed the city of San Francisco
alone contains nearly one-third. Seven,
cities OF the State contain more than. 90
per cent of all the land values in the
| state. The other cities and towns GER
ta1nly contain another 20 per cent, making
| 10 per cent
| OF the remaining % per cent, not half,
nor nearly half, is owned by occupying
farmers; more than half is owned by spec
who farm the farmers. (Applause.) Under
the single tax system the farmer would
pay not exceeding 121g per cent of the
| now bears. His proportion of the tax
would not be more than 10 per cent, be-
cause his exemptions would amount to
vastly more than the increased tax upon
the land value, and to the farmer the sim.
gle. tax would be a benef1cence (applause).
cial records, and tax rolls. I am not ROW
advocating the expediency of adopting the
single tax because 1 will not be drawn
aside from the issues Of the present cam
paign to discuss questions that are not
In issue. But l do say that the statement
which I have just controverted is glar-
leading Republican organs are declaring
and have repeatedly declared that the sin
gle tax would drive capital from the
capital? Capital is movable property ap-
piled to the production of new wealth.
Now all such RT99pety 0 0ge ta ee exempt
Would exemption from taxation drive
capital out of the State? Is there any
room of a railroad paper, or outside Of
the platform committee of a Repub-
lican. railroad convention? It would
would bring pi' Capital into the State.
whether 1t is good or bad 1T would bring
capital into the State instead of driving
movable wealth out? No, they would be
exempt, and they would flow into the
State upon the same principle.
Exemption from taxation never drives
wealth out of q State. But they say
they don't say it, but they intimate it
it would not drive the land out there is
nothing else that is useful to be driven
out So the utter fallacy of that state
trouble with all these people is that they
are ignorant of the subject they are dis
cussng. utterly ignorant of it.. so ignor-
ant that men who understand DIT dislike
the simple task of answering them.
But they say 1t is a measure for the
contiscation of land. Not at all. It is
confscation of land would put an: end to
the single tax. Can the single tax ap-
ply to land belonging to, the State? Ger
tainly not. If it is to be taxed it must
be in private occupation, and it must be
in private occupation under a tenure that
Will admit of taxation. If the single tax
land into private holdings, with exclusive
right of control of the private holdings
such as gives the basis and foundation
for taxation, must continue to exist. And
that is the purpose; that is the purpose.
But l will tell you what it would. stop.
It would stop two men like Miller & Lux
from holding 100000 acres of the land of
these three or four Pacific Coast States
and Territories in comparative idleness
for speculative a purposes. while barring
families from the opportunity to make
homes upon the land. (Applause)
are now borne by the farmers and by the
manufacturers and by the merchants
and by the laborers upon their homes
and business and industries over all these
holdings, including the holdings of the
Spectators and it would impose less
taxes upon the homestead owner, be he
farmer or the owner Of an urban home,
than falls upon him now. Have you
thought what a pripcely possession Mil
Ter & Lux have-one of them is dead, but
the firm goes on-have you thought what
princely possession they are barring the
people of this country away from for
the mere purpose of observation-disclosures
900 acres of land, $4,000 square miles Of
land nearly; $1,000 square miles OF land
extending around the earth at the equa-
tor would form a belt around the earth,
or within thousand miles of reaching
around the earth, strip a mile wide.
Now, If the Single Tax were in issue
in this campaign I would point you to
that kind of land monopoly on the one
hand, and to the degradation of the peo-
pie excluded. from the land by this mo-
nopoly as one of the things that the Sin
gle Tax is intended to extirpate But
the Single Tax is not an issue in the
campaign, and / shall therefore pass it. ,
Now, there is one other thing to which
l desire to refer moment, and that is
personal. The San Francisco Chronicle
has been assailing me with vilifcations
ever since the opening of the campaign.
It's editor, we are told, has assurances, aye,
long before the opening of the campaign
that If the Republican legislative ticket
shall be elected he will become United
States Senator, and he is trying to earn
Those of you who remember the Chronicle
Of twenty years ago will recognize in its
columns of to-day the old style of black
guardism from which no decent man was
exempt in those days. Great applause)
And no decent man will be exempt from
ing him Mr.. de Young can get anything
that he wants. Whenever you see the
columns Of that paper reeking with
blackguardiSm you. may know that Mr..
de Young is after something. Great
laughter and applause) He is after the
A voice-He will never get 1t.
Well don't know about that. He will
get 1t If the railroad ticket wins Mr..
de Young has been obliged to state that
he is not a candidate for United States
Senator. It would defeat the possibility
of his being Senator If he did not deny
it. daughter and applause) But those
itics as now managed by the Southern
Pacific Company will understand that Mr..
de Young's denial don't amount to much.
1t Is not necessary for q Republican to
be a candidate now in order to get Office