The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1898-11-04
MAoulRE AND LAND conFIscaTloN

II his Napa speech and In other speeches, Mcguire
] says that he will not discuss land conhscaton by
the single tax with Mr.. Gage, because Mr.. Gage
does not understand the subject.
! We think Judge Mcguire is mistaken. Not only
Mr. Gage but all men who read, understand that
subject very clearly. Judge Maguire's voluminous
exposition of it has left chance for any misunder
standing True, he has infused into his exposition
great deal of abusive invective He has called land
owners monopolists, robbers, schemers, and has
charged upon them the guilt of all the poverty and
sorrow and crime i'll the country and TO their
guilt in all this to their buying land instead of per-
sonal property may be something hard to compre-
hend but that has nothing to do with the issue it
self. 1t is merely the Mcguire way of making
guent prove the rghtfulness of land confscation
The issue is that conhscation ITSELF the argument
made to sustain it.
In his speech to the Single Tax Club of St. Louis
published in The National Single Taxer for Deem
Der IS, 1897, volume 6, No. 90 Judge Mcguire said
I'VE propose to do away with all vested rights and
titles and ownership land and raise the public rev.
enue from land rental"
There is nothing intricate hard to understand
about that. The argument to sustain it may be
pick and involved and difficult to understand, but the
statement of the thing itself is perfectly plain.
When Judge Mcguire asked within few days,
II you are elected Governor will you your best
endeavors to have the single embodied in the con-
sttuon and laws of this State" he answered Il will
not answer yes or no."
Having stated the purpose of the single tax to be
the doing away with all vested rights and titles and
ownership in land" he refuses to answer yes or no
when asked if he will promote that policy as Gov
All this is perfectly plain Every landowner
has vested right and title his land He has right
to know whether Mcguire will try, as Governor, to
take it away from him, and Mcguire refuses to say
that he will try destroy the vested rights titles
and ownership of land.
This makes the issue perfectly plain. Every land
owner in California who this comprehends it
perfectly. Mr.. Gage needs no illumination from Ma
CURES argument to understand it The matter is SO
plain that explanation only darken it. Mcguire
says what he proposes to do; he says Eve propose
to destroy all vested rights title and ownership to
land" Those who want to do this should vote for
him, as they will. The holders of the endangered
vested rights and titles, the OF land, should
not vote for him.
He seeks votes by attacking the railroad. The sins
of the Southern Pacific might be as scarlet but we
ask the people of California, in all calmness and
soberness OF mind, If those sins stated by Mcguire
facts, what damage have they inflicted upon the
people at all comparable to the blight that will fall
upon the State by instant and complete destruction OF
all vested rights and titles and ownership of land?
Henry George says the moment the single tax IS
made operative land becomes worth nothing "the
community would get the tax, the owner would get
nothing"
This is burning issue. 1t cannot be triaed with.
The Call has persstently presented it in Maguires
language, and his only is that he will not
promise not to promote land confscation as Gov
All men who know him know that he will
promote it. that all of the influence of the Governors
office will be used to effect it All men know that his
election will stimulate the who believe in land
confscaton and will solidify and encourage them to
the unfortunate landowner to destroy his
vested right, title and ownership.