TAX THE AREA 
 
 A SOLUTION OF THE LAND PROBLEM 
 
 BY 
 
 KEMPER BOCOCK 
 
 
 fe&K 3 ’- 
 
 S .. * 
 
 . 4s ‘ -I 
 
 U . • 
 
 ;V . '} • 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 JOHN W. LOVELL COMPANY. 
 14 and 16 Vesey Street. 
 
3 f y<2.‘ ' 2 ~ 
 
 Copyright, 
 
 1887, 
 
 By KEMPER BOCOCK. 
 
 TROWS 
 
 PHI NT* NO AND BOOKBINDING COMPANY, 
 NEW YORK, 
 

 PREFACE. 
 
 The publication of this work has two purposes: 
 First, it is designed to show that the “ unearned 
 increment” is unearned by the community instead 
 of by the individual; and second, that the substitu¬ 
 tion of specific taxes for value taxes on land would 
 meet the chief demand for land reform. Since its 
 preparation for the press, Mr. Henry George, the 
 leading advocate of unearned increment taxation, 
 has disclaimed sympathy with thorough-going social¬ 
 ism. By so doing he virtually abandons his own 
 theory: for the only conceivable circumstances under 
 which the community could have the right to tax 
 the unearned increment of value would be the condi¬ 
 tions of perfect socialism, under which the commu¬ 
 nity would be the creator of all such value, through 
 its direct control and operation of the forces of 
 development, production, and distribution. 
 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 The Problem Stated, . . . .5 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Is Private Ownership of I and Right ? . 12 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The Rights of the Individual, . . .31 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Ad Valorem and Specific Taxation, . . 45 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Practicability of Area Taxation, 
 
 72 
 
TAX THE AREA. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE PROBLEM STATED. 
 
 “ The perfect moral principle, ‘ whatsoever ye would that 
 men should do to you, do ye even so to them,’ is the unwritten 
 constitution of every free people, and is at the foundation of 
 every demand for fair play. No perfect social condition can be 
 attained without its general acceptance in spirit and enforce¬ 
 ment in letter.” 
 
 W HAT is the land problem ? 
 
 It is not “ shall the use of the earth be regu¬ 
 lated by the government for the benefit of the whole 
 people,” but “ how shall the use of the earth be reg¬ 
 ulated by the government for the benefit of the 
 whole people ? ” 
 
 For its use is already regulated by the govern¬ 
 ment. The right of regulation is asserted whenever 
 the right of eminent domain enables a railroad com¬ 
 pany to build tracks across a man’s farm, paying 
 him somebody else’s price instead of his own. It is 
 asserted whenever a landlord, aided by constables 
 or deputy-sheriffs—paid servants of the community 
 
6 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 —evicts a tenant for non-payment of rent. Some¬ 
 times this regulation is for the benefit of the whole 
 people, and sometimes it is not. It depends on 
 circumstances. The present system of land tenure 
 is not a grand structure, fashioned after the design 
 of an intelligent, honest and well-meaning architect; 
 but the patch-work result of a process of evolution 
 that has been going on for many centuries. Much 
 that is of the fittest has survived ; but the unfit is 
 not all dead. 
 
 The right of eminent domain has survived, and is 
 to-day stronger than ever before. But its strength 
 should be maintained in harmony with the progress 
 of civilization. Civilization began with the rule of 
 “might makes right ” and has attained the rule of 
 “ light makes might.” Brute force has been com¬ 
 pelled to surrender to advanced intelligence. But 
 civilization will be a failure if advanced intelligence 
 does not mean advanced justice. It must not stop 
 until it realizes the rule of “ right makes light.” 
 The institution of eminent domain can not survive 
 unless it survives as a right, and to fulfill that 
 requirement it must not only be intrinsically right, 
 but must be exercised in harmony with every inci¬ 
 dental right. Not one must be amputated. Man 
 needs every right he has, in order to attain perfect 
 development, and he has a right to cultivate every 
 faculty of his nature under proper conditions. 
 
THE PROBLEM STATED. 
 
 7 
 
 Proper conditions are simply those under which no 
 man is allowed to interfere with the exercise of any 
 right of any fellow-man. 
 
 Unrestricted landlordism is not one of these 
 proper conditions. No one asserts that it is, and 
 no proof to the contrary is needed. Whatever may 
 be a landlord’s practice, he is seldom—in this coun¬ 
 try at least—a believer in and an advocate of ten¬ 
 antry as the most desirable condition for the mass 
 of the people. It is desirable that there should be 
 enough tenants in the world to make the competi¬ 
 tion for his houses as sharp as possible; but he 
 cares nothing for landlordism in other parts of the 
 world, beyond the limits within which other parts 
 of the world may invite his tenants to emigrate and 
 reduce his rent-roll. Whatever differences of opin¬ 
 ion may exist as to methods, land monopoly in the 
 abstract is odious to “ the common sense of most.” 
 
 The evils of land monopoly have been too exhaust¬ 
 ively discussed by Henry George, in “ Progress and 
 Poverty,” and elsewhere since that remarkable work 
 was published, to require extended study here. A 
 large library of destructive criticism has been printed 
 within a few years. Mr. George has been trying to 
 destroy individual landlordism, and to substitute 
 social landlordism for it, and his critics have gen¬ 
 erally taken up the cudgels for individual landlord¬ 
 ism and tried to destroy Mr. George. But all land- 
 
8 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 lordism should be destroyed, so far as it takes two 
 to make a landlord—the landlord himself and the 
 tenant. That is the sense in which the word land¬ 
 lordism is generally understood, and it may be 
 doubted if any less odious signification will ever 
 take possession of it. There will probably be no 
 such word as landlord if the time should ever come 
 when the motto “ Every man his own landlord," 
 will be realized. 
 
 What does landlordism, in the commonly received 
 sense of “ one who has tenants," tend to imply ? 
 What does it involve when allowed to work out its 
 legitimate results ? The control of the few over 
 opportunities of labor for the many; the control of 
 the few over the means of securing justice for the 
 many; the restriction of the exercise of all the 
 rights of the many by the will of the few; in short, 
 aristocracy. 
 
 If landlordism is to be perpetuated, government 
 landlordism is by all odds the best form of it to 
 perpetuate, for government is tending to be more 
 responsive to the will of the whole people, and, 
 with the growth of popular intelligence and the 
 average power of perceiving popular rights, it is 
 continually seeking to promote the welfare of the 
 whole people. But the progress of all governments 
 towards the realization of a general policy of univer¬ 
 sal justice is slow—very slow. We have by no 
 
THE PROBLEM STATED. 
 
 9 
 
 means found a way to dispense with this new appli¬ 
 cation of an old maxim: “ If you want something 
 done, get the government to do it; if you want it 
 done well, do it yourself.” 
 
 The government is a big thing, in our advanced 
 stage of civilization, and, leaving out of the ques¬ 
 tion all possibility of its assumption of active con¬ 
 trol of the land in its jurisdiction, it is growing big¬ 
 ger all the time instead of growing smaller. Its 
 machinery, in our own country, with its variously 
 distributed centers of authority—national, state and 
 local—is already so complicated that the ambition 
 to hold office is one of the gravest evils of the day. 
 The unrestricted development of this ambition is 
 already so demoralizing as to compel the organi¬ 
 zation of civil service reform associations, and the 
 professed adoption of civil service reform as a policy 
 by both of our great national parties in their quad¬ 
 rennial platforms. 
 
 These considerations cause grave doubts as to 
 whether it is advisable at any time to increase, on a 
 large scale, the machinery of the government, and 
 thus to increase likewise the temptations (which the 
 multiplication of official places would hold out to the 
 youth of the land) to shirk the duty of seriously 
 studying a trade, a profession, or some other form 
 of private business, dependent on the fluctuations of 
 commerce, for the sake of seeking the more securely 
 
IO 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 remunerative and easily performed duties of a 
 routine public official life. The more of such offi¬ 
 cial places there are, the greater will be the tempta* 
 tions and the strength of the spoils system of pol¬ 
 itics. 
 
 Let us, instead, seek to make it easier to be an 
 honest, intelligent, and prosperous private citizen. 
 However wide the sphere of governmental control 
 may become, safety lies in keeping the sphere of the 
 private citizen wider, so that he may be more dis¬ 
 posed to cultivate the bent of his intellectual nature, 
 and attain a suitable average of fitness for the per¬ 
 petual duty of universal suffrage. The servant must 
 not be permitted to get above his lord. The official 
 must never either outweigh or outnumber the pri¬ 
 vate citizen. 
 
 Those who would solve the land problem can least 
 of all afford to forget the rights of the private citi¬ 
 zen in the premises. It is claimed, and rightly, that 
 this problem is second to none in importance, and 
 that on its right solution depends the greatest good 
 of the greater number, for labor and capital are 
 alike at the mercy of the landlord. Its solution 
 should be sought by the speediest route; and those 
 who seek it can not afford to sacrifice any existing 
 institution that can help them to attain their end. 
 Every existing institution that can have any bearing 
 on the question should be examined, in order to see 
 
THE PROBLEM STATED. 
 
 II 
 
 if it has in it any thing good enough to keep; not 
 merely actual good, but possible good as well. The 
 institution that is easily first in its claims on the 
 attention of those who are asking themselves and 
 others the land question, is tne institution of private 
 property in land. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND RIGHT? 
 
 They shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig- 
 tree, and none shall make them afraid.”— Micah. 
 
 HE justice of private property in land does not 
 
 X depend on the title of the first man who 
 claimed it, any more than it depends on some other 
 man’s title to the farm which he occupies to-day. It 
 depends rather on general considerations. In order 
 to learn whether private property in land can by any 
 possibility be a right, we must examine the idea of 
 right, and see wdiat “ a right ” is. 
 
 In general, a man has a right to be or to do 
 that which he can be or do without injury 
 to himself or any other man. We are so con¬ 
 stituted that self-assertion is a necessity of our 
 nature. Every man has a right to live, rather than 
 merely to exist; to cultivate his intellectual and 
 moral nature to the utmost, as well as to gratify his 
 animal wants. If he can own land without interfer¬ 
 ing with the right of any one else to live and to own 
 land if desired, then it is right to own land ; that is, 
 it is not wrong. If the private ownership of land is 
 
IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND RIGHT? 13 
 
 not merely not wrong, but expedient because 
 tending to make it easier for every man to live 
 and to cultivate his intellectual and moral nature, 
 it is not only not wrong to own land ; it is wrong 
 not to own it. It is wrong not to seek by every 
 legitimate means to attain the ownership of land, 
 and it is wrong not to make the ownership of land 
 easy. 
 
 The right of private property in land, if there is 
 such a right, must depend on permanent conditions. 
 The area of land on the globe is practically the 
 same at all times. The population that must live 
 on it tends to increase continually. Whether this 
 tendency will ever be arrested, we can not foresee. 
 We have no right to assume that it will. Now it is 
 plain that if the private ownership of land can be 
 perpetuated, the area allotted to each individual 
 may have to be reduced from time to time; that is, 
 the average area. If a farmer has a farm of one 
 hundred acres and ten sons, there are ten acres for 
 each son. If each son is married and has ten chil¬ 
 dren, there will no longer be ten acres for each 
 descendant. There can not be more than one acre 
 for each child, on a fair average. 
 
 There must be a force, or a set of forces, at work 
 to reduce the average area occupied by each citizen 
 or inhabitant of the world. 
 
 Such a force is found in the development of the 
 
14 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 arts of industry and commerce, acting according to 
 the principle of the division of labor. A part of the 
 population of every civilized nation produces raw 
 material as nature affords the opportunity ; it is the 
 duty of the remaining part to handle that raw mate¬ 
 rial, to work it up into useful shapes, and to dis¬ 
 tribute it among those who want to use it. The 
 performance of this duty creates centers of popula¬ 
 tion at convenient points, and as the wants of civili¬ 
 zation are multiplied, the territory covered by 
 cities and towns increases continually at the expense 
 of the rural territory under cultivation or other form 
 of productive development. The population is thus 
 divided into two classes, in its relation to the sur¬ 
 face of the earth : the first class consisting of those 
 who want large tracts for agricultural or mineral 
 development, and the second, of those who want 
 building sites. The average building site will 
 always be smaller than the average farm ; and, on 
 the other hand, if the utmost freedom of develop¬ 
 ment is insured to the individual, and his wants mul¬ 
 tiply indefinitely in consequence, the proportion of 
 those who handle and work up raw material will 
 increase continually, and the demand for building 
 sites will, in consequence, outstrip the demand for 
 farm land. Thus, even if there is no permanent 
 tendency to reduce the average area of a farm, the 
 increasing demand for building sites will reduce the 
 
IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OP LAND RIGHT? 15 
 
 average area of the earth’s surface required for the 
 support of each person as population increases. The 
 inhabitants of the United States employed in agri¬ 
 cultural pursuits increased twenty-nine per cent, 
 between the census of 1870 and that of 1880, while 
 the number of those engaged in other pursuits 
 increased nearly forty-one per cent. The number 
 engaged in agricultural pursuits was forty-seven per 
 cent, of the total in 1870 and forty-four in 1880, 
 indicating a slight decrease in the ratio of farmers to 
 the total of population with the growth of the latter 
 and the development of the country’s industrial 
 resources. 
 
 Here, then, we have the fulfillment of one con¬ 
 dition required to prove the justice of private 
 property in land. The natural growth of civiliza¬ 
 tion, by shifting population from the country to the 
 city and town faster than it increases in the aggre¬ 
 gate, reduces the average area required per capita. 
 To illustrate this, take the case of a township which 
 contains 100 citizens actively engaged in various 
 occupations. Let us suppose that 44 of these are 
 farmers—the percentage of the census of 1880— 
 with farms of an average size of 50 acres. Suppose 
 the other 56 citizens to reside on lots ranging from 
 50 x 100 feet in size to one acre, or averaging, say, 
 one quarter of an acre. The farmers will then 
 occupy 2200 acres and the non-farmers 14 acres, the 
 
16 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 total area of the township, exclusive of roads and 
 streets, being 2214 acres. The average area per 
 capita will then be 22.14 acres. Now, suppose the 
 population increased in the ratios of increase pre¬ 
 vailing from 1870 to 1880. An increase of 29 per 
 cent, in the number of farmers will bring the total 
 up to 57, excluding fractions; and an increase of 41 
 per cent, in the number of non-farmers actively 
 engaged will bring it up to 89. The average area 
 per capita will then be 15.16 acres; but, as the 
 added number of non-farmers will only reduce the 
 2200 acres of farm land by 33 quarter-acres, or 8 J / 4 
 acres, there will still be 2i9i 3 / 4 acres available for 
 farming purposes, and the average farm area will be 
 38.45 acres. In other words, while the population 
 is increasing at the rate of 30 per cent, and the 
 working population at the rate of 39 per cent., the 
 total available farm area undergoes the trifling 
 reduction of .037 per cent., and the average area 
 per capita required decreases at the same time 31 
 per cent., or faster than the increase of population. 
 There is apparently no reason why the world should 
 not afford every body a living, even when every man 
 has his share of private property in land. We hope 
 to show that to enable every man to have his share 
 would develop the world’s maximum capacity to 
 sustain life. 
 
 “ But,” Mr. George says, “ man has no share of 
 
IS PRIVA TE O WNERSHIP OF LAND RIGH T? 17 
 
 private property in land. He is entitled to none. 
 
 * Right of ownership that springs from labor excludes 7 
 the possibility of any other right of ownership. If 
 a man be rightfully entitled to the produce of his 
 labor, then no one can be rightfully entitled to the 
 ownership of any thing which is not the produce of 
 his labor, or the labor of some one else from whom 
 the right has passed to him. If production give to 
 the producer the right to exclusive possession and 
 enjoyment, there can rightfully be no exclusive 
 possession and enjoyment of any thing not the pro¬ 
 duction of labor, and the recognition of private 
 property in land is wrong. For the right to the 
 produce of labor can not be enjoyed without the 
 right to the free use of the opportunities offered by 
 nature, and to admit the right of property in these 
 is to deny the right of property in the produce 
 of labor.’ ”—(“ Progress and Poverty,” Book VII., 
 Chapter I.) 
 
 The above passage discloses the vulnerable 
 point in the heel of this modern Achilles. Re¬ 
 duced to the form of a syllogism, Mr. George’s 
 reasoning is as follows : 
 
 1. No property in that which is not the produc¬ 
 tion of labor is right. 
 
 2. Land is not the production of labor. There¬ 
 fore, 
 
 3. No property in land is right. 
 
i8 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 Follow out this conclusion to its legitimate 
 result, and another syllogism suggests itself: 
 
 1. No one can be robbed of that which is not 
 his own property by right. 
 
 2. Land is not any one’s property by right. 
 
 3. No one can be robbed of land. 
 
 From this reductio ad absurdum it is plain that 
 there is an erroneous assumption found here. If 
 we re-examine the premises of these two syllogisms, 
 we can find nothing to impeach in the proposition 
 “ land is not the production of labor.” Nor is there 
 any thing that can be objected to in the statement 
 .that “ no one can be robbed of that which is not his 
 own property by right.” The other premise of the 
 second syllogism being the conclusion of the first, 
 and the minor premise of the first (“ land is not 
 the production of labor”) being conceded, the flaw, 
 if there is any, must be in the first premise of the 
 first syllogism, “ no property in that which is 
 not the production of labor is right; ” or otherwise 
 stated, “ property in that which is not the pro¬ 
 duction of labor is not right.” Let us examine this 
 proposition more closely. 
 
 It affirms something of an existing institution. 
 It takes up the subject “ property that is not the, 
 production of labor,” and predicates of this subject 
 that it is not-right, or wrong. Now before we can 
 safely accept this affirmation, we must examine the 
 
IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND RIGHT? 19 
 
 two things, one of which is asserted of the other. 
 It assumes the existence of property that is not 
 the production of labor. It takes things as they 
 are, not as they ought to be. Before ascertaining 
 whither this will lead us, it is well to get a definite 
 idea of property. 
 
 In general, property may be defined as that which 
 is actually owned, whether it is or is not the produc¬ 
 tion of labor. Before we can affirm that it is right, 
 we should also clearly settle the question of what 
 right is. What have we a right to do ? What is 
 the limit of the self-assertion of the individual? 
 What do we find by examining the conditions of 
 the individual’s existence ? What are we warranted 
 in assuming for the purposes of this discussion ? 
 Evidently, this : that man exists on this earth with 
 certain powers and capacities, all of which it is good 
 to assert, so long as their assertion by one man does 
 not interfere with their exercise by any other man. 
 If we have not the right to assert and exert these 
 powers and capacities within such limits, then life 
 is a mystery which it were hopeless to attempt to 
 solve. But to make the notion of right comprehen¬ 
 sive enough to command universal acquiescence, 
 let us add to it the notion of self-protection as well 
 as self-assertion, and we find that 
 
 1. Every thing is right which may be done by an 
 individual without injury to himself or others. 
 
20 
 
 TAX THE AREA 
 
 Now as land is not the product of any body’s 
 labor, and as nobody is necessarily robbed by hold¬ 
 ing it, we consider that 
 
 2. An individual may hold land without injury 
 to himself or others; and therefore 
 
 3. Some landholding may be right. It is exactly 
 as erroneous to infer that all landholding is wrong 
 because some land is wrongly held, as it would be 
 to infer that one man may own all the land in the 
 world without wronging any body, from the fact that 
 he may own ten acres without wronging any body. 
 
 As keenly as Mr. George appreciates the right of 
 every man to the use of the earth for the sake of 
 the means of subsistence, he forgets that it includes 
 the right of every man to every form of use to 
 which the earth can be put. Man has a right to all 
 the benefits of private ownership of land, and this 
 right, like the right to the means of earning a liv¬ 
 ing, is universal. The evils of which Mr. George 
 complains are the outgrowth of the abuse of the 
 institution of private property in land, not its legiti¬ 
 mate use. The legitimate use of this institution 
 would be its extension to every individual. If 
 every person owned his share of the surface of the 
 earth in fee simple — a farm or a building lot, 
 according to the occupation which he chose to 
 follow and the nature of it—the causes of industrial 
 depression would have to be sought elsewhere than 
 
IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND RIGHT? 21 
 
 in the land question. Mr. George can not say that 
 the causes which he had pointed out—the monopoly 
 and non-improvement of land — would continue to 
 exist if the ownership of land were made universal. 
 To claim that it is impossible to distribute land so 
 as to secure to every one his right to the opportu¬ 
 nities of nature is to assume the point which, of all 
 others, it devolves on Mr. George to prove. He 
 does not really undertake to prove it. On the 
 contrary, after an elaborate argument designed to 
 prove that, since man did not make land, he has no 
 right of property in it, Mr. George substitutes for 
 the notion of property right a natural and unac¬ 
 quired right; the right that exists at birth, before 
 the individual had any chance to earn any thing. 
 In order to enforce this right, he proposes that 
 individual ownership of land shall continue in form 
 but be abolished in substance, by taxing — what? 
 Land ? No, but land values. No one can success¬ 
 fully dispute Mr. George’s position that our right 
 to the use of land is natural, and to be con¬ 
 sistent he should have proposed to tax land 
 itself, not its value. To tax land itself may be to 
 stimulate the usefulness of land to the human 
 race ; to tax its value is to tax that usefulness, and 
 to handicap it. But the question of expediency is 
 important enough to deserve more extended dis¬ 
 cussion in its own place. To return to the question 
 
22 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 of right, let us analyze the right of private property 
 as applied by existing institutions. What does it 
 consist of ? 
 
 1. Of the right (asserted by Mr. George) of every 
 man to the use of the earth for the sake of the 
 means of subsistence. 
 
 2 . Of the right (asserted by existing institutions 
 and denied by Mr. George) of the individual to the 
 value of the land appropriated by him. 
 
 We confidently assert this second right as general 
 and equitable in its nature, subject only to such 
 restrictions as the nature of the community and the 
 demands of the public interest may impose. We 
 hope to show hereafter that the relation of land 
 value to the development and organic form of the 
 community is such that the community is provided 
 with the power of asserting its rights without taxing 
 the value of land, and that every legitimate or nec¬ 
 essary object of its taxation can be accomplished by 
 taxing the land itself. But before undertaking to 
 do this it is necessary to meet Mr. George’s assertion 
 that the community is entitled to the value of land 
 and that the tenant’s title to it (except when its 
 value is the outgrowth of improvements that he has 
 made, as when a farmer fertilizes his farm), is noth¬ 
 ing by comparison. 
 
 In order to understand the right of the individual 
 to that portion of the value of land which comes 
 
IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND RIGHT ? 23 
 
 from the growth of the community around it, we 
 must avoid the error, into which Mr. George seems 
 to have fallen, of mistaking the effect for the cause. 
 Individual enterprise makes a community grow 
 before the growth of the community enriches the 
 individual. There is not a single incident in the 
 growth of a community that is not made up entirely 
 of individual forces, or forces which one or more indi¬ 
 viduals have set in motion. The chance that all the 
 individuals in a community have an exactly equal 
 share in all the circumstances which, from its origin to 
 a given point of recent time, have contributed to its 
 growth, is but one in many thousands. 
 
 Suppose that one hundred men go from an eastern 
 city to a western territory and found a town. Their 
 individual shrewdness, averaged by consultation, 
 selects a favorable site. 
 
 Suppose that fifty of these men build houses and 
 the other fifty live in these houses with the building 
 fifty, and hold their own lots for a speculative 
 advance. We are already beginning to differentiate 
 the interests of these individuals in the growth of 
 the community. It is already unjust to tax one of 
 the building fifty to the full value of his lot for the 
 benefit of one of the speculating fifty. Yet this is 
 what Mr. George proposes to do. A public tax is 
 supposed to be for the benefit of all; like the rain, 
 its benefit falls on the unjust as well as the just. It 
 
24 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 therefore follows that a public tax should not be 
 levied beyond the absolute need of the community 
 whether it is levied justly or unjustly with regard to 
 the objects of taxation. 
 
 Suppose, again, that twenty-five of the working, 
 building fifty settlers form a board of trade. They 
 secure railroad facilities for the town. They invite 
 factories to come to it. They organize a building 
 association ; they study the possibilities of improve¬ 
 ment ; they advertise the town ; they induce capital 
 to come to it and increase its value as a whole. 
 Thus they improve the value of every piece of prop¬ 
 erty in it. Now is it just that they should be taxed 
 for the benefit of the seventy-five others who have 
 not done as much to promote this total value as 
 they have ? 
 
 As the town grows, more settlers come to it. Some 
 of them own real estate or buy it, others do not. 
 Some are thriving and industrious, others are not. 
 The value of land continues to improve; if that 
 value is taxed, the revenue that is raised for the 
 whole community is increased, and its benefits are 
 given to a larger number of the drones with each 
 increase in wealth and population. The most valu¬ 
 able land, and the land that would be taxed most, 
 would be on the principal streets, where the most 
 enterprising and public-spirited citizens were owners. 
 The next most valuable would be on the next streets. 
 
IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND RIGHT? 25 
 
 The less valuable, still further out. Any circum¬ 
 stances calculated to affect these values would gen¬ 
 erally be due to the enterprise of individuals or asso¬ 
 ciations of individuals, acting with a view to the 
 purchase of some benefit for themselves, by giving 
 benefit in exchange for it. If A owns a lot in the 
 center of a block, and B, C, D, and other citizens 
 make that lot more valuable by buying and improv¬ 
 ing adjoining lots, A does not owe this increased 
 value to the community in general, but to B, C, D, 
 and the other individuals in "particular. They do 
 not come there merely for the sake of what the com¬ 
 munity affords them in its corporate capacity, but 
 for the opportunity, which an aggregation of individ¬ 
 uals affords them, of selling their labor or investing 
 their capital. A is one of these individuals, and he 
 receives an equivalent for what he gives. One can 
 readily imagine that a lot in such a town, valued at 
 $10,000, and surveyed on land that had been given 
 to the settlers outright as an inducement, might have 
 derived almost its entire value from a succession of 
 events which were brought about by private enter¬ 
 prise ;—whether individual or organized, it matters 
 not. The value of such a lot might be analyzed as 
 follows : 
 
 Value derived from the extension of a railroad past the 
 town—one group of private citizens building the rail¬ 
 road and another group of citizens persuading them to 
 locate the line there, giving the right of way, etc., $ 1,000 
 
26 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 Value derived from the location of a station in the town, 
 through the co-operation of the same two groups of 
 individuals. ....... $2,000 
 
 Value derived from the opening of streets by the town 
 
 council. ........ 2,000 
 
 Value derived from the advertising given the town by 
 newspapers and real estate agencies (operated by 
 private capital). ...... 2,o oo 
 
 Value derived from influx of new population (an aggre¬ 
 gation of individuals, voluntarily choosing to give 
 whatever benefit their presence may cause to the town 
 in return for the opportunity of making a living which 
 it holds out to them). ..... 3,00o 
 
 Total 10,000 
 
 The last named item might be larger, but a con¬ 
 siderable share of it is earned by the individual 
 efforts included in the preceding item. The $2000 
 of value derived from the opening of streets is, 
 strictly speaking, the only part of the total value of 
 $10,000 that has not been earned by the owner of 
 the lot, or by those to whom he has given something 
 valuable in exchange. Verily, the “ unearned incre¬ 
 ment/’ John Stuart Mill to the contrary notwith¬ 
 standing, is chiefly unearned by the community, 
 and almost entirely earned by one or more individ¬ 
 uals, whose mutual debt is settled by various forms 
 of individual reciprocity. The community has no 
 more right to confiscate the full value of land because 
 it is acquired in this way, than to confiscate the 
 house on it because one man furnished the stone, 
 
IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OE LAND RIGHT? 
 
 - i 
 
 another the brick, another the timber, another the 
 plaster, and several men the labor. A man has a 
 right to make an expressed or implied contract with 
 as few or as many other men as he chooses, and the 
 community can not justly extend the number to 
 include all of its members and to give them an equal 
 share in the benefits of one side of that contract, 
 regardless of their respective responsibility for the 
 benefits received on the other side. If it were even 
 remotely possible to distribute the benefits of public 
 revenue so as to return most to those who have 
 earned most, less to those who have earned less, and 
 so forth, there might be a prima facie case made out 
 for a levy of revenue beyond the necessities of the 
 taxing authority; but these ideal conditions are 
 never fulfilled. Such a system of taxation would 
 benefit Mr. George’s particular bite noire , the land 
 miser, just as much as another citizen. The man 
 who locks up unimproved land for speculative pur¬ 
 poses, the keeper of the saloon, the brothel, and the 
 gambling hell—all are members of the community, 
 and all derive more or less undeserved benefit from 
 the expenditure of revenue for public purposes. 
 In short, the collection of public revenue can not 
 benefit any one who does not belong to one of the 
 following three classes: 
 
 i. The man who gets more benefit therefrom than 
 he deserves. 
 
28 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 2. The man who gets exactly as much benefit as 
 
 he deserves. 
 
 3. The man who is benefited less than he deserves, 
 if at all. 
 
 The third man is robbed for the benefit of the 
 first, as truly as the Irish tenant is robbed for the 
 benefit of the landlord. Both of these men are 
 wronged ; for the man who receives something valu¬ 
 able which he has not earned, save as the gift of 
 ennobling friendship or affection, is rendered less 
 dependent on his own exertions and less useful to 
 society, even if the sudden acquisition of additional 
 wealth does not sharpen his greed and make him 
 more grasping. 
 
 As for the man who receives from taxation just 
 what he deserves—in other words, just what he has 
 paid in in the shape of capital or labor—there is no 
 reason for collecting from him at all, beyond the 
 necessity of making him pay his share for the ex¬ 
 penses of ordinary governmental machinery. It is 
 as absurd to tax him and to return the tax to him as 
 it would be for Mr. Henry George to hand Father 
 McGlynn a dollar, and for Father McGlynn to hand 
 it directly back to Mr. George. 
 
 We imagine we hear Mr. George asking “Would 
 you then make the amount of wealth which a man 
 had accumulated the measure of his deserts at the 
 hands of the community? ” 
 
IS PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND RIGHT? 29 
 
 By no means ; but under a system of government 
 which gave every man an equal opportunity, that 
 man’s acquisitions would, at any given point of future 
 time, represent the net result of his individual exer¬ 
 tions. Mr. George has taken the position that land is 
 opportunity and opportunity island. He should be 
 willing to favor a system of land regulation, designed 
 to prevent any man from monopolizing more than 
 his share of land, provided it can be shown to con¬ 
 tain the elements of success. 
 
 It is not desirable to tax the deserving individual 
 unnecessarily for the support of the undeserving. 
 There are legitimate subjects of taxation, including 
 land, which obviate the necessity of so doing, and 
 which suffice for the means of a system of most lib¬ 
 eral provision for teaching the undeserving citizen 
 to deserve. It is not necessary to tax all land values 
 in order to provide for an ample supply of industrial 
 schools, public libraries, museums, and other benefi¬ 
 cent institutions, the mission of which should be 
 to protect the helpless and to rescue the fallen, as 
 well as to teach the healthy and respectable young 
 man how to do every thing for himself, instead of 
 asking the government to do every thing for him. 
 Every step taken in the direction of paternal gov¬ 
 ernment should be taken with the development of 
 the individual in view, and no such steps should be 
 taken which are not logically consistent with the 
 
TAX THE AREA. 
 
 30 
 
 natural laws of individual development. Self-culture 
 and a vigorous, manly type of individual are not 
 promoted by giving the individual every thing with 
 as little exertion as possible^on his part. There is no 
 such thing as a nation of minors, and self-respecting 
 citizens do not want to be treated as minors. They 
 wish nothing more than the regulation of the oppor¬ 
 tunities to which they have equal rights, so that 
 those opportunities will afford the greatest possible 
 encouragement to self-culture and individual exer¬ 
 tion, and so that the excuse of the loafer and idler 
 that “there is no show for a poor man” maybe 
 taken away. 
 
 We conclude, then, that the individual’s title to 
 the “ unearned increment ” is far better than the com¬ 
 munity’s ; that the latter’s right to tax it is limited, 
 because its share in promoting the growth of that 
 increment is limited; that this right can become 
 unlimited only by the community totally supersed¬ 
 ing the individual in the operation of all the factors 
 of such growth,—in other words, by the realization of 
 
 the ideal socialistic state; and finally that it would be 
 
 * » 
 
 impossible to distribute justly the benefits of such 
 taxation. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL. 
 
 “ This undertaking for another is the blunder which stands in 
 colossal ugliness in the governments of the world.” —Emerson. 
 
 T HE only communities of which we know any 
 thing are composed of individuals. That 
 which is good for the individual under the laws of 
 his being must necessarily be good for any possible 
 aggregation of individuals existing under the same 
 laws, no matter how large such an aggregation may 
 be. Conversely, nothing that tends to belittle the 
 individual, or to reduce the sphere of his conscious¬ 
 ness, or to prevent the exercise of any one of his 
 natural faculties for his own physical, mental, or 
 moral benefit, subject to such restrictions as are 
 needed to prevent him from encroaching upon the 
 similar exercise of similar rights by others, can be 
 good for the community in the long run. The indi¬ 
 vidual may suffer or die for the benefit of the com¬ 
 munity, but even then he benefits the community 
 only by benefiting the individuals in it. If he is a 
 criminal and suffers death on the scaffold, it is a 
 
32 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 warning to others that the life of the humblest indi¬ 
 vidual must be respected, and that punishment 
 awaits him who takes it. If the individual who suf¬ 
 fers is a patriot soldier, he endures the privation of 
 military service, and perhaps gives his life, for the 
 sentiment of patriotism and the rights of other indi¬ 
 viduals to exercise that sentiment or to enjoy more 
 material forms of liberty. If he survives, the self- 
 sacrifice which he has endured strengthens, perhaps 
 ennobles his own character. It adds to his own indi¬ 
 viduality, and enlarges his capacity for intellectual 
 and moral life. It educates him. 
 
 What is an army but an aggregation of individ¬ 
 uals? What is a war, with all its tremendous and 
 immeasurable consequences, its stimulation of 
 patriotic feeling, and its indefinite influence on the 
 intellectual and moral life of one or more nations, 
 but the joint act of the individuals participating in 
 it ? What great reform, such as the abolition of 
 slavery, was ever accomplished, save by enlisting 
 individuals, one by one, under its banner? It is 
 absurd to undertake to accomplish any organic 
 change in society without educating individuals to 
 it. Mr. Henry George recognizes this. He and his 
 fellow-orators in the cause of land nationalization are 
 continually making speeches to individuals, and send¬ 
 ing books and other documents for individuals to 
 read. They all recognize that no effect is possible 
 
THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL . 33 
 
 without securing individual co-operation as a second 
 cause. 
 
 But apply this theory of individualism, uncon¬ 
 sciously recognized by all, to the less undisputed 
 theory of land nationalization, and what is the lesson 
 that forces itself upon us? This; that land nation¬ 
 alization must be if it is good for the individual; 
 that it can not be if it is not good for the individual; 
 for in the latter event it can not by any possibility 
 be permanently good for the community. 
 
 The sense of private ownership in general increases 
 the sense of personal dignity. It increases one’s 
 self-respect most if that which is owned has been 
 honestly acquired by the labor of the owner, and is 
 held in constant regard of the right of others. 
 There is, however, something especially inspiring in 
 the sense of ownership of land. It gives a man 
 a king-like feeling. It awakens his pride and as it 
 has never been awakened before. It calls into exer¬ 
 cise various other faculties that have been dormant 
 up to the hour when the consciousness of ownership 
 begins. 
 
 To find the general laws governing the effect of 
 land ownership upon the individual man, the notion 
 must be qualified as little as possible. The area 
 owned is variable, and is not a constant factor at 
 this phase of the problem. The notion of area must 
 therefore be excluded for the present. We wish to 
 
34 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 determine the general effect of land ownership on a 
 man, whether he owns a lot a few feet square or a 
 county. 
 
 It is the universal verdict of experience that the 
 acquisition of land in one’s own name increases one’s 
 sense of personal importance, and leads to increased 
 self-assertion. Now self-assertion within proper 
 bounds—such bounds as are set by the most delicate 
 perception of the rights of others—is the secret of 
 individual success in the sphere for which one is 
 adapted. The lack of it is the most familiar expla¬ 
 nation of a man’s failure when his natural capacities 
 are known to contain the other elements of success. 
 It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that to 
 make every citizen a land owner would give to many 
 who had not received it, a mighty impulse to individ¬ 
 uality. It would awaken millions who now seem to 
 be asleep by comparison with the intellectual and 
 practical activity of their more aggressive fellow- 
 men. 
 
 If legislation can be so shaped as to bring about 
 a well-nigh universal distribution of real property, 
 the beneficial effects of such a state will be farther- 
 reaching and more varied than language can predict. 
 To be an owner instead of a tenant would mean, to 
 the average man of limited means, relief from a tax 
 probably amounting to twenty-five percent, of his 
 income. He would have that much more time 
 
THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL. 35 
 
 available either for more careful study of the details 
 of his business—likely to result in a surer grasp of 
 its general principles—or for the cultivation of his 
 intellectual, aesthetic, moral, and religious faculties. 
 His value as a citizen and a voter would be vastly 
 increased. The man who owns his home feels a 
 keener interest in the administration of public affairs 
 than he who is merely a tenant. He is a stock¬ 
 holder in the municipality; his property may be 
 depreciated or ruined by the misconduct of public 
 officials if he does not watch them and do his part in 
 holding them to their responsibility to the people 
 their masters. His sympathies will generally be 
 enlisted in behalf of the preservation of public order 
 when it is riotously assailed, for his selfish interest 
 will be imperiled. When the labor riots of 1877 
 endangered life and property in many of the smaller 
 industrial centers of the great manufacturing state 
 of Pennsylvania, sometimes sacrificing both, there 
 was no appreciable disorder in the greatest indus¬ 
 trial center of all, the city of Philadelphia; which 
 freedom from trouble was almost universally attrib¬ 
 uted, then and since, to the fact that has given that 
 city the name of “ The city of homes ; ” the fact 
 that, through the agency of an army of building 
 associations the percentage of house owners in the 
 population of Philadelphia is larger than in any 
 other such city in the world. 
 
36 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 If there were no reason for agitating the land 
 question except the importance of promoting indi¬ 
 vidual ownership of land as an incentive to good 
 citizenship, this motive of itself would justify every 
 legal step needed to make every man a house owner. 
 Universal suffrage is an accomplished fact in this 
 country, and there is no step backward from it; and 
 it is slowly but certainly coming in all progressive 
 nations. Shall the balance of power be held by 
 orderly, industrious citizens who have everything to 
 lose and nothing to gain by revolution outside of 
 legal methods, or by the Ishmaels of society, who 
 have nothing to lose and every thing to gain by un¬ 
 settling the fabric of law and justice? If by the 
 former, then it is the true policy to destroy the lat¬ 
 ter as a famous Eastern Emperor destroyed his ene¬ 
 mies when he made friends of them. Let us destroy 
 the Ishmaels, as Ishmaels. Let us make the law 
 their friend, and so make them friends of the law. 
 But let us not, in seeking to do this, make the law 
 their deadliest enemy by depriving honest labor of 
 its favorite reward, in order to accumulate a fund to 
 divide among those who have not earned it, and 
 thus removing from either party to the arrangement 
 the inducement to self-culture and independence of 
 character, as developed by industry. Provided the 
 opportunities are properly regulated so as to give 
 every man a chance to earn a living, there is no one 
 
THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL. 37 
 
 who will not, in the long run, respect himself more 
 if every dollar that he accumulates is the result of 
 his own exertions, than he would if he were entitled 
 to receive, on coming of age, a sum of money from 
 the government as capital on which to make his start 
 in life. The honest, manly young citizen asks no 
 such donation. All he wants is a fair field and no 
 favor, and he will make his own way. No system 
 of legislation ever yet devised can save the shiftless 
 from being outstripped in the race for wealth by the 
 careful and industrious, and any legislation that 
 would do so would be grossly unjust. So far as leg- 
 islation can do any thing to reduce the number of 
 the shiftless, it can only do so by keeping the stand¬ 
 ard of individualism clearly in sight ; by measures 
 that will promote it and increase its average. A 
 generation of parents of superior intellectual and 
 moral culture will be likely to produce a generation 
 of children in advance of the average that prevailed 
 before the sphere of individual and moral culture 
 was enlarged by increasing the opportunities of the 
 multitude. 
 
 We regard as the fatal defect of Mr. George’s 
 proposition to tax the full rental value of land, its 
 deadly demoralizing effect on the individual. It is 
 bad for the individual both in the collection and the 
 disbursement of the tax proposed. The collection 
 of a tax to the full rental value of a piece of land 
 
33 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 would impair the sense of ownership, which we have 
 seen to be of the utmost value to the individual. 
 He would feel all the time that the State, not he, 
 owned it. 
 
 When the tax should have been collected in any 
 one year, and disbursed again in bounties to young 
 men coming of age, every one of these young men 
 would be injured, mentally and morally, in that he 
 was under no necessity of working for and earning 
 his bounty before he received it. Another genera¬ 
 tion of individuals, begotten by bountied young 
 men, would consist of moral dwarfs and runts, and 
 a full-grown man—a man of marked individuality 
 and force of character—would be regarded as a freak 
 and a crank. 
 
 We have so far considered the question of distri¬ 
 bution with reference to its direct effect on the 
 individual. But the truths of individualism claim 
 not only to be of the highest intellectual and moral 
 value, but also to be of the utmost importance to 
 the world’s prosperity in a material sense. 
 
 In general, science teaches that an organism takes 
 a high or a low place in the scale of natural devel¬ 
 opment and efficiency of control over inorganic na¬ 
 ture for its own purposes, according to the com¬ 
 plexity or simplicity of its various organs, and the 
 extent to which their respective functions are 
 specialized and defined. If we view society as a 
 
THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL. 
 
 39 
 
 huge organism and the individuals that constitute 
 it as its organs, it will follow that the welfare of 
 society will, in general, be promoted by institutions 
 that tend to produce specialization and diversity 
 of function among individuals. We have already 
 seen in Chapter II. how important the diversifica¬ 
 tion of industries is to the problem of making the 
 soil support the ultimate population of the earth. 
 We have seen that the stream of immigration from 
 the country to the city must be maintained to insure 
 that reduction of the average area required per 
 capita , which is needed to make a constant surface 
 support an increasing population. It can be main¬ 
 tained only by the country sending to the cities, 
 towns and villages, an enormous diversity of raw 
 material, to be worked up into manufactured 
 articles and turned into the channels of commerce. 
 It is a question whether a proper diversification of 
 our industries would not, temporarily at least, pre¬ 
 vent the recurrence of those periods of industrial 
 depression which have caused a revival of interest 
 in the land question. This, at least, is reasonably 
 certain ; that the productive capacity of the earth’s 
 surface would be enormously increased by the sub¬ 
 division of arable land and the cultivation of each 
 part thereof by its owner. The productive capacity 
 will be better sustained by an occupant who feels 
 that he owns it, than by a tenant whose tenure is 
 
40 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 limited, and who will feel no sense of loss if he 
 exhausts the fertility of the soil when approaching 
 the expiration of his lease. If a tenant does not 
 yield to this temptation, but, on the contrary, con¬ 
 scientiously improves the quality of the ground 
 which he cultivates, there is nothing to insure him 
 against an increase of the rent which he has to pay 
 for the use of it, for his landlord can perhaps get 
 more from somebody else, and may decline to renew 
 his lease. But when assured of a life-long tenure of 
 ownership, unless he surrenders it of his own free 
 will, he is likely to be careful not to exhaust the 
 soil: rather to re-enforce it from time to time and to 
 realize the benefits of a rotation of crops. Experi¬ 
 ence will enable him to understand what the local 
 soil most needs. It is equally obvious that the distri¬ 
 bution of the land into small areas can not fail to 
 secure a better average of attention to cultivation, 
 because it will tend to make every man concentrate 
 his resources. Instead of a large tract half culti¬ 
 vated by one man, there will be two or more small 
 tracts, well cultivated, each by its owner. The fair¬ 
 est tests of the policy of maximum distribution 
 show that in general it promotes the prosperity of 
 the individual. Mr. T. Cliffe Leslie, in his Cobden 
 Club essay on “The Land System of France,’' says 
 that the system of small property is daily gain- 
 ing ground in France, and regards the fact that the 
 
THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL. 
 
 4 1 
 
 small cultivating landholder is a continual buyer of 
 land, as a proof that it is profitable. Ex-congressman 
 William A. Phillips of Kansas, in his interesting 
 work entitled, “ Labor, Land, and Law,” finds that 
 in France, in the past two-thirds of a century “the 
 improvements on the small farms are much greater 
 than they would be if the land was held by renters. 
 The cultivators are not only able to buy more land 
 whenever an opportunity offers, but to improve the 
 condition of what they have. * * Arthur Young 
 
 predicted that such small divisions would make 
 France a ‘ rabbit warren.’ It was also predicted 
 that as there would be no wealthy employers the 
 common laborers would suffer and wages decline. 
 The contrary is the fact. The small farm culture in 
 France has increased wages, partly owing to better 
 production and partly to the fact that the labor¬ 
 ers have continually been changing to small holders. 
 Mr. Leslie on this subject says that seventy-five per 
 cent, of those who were mere laborers when this 
 system began, have become owners of land. It was 
 also said by the political economists that these small 
 farmers would be burdened with debt, so as to crip¬ 
 ple them. M. Lavergne estimates the debt on the 
 small properties in France to be only five per cent, 
 of their value. * * The buyers are almost ex¬ 
 clusively occupants. * * A large amount of the 
 
 national debt of France is held by these peasant 
 
42 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 landholders. This was one thing that enabled France 
 to meet her great war indemnity to Germany.” The 
 cheapness of the necessaries of life in France, and 
 the enormous value of her agricultural exports as 
 well as the exports of manufactured products, speak 
 volumes when compared with the results of aristo¬ 
 cratic landlordism and tenantry in Ireland, En¬ 
 gland, Austria and Spain. 
 
 If a community consists of prosperous individuals, 
 that it will be a prosperous community goes without 
 saying. If it is filled with contented individuals, 
 that mysterious, impalpable thing called business 
 confidence will be likely to prevail. If the popula¬ 
 tion is increasing in the natural course of events 
 there will be competition and aggressive enterprise 
 where there is confidence. 
 
 The relations of capital and labor will be mere 
 friendly and rational whenever the bulk of the wage 
 workers own their houses. The home-owner is not 
 quick to make to himself enemies in the community 
 in which he lives by unnecessary participation in 
 strikes, boycotts or any other form of organized 
 action that is easily abused. From the nature of his 
 circumstances, he is an advocate of arbitration, and 
 he is willing to abide by it when it does not result in 
 his favor, because he can afford to wait and to 
 depend on the good-will of public opinion, which 
 attaches itself to a citizen whose respectability has 
 
THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL . 
 
 43 
 
 stood the test of time. It is not easy to exaggerate 
 the value of universal home ownership as a preven¬ 
 tive of the industrial disturbances that so often 
 arrest prosperity, and that, happily with greater 
 rarity, endanger public order and the happiness of 
 those not responsible for the evil that is at the root 
 of the disturbance. 
 
 We have seen that perfect distribution would 
 benefit the individual apart from the material or pro¬ 
 ductive value of the land, and that the development 
 of the individual, by this means, would be followed 
 by increased attention to the productive powers of 
 the soil, increased development of those powers, and 
 consequently increased production. In other words, 
 it would improve the individual to own land, and it 
 would improve the land to be owned by as many 
 individuals as possible. On the other hand, the 
 wholesale suppression of the individual by a perpetu¬ 
 ally obtrusive system of public ownership would not 
 only retard human intellectual and moral develop¬ 
 ment, but would arrest the growth of productive 
 forces. The world is coming to see that the home- 
 rule principle, the principle of individual liberty, is 
 the most expedient as well as the most just of the 
 canons of government. To secure the best results, 
 every individual must be an assistant governor. 
 Every individual must enforce proper rules of con¬ 
 duct within his own sphere, and this enforcement 
 
44 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 will be most perfect when every individual enforces 
 as much as possible of the law that he makes, and 
 makes as much as possible of that which he enforces. 
 The ultimate solution must be the education of the 
 individual, and the bringing of every public function 
 as near to him, by thoroughly distributing the centers 
 of administration and responsibility, as possible. 
 Only thus can responsibility be clearly defined and 
 enforced without the confusion of issues. The ap¬ 
 plication of this general truth to the land question 
 teaches that the perfect distribution of land will 
 bring about its perfect development, and the perfect 
 administration of those laws of nature which regu¬ 
 late its use for the maintenance of mankind. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 
 
 “ Democratize property, not by abolishing but by universal¬ 
 izing it, so that every citizen without exception may be a land¬ 
 holder— a?i easier task than it may be supposed —in two words, 
 know how to produce wealth and to distribute it, and you will 
 possess at once material greatness and moral greatness.”— 
 Victor Hugo. 
 
 ERFECT distribution implies rigid regulation 
 
 X of land ownership. Land must not only be 
 distributed once, but it must stay distributed ; the 
 distributing force must be permanently resident in 
 the law itself, not applied in the form of overt acts 
 at irregular intervals. The land should, in fact, be 
 made to seem to distribute itself spontaneously. It 
 would be bad statesmanship to distribute it forcibly. 
 There are numerous objections to wholesale confis¬ 
 cation and redistribution. An enormous increase 
 in governmental machinery would be needed, and 
 every student of civil service questions knows how 
 hard it is to keep offices created for temporary 
 purposes from becoming permanent barnacles. 
 
 In economics, as in physical science, the best 
 progress is made by following the line of least re- 
 
46 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 sistance or friction. An immense reserve of money 
 would be required to enable the government of a 
 state or a county to buy every body’s land in order 
 to resell it; the awarding of fair compensation 
 would be a herculean job in more senses than one, 
 and more or less corruption would result long before 
 the government had gotten possession of all the 
 land. When the actual work of redistribution 
 began, there would be a serious dilemma. If a 
 government were able to give away the land in its 
 jurisdiction, the next generation would think it 
 unfair that the sons had to buy land which was 
 given to the fathers, for accumulation and unequal 
 distribution would go on as before if the ordinary 
 laws of land tenure continued in force. The sons of 
 accumulating fathers would inherit, and the sons of 
 other fathers would have to buy. What would be 
 more natural than that another process of wholesale 
 purchase and redonation would be demanded, and 
 how hard would it be to resist it! Such a method 
 of redistribution is plainly inadequate. It would 
 discourage the spirit of improvement that is born of 
 the sense of permanent tenure and would involve 
 the increase of governmental machinery at frequent 
 intervals. It is open, although in a less degree, to 
 the objections that lie against actual state owner¬ 
 ship and universal tenantship. 
 
 It would be far wiser to put distributing forces in 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 47 
 
 operation in the ordinary, rather than in extraor¬ 
 dinary regulations of land tenure; to adjust the land 
 laws so that the unwritten law of supply and demand 
 could have a chance to operate instead of being 
 blocked more and more as a community increases 
 in material progress; to make use of existing 
 institutions with which the public is familiar, and 
 which it takes as matters of course, and to apply 
 legal machinery only under circumstances which 
 suggest its use, instead of introducing it arbi¬ 
 trarily. 
 
 Just such circumstances are found in the institu¬ 
 tion of taxation, and in the temporary assumption 
 of qualified governmental control on the death of a 
 
 person leaving an estate. If the opportunities 
 
 * 
 
 offered by these familiar facts suffice for making 
 effective such measures as are intended to promote 
 the utmost necessary distribution of land, their 
 effectiveness will be impaired rather than increased 
 by going further and arousing needless opposition. 
 
 We infer, then, that the desideratum is a method 
 of taxation that zvill make land distribute itself in 
 response to the continually increasing demand there¬ 
 for; supplemented with such legislation regarding 
 the settlement of estates as will aid in this process 
 of distribution. It should be made unlawful for an 
 heir to inherit more than a certain area of land in 
 any county in which he does not actually reside, the 
 
4 8 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 excess to be sold by the sheriff, and the proceeds, 
 less costs, turned into the estate in cash. Such a 
 provision would induce many men to settle their 
 own estates by selling off land as they had 
 opportunity and investing the money otherwise. 
 Indeed, rich men would be less disposed to accumu¬ 
 late real estate, and thus the monopoly demand for 
 land would be reduced, and improvement promoted 
 by the capital thus directed into channels of greater 
 activity. 
 
 So much for occasions of extraordinary govern¬ 
 mental interference. The ordinary occasion—that 
 of taxation—demands a more extended discussion. 
 
 The object of taxation is, primarily, the accumu¬ 
 lation of the money needed to pay the necessary 
 cost of government. Taxation of some kind is a 
 necessity, if there is to be any government; and this 
 institution, therefore, offers one of the easiest meth¬ 
 ods of accomplishing a given legitimate purpose, 
 when it is desirable to work by indirect methods, 
 rather than to provoke resistance by direct interfer¬ 
 ence of a more or less arbitrary aspect. Laws which 
 compel the citizen to do his share in a great altruis¬ 
 tic scheme for giving his neighbor an equal oppor¬ 
 tunity to that which he enjoys are more readily 
 acquiesced in if their operation is indirect enough 
 not to be felt. The abuse of indirect taxation is no 
 argument against its legitimate use, and the spirit 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAX A TION. 49 
 
 of individualism is promoted by reminding the indi¬ 
 vidual as seldom as possible that he is governed. 
 There is, therefore, a legitimate secondary use of 
 taxation as a means to a worthy end. Wisely 
 applied taxation can be used for the assertion of 
 that individualism which is as important to the 
 nation, or the social unit, as a factor in human prog¬ 
 ress, as it is to the personal unit. 
 
 Land taxation in particular, for ulterior purposes, 
 should commend itself even to the extreme members 
 of the laissez faire school, on account of the fact, which 
 can not be ignored for a moment in any fair discus¬ 
 sion of the land question, that land is constant while 
 the population that must live on it tends to increase 
 continually. If it were susceptible of proof that 
 taxation should not be ordinarily employed for any 
 other purpose whatsoever than the raising of 
 revenue, it would still be legitimate to apply it to 
 the land in such a way as to break up monopoly. 
 For no other object of taxation, from its very nature 
 and conditions , is so admirably adapted for the 
 restriction of taxation to “ the actual needs of the 
 government , honestly administered ,” as one which is 
 constant in quantity while the community that taxes 
 it is growing continually . Nothing is so necessary 
 to our existence as land, and no other object of tax¬ 
 ation transmits the sense of being taxed to so many 
 persons.. Every body feels realty taxes. The land- 
 
5 ° 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 lord feels them, and he takes good care to take them 
 out of the tenant as far as possible. 
 
 But even the rigid regulation of land tenure should 
 be kept within the limits indicated by Mr. Herbert 
 Spencer’s theory that the true function of govern¬ 
 ment is negatively-regulative; that the govern¬ 
 ment, instead of doing every thing for the individual, 
 should simply insure him the opportunity to do 
 every thing for himself. Mr. Spencer’s principle 
 will be found amply sufficient. All that is needed 
 is that the government should tear down the artifi¬ 
 cial and irrational barriers to improvement and dis¬ 
 tribution, and adopt a rational and obvious system 
 of taxation, and land will not only distribute itself, 
 but will stay distributed. 
 
 In order to be permanently useful, land taxation 
 should meet these two demands: 
 
 (1) It should promote, rather than retard, distri¬ 
 bution. 
 
 (2) It should promote, rather than retard, 
 improvement. 
 
 To these requisites must be added a third, which 
 applies to all taxation whatsoever: 
 
 (3) It should be impartial in its operation. 
 
 Adhering" as closely as possible to the principle 
 
 that existing institutions, particular as well as gen¬ 
 eral, are to be utilized as the surest channels to 
 immediate and permanent progress, it is important 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 5 1 
 
 to inquire how far the present method of land tax¬ 
 ation complies with the above requirements. The 
 present method embodies the principle known in 
 custom-houses as that of ad valorem taxation. 
 
 First, does ad valorem taxation of land promote 
 distribution ? 
 
 A tax will operate in favor of customs and devices 
 by which it can be evaded. This is human nature 
 and is not altogether wrong. A tax is, in general, 
 the confiscation of a portion of man’s income, pre¬ 
 sumably the result of his labor, and which he has 
 earned the right to dispose of. Now it is a familiar 
 fact that a farm of 500 acres is liable to be assessed 
 at less than five times the valuation placed by 
 assessors upon a similarly located farm of 100 acres. 
 Our present system of taxation—indeed our whole 
 system of land traffic—deals with land as if it were 
 a commodity that could be reproduced indefinitely, 
 and of which the production could be encouraged 
 by making the wholesale price per acre smaller than 
 the retail. There is reason in the difference between 
 the wholesale and retail prices of articles which can 
 be replaced when consumed. The process of 
 replacing them gives employment to labor, and the 
 money spent for labor and material goes into circu¬ 
 lation all the sooner for the necessity of replacing 
 them. But when land is taken out of the market 
 you can not employ labor to make more land. It is 
 
5 2 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 not so reasonable, then, to discriminate in favor of 
 the man who has a large tract of land, and to make 
 his taxes lighter to the acre than those of a small 
 holder are likely to be. Yet there is a continual 
 temptation to this. It is not so easy for the asses¬ 
 sor to explore a large holding as it is to examine a 
 small one, so he looks at the buildings, takes the 
 average value of the land for granted, and naturally 
 gives the owner, rather than the community, the 
 benefit of whatever doubt there is. 
 
 Let us assume that there are half a dozen proper¬ 
 ties, of the respective areas of ten, twenty, forty, 
 eighty, one hundred and sixty and three hundred 
 and twenty acres, and that the artificial improve¬ 
 ments are of equal value throughout, consisting, 
 say, of houses worth $5,000 upon each property. 
 Let us suppose that the land, without the houses, is 
 worth $100 per acre. The following table shows 
 the total value of each property : 
 
 Acres 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 40 
 
 80 
 
 160 
 
 Value 
 
 $6,000 
 
 7,000 
 
 9,000 
 
 13, 000 
 
 21,000 
 
 It is evident from this table that the taxation of 
 real property on the ad valorem plan is less burden¬ 
 some per acre as the area of a holding increases. If 
 we exempt artificial improvements and attempt, like 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 53 
 
 Henry George, to tax the land itself, the ad valorem 
 tax puts a premium on monopoly and discourages 
 small holdings for homestead purposes. It is not 
 to be wondered at that Mr. George suspects the 
 existence of conditions which make the rich richer 
 and the poor poorer. The only thing to be won¬ 
 dered at is that he fails to see that it is the taxation 
 of that element of value which the individual creates, 
 the improvements both in the soil and on it, that 
 tends to keep poverty abreast of progress. But, 
 just as a man on a giant’s shoulders can see farther 
 than the giant can, we can see that his principle that 
 taxation should not handicap improvement extends 
 farther than he thinks, and that it applies to land as 
 well as to houses. The logical result of its exten¬ 
 sion to land is the principle of specific taxation ; the 
 taxation of land, not production or the producer. 
 
 The above table shows again that the ad valorem 
 method of taxation discriminates in favor of the land 
 miser, who locks up large areas for speculative pur¬ 
 poses and keeps them idle and unproductive, while 
 it bears hardest on the small holder who perhaps 
 cultivates every square foot of his little lot not 
 required for his houses and pathways. The lot 
 holder who improves his property is punished, as if 
 for doing wrong to the community, when he in¬ 
 creases its supply of building accommodation and 
 does his share to keep rents down. The farmer is 
 
54 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 punished by increased taxation if he increases the 
 value of his farm by making it more productive, 
 increasing the supply of food and keeping down the 
 price of the necessaries of life. The land miser is 
 much worse than the currency miser, for there is 
 more currency where the latter miser’s commodity 
 came from. But he who locks up land against 
 improvement reduces the actual supply. Thus he 
 wrongs the present generation. He prevents the 
 improvement needed to enable the soil to support 
 an increasing population in future. Thus he wrongs 
 future generations. He should be taxed out of 
 existence. 
 
 It would seem, then, that so far as the ad valorem 
 taxation of land affects its distribution at all, it tends 
 to retard it. It certainly does not promote it, but 
 rather encourages the accumulation of idle land for 
 speculative purposes. But it is impossible to weigh 
 the real merits of the value method of taxation of 
 land without considering the effects of improve¬ 
 ment, which, under normal conditions, is responsible 
 for whatever differences in value may exist. We 
 therefore pass on to the second question and call 
 attention to it as of the utmost importance. 
 
 Does value taxation promote improvement or 
 retard it ? 
 
 We are confronted at the outset by the obvious 
 fact that improvement, from the very nature of the 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 55 
 
 case, increases value, and therefore creates a liability 
 to increased taxation. It now becomes clearer why 
 the farm of ioo acres bears more than one-fifth of 
 the burden imposed on the farm of 500 acres. It is 
 because all kinds of improvements are taxed. One 
 is tempted to wonder how such an absurd basis of 
 taxation could ever have been adopted until we 
 remember that every such system is a gradual 
 growth from inadequate beginnings. To deny that 
 an ad valorem tax is a tax on improvement is as 
 useless as it would be to deny that two and two 
 are four. So plain a truth can not be denied, and 
 does not need to be asserted. It asserts itself, and 
 its absurdity also asserts itself, when it is seen from 
 any point of view except that from which we are 
 compelled to recognize the improvement tax as an 
 existing institution. 
 
 Henry George, in “ Progress and Poverty/’ points 
 out this absurdity, and proceeds to demand the 
 abolition of the lesser part of it in importance, the 
 tax on buildings. Mr. George would concentrate 
 all taxation on land itself; and so far he seems to us 
 to be right. All taxation on real estate should be 
 put on the land itself. A town that wishes to 
 induce a factory to locate within its limits exempts 
 it from taxation for a term of years, and the fac¬ 
 tory comes. This species of exemption should 
 become perpetual and universal, if possible. A 
 
5 6 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 man should not be fined for building a handsome 
 house, by being compelled to pay a big tax on it, 
 while his next door neighbor, occupying a lot of 
 perhaps the same size, with a squatty, ugly little 
 house that is an eyesore to the neighborhood, is 
 taxed lightly. 
 
 But carry out to its logical conclusion the excel¬ 
 lent point made by Mr. George, that a tax on im¬ 
 provements is a tax on improvement—any of us can 
 make this egg stand on its end after Columbus has 
 done it—and what are we compelled to infer? 
 
 The ad valorem tax is a tax on the improvement , 
 and a hindrance to the productive capacity, of the land 
 itself. 
 
 Fertilize a farm and increase the average yield to 
 the acre, and its value is increased, even if you have 
 made no additions to the buildings since the last val¬ 
 uation was made. If valuation were only a question 
 of buildings—important as it is to repeal the tax 
 on building improvements—the land question would 
 not to-day be a topic of widespread discussion in¬ 
 volving the rights of man and the future subsistence 
 of the race. Land without buildings would be easy 
 to get. But there is improved land in the suburbs 
 of every town or city which it is next to impossible 
 to get without paying an exorbitant price. Henry 
 George wants to tax the so-called “ unearned incre¬ 
 ment,” the increase in value resulting from the 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 57 
 
 growth, of the community close by. But the ad 
 valorem tax taxes the earned increment. The 
 farmer who takes up some wild land, clears it, fertil¬ 
 izes it, and makes it worth something, is taxed or 
 fined for doing so. In one respect, at least, we have 
 already carried out the socialist doctrine. The 
 farmer is only a tenant, the government is his land¬ 
 lord : the tax is his rent, and when the tenant makes 
 improvements the landlord raises the rent. 
 
 The third test to be applied to the value taxation 
 method is the question whether it is impartial. 
 
 We have already seen that it is not, in that it pun¬ 
 ishes the enterprising citizen who makes handsome 
 improvements, and puts a premium on non-improve¬ 
 ment, which encourages that contemptible being, 
 the land miser. This is unjust. But it is also un¬ 
 just through the imperfect distribution which it 
 makes continually more imperfect. It is continu¬ 
 ally growing harder to get land under this locking- 
 up-system. The result is that the tenants increase 
 faster than the landlords, and the latter, being mas¬ 
 ters of the situation, impose the taxes on the former, 
 by increasing the rent. The system is hardest of 
 all on the tenant of the small house. Houses of 
 four rooms pay ten and twelve per cent, on the 
 investment because the workingman is obliged to be 
 a tenant, since he finds it so hard to own a home¬ 
 stead. Perfect distribution would go far to remedy 
 
TAX THE AREA, 
 
 5 * 
 
 this. The workingman would find it easier to own 
 his house if he chose to do so, and the proportion of 
 tenants to owners would fall off. The taxes would 
 equalize themselves with improved distribution, 
 while the ad valorem method of taxation, with its 
 adverse effect on distribution—partly a direct effect 
 and partly indirect, through its adverse effect on 
 improvement, with which distribution is so closely 
 associated—imposes the burdens of taxation more 
 unequally as civilization progresses. 
 
 To recapitulate, we have, been led to the conclu¬ 
 sion that the evils arising from the imperfect distri¬ 
 bution of land can be remedied by reforms calcu¬ 
 lated to promote individualism; that the most per¬ 
 fect distribution of land would be that which made 
 it as easy as possible for every individual to acquire 
 land ; that such a reform should be accomplished 
 by ordinary and accepted, rather than extraordinary 
 and radical methods of administration ; that taxation 
 and the regulation of decedents' estates are the 
 channels through which the desired end can be 
 attained with the least resistance ; and finally, that 
 the ad valorem method of taxation is a hindrance to 
 distribution and improvement, and tends to promote 
 the evils of landlordism, and the idleness of the soil 
 for the speculative purposes of its owners. We find 
 that the taxation of improvements whether in build¬ 
 ings or in the quality of the soil, is inseparable from 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION . 59 
 
 the taxation of real property on a basis of mere 
 value, and that all such taxation tends to discourage 
 the spirit of enterprise which should be exerted 
 upon the soil to make it meet the increasing de¬ 
 mands that will be made upon it in the future, with 
 the growth of population. 
 
 Taxation of every kind is included in one or the 
 other of two classes: ad valorem taxes and specific 
 taxes. These two expressions are chiefly used with 
 reference to import duties, the ad valorem duty on 
 wool for instance, having been at one time five per 
 cent., and the specific duty subsequently twelve 
 cents a pound. 
 
 We propose that specific taxation be substituted for 
 the ad valorem taxation of land, by applying to each 
 unit of measurement (an acre, or a square foot) a tax 
 rate of a definite sum of money , 
 
 It should be understood at once that a specific 
 tax on land, which must of necessity be a tax ac¬ 
 cording to area or linear measurement, does not 
 mean the same tax rate on one acre as on another 
 acre differently situated, any more than to make all 
 tariff duties specific would mean the same duty 
 on a pound of wool as on a pound of sugar, or 
 the measurement of every imported article by 
 the pound instead of by some other unit of 
 measurement more appropriate to the circum¬ 
 stances of the case, It would be just as easy 
 
6o 
 
 TAX THIS. AREA. 
 
 to classify land as any other series of taxable 
 
 « 
 
 articles. 
 
 There can be no perfect substitute for the ad 
 valorem method of taxing land, which is not free 
 from the objections which we have found to lie 
 against this method. In other words the area tax 
 plan, or any other plan which is intended to replace 
 the value tax plan, must comply with these require¬ 
 ments : 
 
 1. It must promote the distribution of land. 
 
 2. It must promote the improvement of land, in 
 every sense of that word, and under all circum¬ 
 stances. 
 
 3. It must be equitable. 
 
 While there can be no tax on the value principle 
 that is not a tax on improvement, which is, by its 
 very nature, progressive value, yet there is value 
 residing in real property, which does not depend on 
 actual improvement, but on possible improvement. 
 This, the germ of right inherent in ad valorem tax¬ 
 ation, is the right, because of the necessity, to tax 
 that part of value which arises from location, and 
 which makes necessary some arrangement for the 
 classification of land for the purposes of taxation. 
 It is clear enough that an acre of land which is favor¬ 
 ably located for purposes of improvement ought to 
 bear a much higher tax than an acre the location of 
 which suggests no improvement at all. A scheme 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 61 
 
 of taxation avowedly for the purpose of promoting 
 improvement must necessarily take into account the 
 circumstances which make the question of improve¬ 
 ment one of importance to the community. If we 
 propose to tax an unimproved town lot as much as 
 we tax the improved lot of the same area adjacent 
 to it, then it will be necessary to tax it at a specific 
 rate which, applied to a less favorably located lot, 
 would be actually prohibitory of improvement ; for in 
 the latter case no possible form of improvement 
 would, under the prevailing circumstances, enable the 
 owner even to reimburse himself for the tax, much 
 less to make a profit or a living out of the business. 
 Obviously there is value, in the one case, which it is 
 just and necessary to tax and which is absent in the 
 other case and should therefore not be taxed. This 
 is included in that part of the value of land which is 
 called by political economists the “ unearned incre¬ 
 ment.” The true object of its taxation is, not to 
 punish the owner of the land for having the fore¬ 
 sight to buy that land when it was cheap and hold 
 for a rise, but to promote its improvement. We are 
 impelled irresistibly to the following conclusion: 
 
 So far as it is advisable to tax the “ unearned incre¬ 
 ment,” the tax thereon should be so imposed as to pro¬ 
 mote improvement , and it is therefore absurd to tax it 
 according to any principle of taxation the ejfect of 
 which is, in general, to check improvement . 
 
62 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 Let us see how far the principle of specific tax- 
 ation will meet our demands. 
 
 First, it must promote distribution. There is no 
 possible way of taxing land which would bring its 
 holder so directly and squarely face to face with the 
 fact that he is appropriating more than his share of 
 the earth’s surface, as taxation according to the area 
 he appropriates. Its natural effect upon him would 
 be to reduce the area monopolized by him to that 
 which he could actually use to the best advantage. 
 So far as any part of his land was worthless to him 
 for present purposes, so far would he be willing to 
 part with it for a fair consideration. It is plain that 
 a permanent principle of area taxation, if found prac¬ 
 ticable, would promote distribution, and continue to 
 promote it. A large tract of land, so rich in valuable 
 minerals that its owners could afford to pay specific 
 taxes on it, would be distributed and become avail¬ 
 able for agricultural purposes when the mineral 
 resources are exhausted. 
 
 Again, area taxation would promote improvement. 
 
 This is the key-note of the campaign for area tax¬ 
 ation, whether taken with reference to mineral land, 
 farm land, or land in a growing community, desirable 
 for building purposes, and possessed of an encourag¬ 
 ing “unearned increment.” 
 
 Producers of mineral raw material would not 
 under specific taxes lock up thousands of acres for 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 63 
 
 future use so as to restrict production and control 
 the market. They would more generally operate 
 under leases from individual holders, and would buy 
 only such land as they could afford to pay the area 
 tax on. There would thus be less monopoly and 
 more competition in the production of raw material 
 of a mineral character, like coal or iron ore. 
 
 Farmers would take the advice which agricultural 
 journals and conventions have been giving them for 
 years, and reduce their farms to the area which they 
 could manage most profitably. All the land that 
 anybody really wanted would come into the market, 
 within a convenient distance from the markets for 
 farm products ; for in thickly populated districts, 
 from the nature of the case and the volume of pub¬ 
 lic business to be transacted, the expenses of local 
 government would be greater and tax rates higher 
 and more prohibitory of monopoly than in sparsely 
 settled regions. 
 
 We have stipulated, however, that the ideal prin¬ 
 ciple of land taxation must promote improvement 
 under all circumstances, and as soon as we come to 
 consider the comparative workings of the specific 
 principle upon developed and undeveloped land 
 respectively, we are obliged to entertain the impor¬ 
 tant subject of classification. For developed or im¬ 
 proved land must be classed, not with improved land 
 of some other class, but with unimproved land which 
 
6 4 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 would be brought by improvement to resemble it, so 
 that the aim of taxation may be to secure that kind 
 of improvement for which the unimproved land 
 to be taxed is best adapted. It is now easier to 
 see the unreasonableness of loosely classifying land 
 as land improved and unimproved, cultivated and 
 uncultivated. It is not easy to escape this conclu¬ 
 sion : 
 
 The capacity of the community in which the taxable 
 land is situated is the proper basis of classification for 
 purposes of taxation , and not the degree of improve¬ 
 ment that has been attained. The community itself 
 has no right to tax the value that its growth does 
 not produce, and the nature of the community reg¬ 
 isters this growth in its municipal institutions. 
 
 Here we have a basis of classification and taxa¬ 
 tion which bears as direct a relation to the needs of 
 the taxing authority as may be, for the taxing 
 authority continually tends to identify itself with the 
 most prominent interests of the social community, 
 as asserted by its organized government. The 
 social community, in its most general sense, will be 
 found to create the limit within which it is equitable 
 and productive of improvement to tax unimproved 
 land. This limit may not, and in many cases can¬ 
 not, be that of the social community itself; but so 
 far as it will be necessary to depart from such a theory 
 of it, we will find that the social community has the 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 65 
 
 power to fix and to enforce more special classifica¬ 
 tion within itself. 
 
 To apply these general statements to the con¬ 
 ditions of taxation in a large city, insisting in gen¬ 
 eral on the principle that an unimproved lot shall be 
 taxed as highly as an improved lot of the same size 
 and like location, the first class of taxable land 
 should constitute the land fronting upon the princi¬ 
 pal thoroughfare, within those blocks most desirable 
 for business purposes or fashionable residence. 
 There could be as many such classes as circum¬ 
 stances might demand. There would be decidedly 
 fewer—there could not possibly be more—com¬ 
 plaints of discrimination or favoritism on the part of 
 the assessors or the boards of revision than there 
 are under the valuation system. To define what 
 fronts upon a principal street and what blocks, 
 bounded by other streets, should constitute the var¬ 
 ious classes for purposes of taxation would be as 
 easy a matter of public enactment as the fixing of 
 the boundaries of a ward or precinct for electoral or 
 police purposes, and the publicity of the definition 
 would afford the owner of the property taxed high¬ 
 est the compensation of a proof of his right to charge 
 the high rents which tradesmen are willing to pay 
 for a location on the best streets. The tradesman 
 pays higher rents for the landlord’s higher taxes 
 now; but under the operation of specific taxation 
 
66 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 law he would be protected against landlords who 
 make higher taxes an excuse for exorbitant rents ; 
 since he could easily find out in what class the 
 property was taxed, the specific rate assessed 
 upon it, and how far his landlord was justi¬ 
 fied in raising rents on this account. The facilities 
 for concealment afforded by the necessity of assess¬ 
 ing every property separately operate in favor of the 
 landlord, and place the tenant more in his power 
 than the latter would otherwise be. This considera¬ 
 tion alone is an important argument in favor of 
 specific taxation, and a reason why those who do 
 not care to own property, but are willing to rent it, 
 should support such a reform. 
 
 The just limits of such classification would easily 
 define themselves. Provision could be made for 
 appeals as easily as now, and the appeal should be 
 announced in as public a manner as the original 
 definition, so that no change could be authorized 
 without good reason. The publicity incident to the 
 whole machinery of specific taxation would in itself 
 be a feature of incalculable value as a prevention of 
 dishonesty, injustice or evasion. 
 
 County authorities could in like manner be author¬ 
 ized to classify rural property for taxation ; wild and 
 barren land constituting one class, on which the tax 
 per acre could be adjusted so as to induce the owner 
 to investigate the possibilities of improvement, and 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 6 7 
 
 if their realization were found to be beyond his indb 
 vidual power, the forfeiture of the land for nonpay¬ 
 ment of taxes would injure no one. The owner 
 would be rather benefited, and the public authorities 
 would be free to sell the land to any buyer who 
 thought he could make use of it. 
 
 Arable or cleared land should constitute at least 
 one class, and timber land another, the latter to be 
 taxed lower because of the increasing necessity of 
 forest preservation. Plain common business-sense 
 in the exercise of the power of classification would 
 be the best guarantee against oppression or discrim¬ 
 ination. The fact that the area of every land¬ 
 owner’s property is already a matter of record upon 
 county deed books, or may easily be computed there¬ 
 from, would facilitate area taxation and it would be 
 an easy matter after the completion of preliminary 
 surveys with a view to classification, to require that 
 deeds should contain the respective areas included 
 in each class, when more than one class was repre¬ 
 sented in a single piece of property. 
 
 The third question to be answered is, whether 
 taxation according to such a plan would be just or 
 equitable. Would its burdens be distributed in pro¬ 
 portion to the actual obligations of the taxpayers to 
 the community ? 
 
 It is only fair that a man who holds more land 
 than he can use should be subjected to some limit- 
 
68 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 ing influence, for, as we have seen, land is of increas¬ 
 ing importance to the welfare of the whole people. 
 
 On the other hand, it is only fair that a general 
 arrangement should be made under which a man 
 who could use a large area should be at liberty to do 
 so. To let him use as much land as he wants so 
 long as he recognizes the public right in the matter 
 by paying the tax in proportion to the actual amount 
 used, is more in accordance with democratic princi¬ 
 ples than it would be to fix an arbitrary limit to the 
 area which a single owner could own ; nor could it 
 be so readily evaded as the latter species of provi¬ 
 sion, under which a man could transfer tracts of land 
 to his relations and thus escape the penalty. If the 
 land were evenly taxed, it would make no difference 
 who owned it. 
 
 “ But,” it is objected, “ is it just to confiscate a 
 man’s property because he is unable to improve it 
 or to pay the taxes on it? ” It is certainly just if 
 the good of the community requires it. The good 
 of the community justifies a railroad company in 
 taking a man’s land for its tracks, unless he incor¬ 
 porates another railroad company and builds tracks 
 on his land himself, and even then the other com¬ 
 pany may take his house itself or any other part of 
 his property it wants, in order to secure a right of 
 way. Neither form of confiscation robs him, so 
 long as there is provision for the payment o( a fair 
 
AD VALOREM AND SPECIFIC TAXA TION. 69 
 
 award of damages. He is in most cases compen¬ 
 sated, both directly and indirectly. The railroad 
 improves the value of his adjacent property and so 
 will the other form of confiscation in the public 
 interest. He can get a better price if he sells and a 
 higher rent if he continues to own land in the vicinity. 
 The development of the community improves the 
 market for every thing that he produces or handles. 
 If a corporation can confiscate useful land to make 
 it more useful, the people can surely confiscate use¬ 
 less land to make it useful. 
 
 A member of the Pennsylvania legislature, after 
 hearing argument upon a proposed amendment to 
 the Constitution of the State, providing for the 
 specific or area taxation of land, objected that such 
 a change would make the rich richer and the poor 
 poorer. This objection is worth examination. 
 
 Let us suppose two large farms, side by side, both 
 under partial cultivation only. The owner of one 
 is rich, the owner of the other is “ land-poor.’' On 
 the introduction of area taxation, the rich farmer 
 would pay his taxes, but he would cultivate his 
 whole farm to make every acre pay its share. Thus 
 the objection might be partly true ; the rich might 
 possibly become richer. It is a question, however, 
 whether he would not find that he could do more 
 and increase his wealth faster by reducing his area, 
 and so sell a part. In either event the increased 
 
7° 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 production of that farm would increase the supply 
 of food or raw material in the public market. The 
 poor could buy provisions so much cheaper, and the 
 manufacturers who employed them could buy raw 
 material cheaper and hence pay better wages or 
 employ more of the aforesaid poor. This is cer¬ 
 tainly not making the poor poorer. 
 
 Now let us see what would happen to the other 
 farmer—the land-poor man. He could not pay the 
 taxes on all his unproductive land, so he would 
 figure up how much he could use and make pay its 
 own taxes and then he would sell the rest. For it 
 he would receive money, which he could either put 
 into fertilizers, better buildings, machinery, live 
 stock or miscellaneous investments without neces¬ 
 sarily rendering himself liable to increased taxation 
 thereby. If he used the purchase-money wisely, he 
 would be richer, not poorer, as a result of the “ con¬ 
 fiscation ” of part of his land. Meanwhile the pur¬ 
 chaser of the sold land would probably improve it, 
 thus at any rate raising the average value of land 
 in the neighborhood and possibly increasing the 
 population so as to enlarge the market for farm 
 products. Both buyer and seller ought to be 
 benefited. 
 
 It is not easy to see where the influence that would 
 make the poor poorer would come in. The poor in 
 general would be benefited by the fact that more 
 
AD V AERO EM AND SPECIFIC TAXATION. 7 1 
 
 land came into the market for sale and a house was 
 easier to get. 
 
 So far as “ confiscation ” by this indirect method 
 becomes necessary, so far would the supply of capi¬ 
 tal available for building and industrial enterprises 
 be increased, for the money that was taken out of 
 land would seek other channels of investment. 
 Houses in which the poor could live and factories 
 where they could be employed would be multiplied, 
 for small houses pay a bigger interest than most 
 other forms of investment; and the increased devel¬ 
 opment in the soil would result in the discovery of 
 increased quantities and varieties of raw material. 
 Thus area taxation would be likely to preserve and 
 promote the tendency of population to flow from 
 the country to the cities, by diversifying indus¬ 
 tries. 
 
 To recapitulate: we have found that the specific 
 taxation of land, or the taxation of land areas, 
 meets the three requirements that it must promote 
 distribution, promote improvement, and be equi¬ 
 table. The question of its practicability demands 
 some further consideration. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION. 
 
 “ A practical man is a man who practices the blunders of his 
 predecessors.”—L ord Beaconsfield. 
 
 HEN England imposed an excise tax on all 
 
 V V panes of window glass beyond a certain size, 
 the windowpanes of most of the houses in that country 
 shrunk as if by magic. Every body seemed to want to 
 
 get away from the tax. The object of the excise tax 
 
 in question was of course the raising of a revenue, 
 and oppressive as the tax was, it can easily be seen that 
 it was not easy for any one who was justly liable 
 for its payment to evade it. One’s window panes 
 were substantially visible from the outside of the 
 house, and the tax could be readily computed by 
 means of simple measurements. It was not like a 
 tax on watches or money at interest or other things 
 which could be concealed from the assessor, or about 
 which, if matters were privately arranged with the 
 assessor, no third party need ever be wiser. The 
 only way in which the window pane tax could be 
 
PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION. 
 
 73 
 
 evaded was by reducing the size of one’s window 
 panes until the limit of exemption was reached. 
 Whether this tax, as a source of revenue, was a 
 success or not, there is no doubt that it would have 
 been regarded as a success if its object had been to 
 make people use smaller panes in their windows. If 
 it had been imposed in the interest of some manu¬ 
 facturer who made small panes of glass only, it 
 would probably have made him rich. 
 
 Why should it have been a greater success as an 
 influence in favor of the use of smaller window 
 panes than as a source of revenue? Because it 
 appealed to the tax-dodging instinct of human 
 nature. There is something more or less fascinating 
 to the usual mind in the idea of evading a tax. It 
 is possibly an inherited tendency, born in the days 
 of tyrannical rulers whose taxes were presumably 
 extortionate and were collected to satisfy their indi¬ 
 vidual greed. The tax dodging tendency is not 
 wholly dishonest. It is a rebellion of the individual 
 against the idea that he is not entitled to spend all 
 money that he earns. 
 
 It is one of those characteristics of human nature 
 which ought to be of the greatest value to the prac¬ 
 tical statesman. Indeed, the really practical states¬ 
 man—for the old fogy is the statesman punctured 
 by Lord Beaconsfield’s satirical definition—is he who 
 makes the best use of just such characteristics as the 
 
74 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 tax dodging instinct. Every such characteristic 
 becomes his servant instead of his master. 
 
 About the only object of taxation that is more 
 certainly out of doors than the window panes is the 
 land itself. Its area is easily ascertained, for it is 
 lying around where every body can see it. It can 
 not be carried in the pocket, like a watch, or locked 
 up in a bank vault like a bond. A tax on the area 
 of land, subject to the necessities of the community 
 imposing the tax, could be as easily imposed and as 
 easily collected as a tax on window panes of a cer¬ 
 tain size. But that it would break up land into 
 small areas is even more certain than that it would 
 insure a steady revenue. 
 
 If we suppose a new-found and fertile country to 
 be peopled by a colony, and that when the colony 
 came to consider the question of revenue, only one 
 member of it knew any thing about the taxation of 
 land on the ad valorem principle, it is difficult to 
 avoid the conclusion that when it came to a compari¬ 
 son of that method with the specific method, it 
 would be the ad valorem method, not the specific, 
 that would have to bear the stigma of impractica¬ 
 bility. The conversation might be something like 
 the following: 
 
 First Colonist .—I propose that we survey our hold¬ 
 ings of land, record the area transferred when we 
 transfer any from one to the other, and pay every 
 
PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION . 75 
 
 year into the common fund a tax directly related to 
 the area occupied by the tax-payer. 
 
 Second Colonist .—I propose, as a substitute for that 
 proposition, that we have an assessor to assess every 
 piece of property at stated intervals, and that a cer¬ 
 tain small fraction of its value be paid into the com¬ 
 mon fund. 
 
 It would not seem unnatural, under these circum¬ 
 stances, to hear a third colonist speak as follows: 
 
 Third Colonist .—The first plan is much the more 
 direct and simple. It is wasting a man to have him 
 assess every property over again so often, when he 
 might be doing something of more use to the colony. 
 Besides, the assessor would have to be a man, as 
 there are no angels in the colony, and he might not 
 be impartial. He might even be guilty of gross 
 favoritism and corruption. We would never know just 
 how much we would have to pay until he told us. 
 On the other hand, with the area plan, each one of 
 us would know just how much he would have to pay 
 as soon as the tax rate per acre for his district was 
 announced, and he could tell by reference to the deed 
 book, which recorded his neighbor’s area, just how 
 much his neighbor would have to pay. Every man 
 could thus be better prepared to meet the tax, and 
 it would be less oppressive to him ; and the colony’s 
 income would be more certain ; thus we would not 
 be liable to an increase of the tax rate as we would 
 
7 6 
 
 TAX THE AREA . 
 
 under the other plan and its uncertainties. Friend, 
 your ad valorem plan is comparatively impracticable, 
 I am afraid you would rather be an assessor than an 
 industrious colonist. 
 
 The specific taxation of land can be realized if its 
 pecuniary advantages to the individual are brought 
 home to him along the lines of thought suggested 
 by our friend the third colonist. For the average 
 individual cares less for the benefits which may 
 accrue to the human race as a whole, or to his own 
 intellectual and moral nature, than for the consider¬ 
 ations that affect his personal comfort. A big book 
 might be written, as this little book is written, to 
 prove that the specific taxation of land is a great 
 humanitarian scheme, and it would not have one 
 tenth as much effect on him as a simple little table 
 of figures, showing that, as a result of the saving 
 effected by abolishing assessors and placing a tax 
 on unimproved land to encourage its improvement, 
 his total tax bill would be less under the specific 
 system than under the ad valorem system. But 
 almost any thing can be proved by the aid of statis¬ 
 tics, and they are introduced here chiefly for the 
 purpose of illustration. There are two counties in 
 the State of Pennsylvania which will serve to illus¬ 
 trate the extremes of a high and a low state of rural 
 development. The first of these is Lancaster, for 
 some years the banner agricultural county of the 
 
PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION. 77 
 
 United States. The value of real estate in Lancas¬ 
 ter county in the year 1885, exclusive of the only 
 two formally incorporated municipalities within it 
 —the city of Lancaster and the borough of Colum¬ 
 bia—was $70,000,000. At the time of the census 
 enumeration of 1880 the improved area of Lancaster 
 county was 490,922 acres, in a total area of 621,000 
 acres. The tax rate of two and a half mills on the 
 dollar produces a nominal revenue of $175,000, 
 although the actual collections are considerably less, 
 as a result of the evasions and favoritism incident to 
 the ad valorem method of assessment. This is an 
 average of 35.6 cents per acre of improved land, 
 supposing the unimproved land to be practically 
 exempt from taxation ; not an oppressive rate, con¬ 
 sidering the value per acre, as measured by the pro¬ 
 ductive capacity of Lancaster county land, where 
 one tobacco planter for the season of 1886 realized 
 a profit of $360 per acre. Now suppose that the 
 county commissioners were to classify the 130,078 
 acres of unimproved land for taxation on the specific 
 principle. A considerable portion of it, say 10,000 
 acres, could be properly assessed as highly as the 
 improved land, because equally capable of improve¬ 
 ment. This would bring in $3560 additional rev¬ 
 enue. If we suppose 20,078 acres of the remainder 
 to be taxable at 20 cents an acre only, according to 
 some just average of classification, this would bring 
 
7 8 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 in $4015.60 more revenue. Now if a tax of 10 cents 
 per acre were imposed on the 100,000 acres remain¬ 
 ing to be considered, this would produce $10,000 
 more, making the total additional revenue $17,575.- 
 60, or more than 10 per cent, of the amount sup¬ 
 posed to be raised, and that is practically raised at 
 present, from the improved land. The result of such 
 an assessment of the unimproved acreage would, 
 even in a county so highly developed as Lancaster, 
 be likely to effect a ten per cent, reduction in the 
 burden of taxation borne by improved real property. 
 
 The county of Cameron is the least improved in 
 Pennsylvania, considering its area, which is 243,200 
 acres, of which there are 9786 acres in improved 
 farms. The county tax rate is 12 1-2 mills on the 
 dollar, or one of the highest in the State—the Lan¬ 
 caster rate being the lowest. The taxable real 
 estate in 1885 was assessed at $716,528, while the 
 value of the 9,786 acres of improved farm land, as 
 reported by the census of 1880, was $609,820. The 
 taxable valuation of $716,528 produces a theoretical 
 revenue of $8956.60 at the tax rate above men¬ 
 tioned ; an average tax of 3.6 cents per acre if the 
 improved and the unimproved land be averaged in¬ 
 discriminately. But let us try to find out what pro¬ 
 portion of the burden is actually borne by improved 
 property. It should be borne in mind that in Penn¬ 
 sylvania the ad valorem method has encouraged a 
 
PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION. 79 
 
 system of undervaluation which, according to the 
 report of the Secretary of Internal Affairs for 1885, 
 makes the assessed value of realty vary from one-fifth 
 to four-fifths of the market value, its usual ratio 
 being one-half. The improved land which, accord¬ 
 ing to the census, was worth $609,820, is probably 
 assessed even now at $304,910 for purposes of taxa¬ 
 tion, and at 12 1-2 mills, produces a revenue of 
 $3811.37, or what would be raised by a tax of 39 
 cents per acre of improved land; leaving $5145.23 
 to be raised from the 233,414 acres of unimproved 
 land, or an average of 2.2 cents an acre only. It is 
 not to be wondered at that the farmers in half- 
 developed counties, or those less-than-half-developed, 
 complain of unequal taxation. Here are figures that 
 show that they pay nearly twenty times as much as 
 is paid by the speculator, who has bought 50,000 
 acres of wood-land and is locking it up against im¬ 
 provement until the opportunity arrives for such 
 improvement as he can make with profit to his 
 own pocket, or for a handsome profit by selling 
 out. 
 
 In many of the counties of this type the unim¬ 
 proved land is held by men who are “ land poor ” ; 
 men without capital to clear and develop it, or even 
 to advertise its advantages, if it has any. Here is 
 an opportunity to make the State land-offices use¬ 
 ful. When such wild land is sold for non-payment 
 
8o 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 of taxes it should, in default of individual purchase, 
 become the property of the State and the county 
 jointly on the payment, by the State to the county, 
 of one-half of the tax bill thereon. The State land- 
 office should issue bulletins, from time to time, de¬ 
 scribing the lands that have come under its control 
 by this method. There is no doubt that such a 
 harmless confiscation of wild land would open up 
 for settlement many thousands of acres in the East¬ 
 ern and Southern States. 
 
 Lancaster and Cameron counties, which have been 
 used for illustration, are among the twenty-two 
 counties of Pennsylvania in which the ad valorem 
 system has not gone to the absurd length of bring¬ 
 ing down the total realty valuation for taxable pur¬ 
 poses to less than the census valuation of improved 
 land. In forty-jive counties of Pennsylvania the im¬ 
 proved land , according to the census of 1880, is worth 
 more than the assessed values of all the land in those 
 counties respectively for the census year! Of the 
 twenty-two exceptions to this rule, fifteen are so 
 only by reason of containing cities or large and pop¬ 
 ulous towns. In such counties the total of improved 
 farm values bears, of course, a smaller ratio to the 
 total realty valuation than in the others. There are 
 no cities or large towns in Cameron county, and the 
 rule of official assessment in that rural region prob¬ 
 ably comes nearer the outside limit of value men- 
 
PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION. 
 
 81 
 
 tioned by the Secretary of Internal Affairs—four- 
 fifths—than in most counties. 
 
 These figures show that such revenue as is now 
 raised by taxation according to the value of both 
 land and improvements can be raised by the tax¬ 
 ation of land according to its area, regardless of the 
 artificial improvements thereon, but subject to such 
 principles of classification as the demand for im¬ 
 provement might dictate. 
 
 They also indicate that every change that could 
 be made in the direction of these reforms would 
 reduce the burden of taxation upon the agricultural 
 classes, whose improved land now bears more than 
 its share of that burden, while the unimproved land 
 bears less, whether it is capable of improvement or 
 not. The area of wild land is not always easily 
 ascertained, it is true ; but it is generally expressed 
 in acres for purposes of sale between man and man, 
 and the price paid is represented by a specific sum 
 of money per acre. It ought to be no more 
 trouble to tax it by the acre in its proper class, than 
 to sell it by the acre. 
 
 Any advocate of area taxation who expects to 
 secure the enactment of a law introducing the 
 system throughout any particular state, whatever its 
 size or the nature of its surface, for a long time to 
 come, will be likely to find himself deceived. The 
 principle of specific taxation, however, is so reason- 
 
82 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 able and its application so simple when it is once 
 established, that one measure after another in which 
 it was introduced piecemeal could be put through 
 without exciting appreciable opposition. 
 
 The value of real estate in large cities tends to 
 become more and more a question of the area of the 
 lot, and less a question of the house on it. One 
 might be disposed to think, therefore, that classi¬ 
 fied area or specific taxation might be most easily 
 introduced in large cities; but it need cause no 
 surprise if the first organized movement for its real¬ 
 ization should relate most directly to the wildest 
 mountain regions—the sources of streams. The 
 forestry question is increasing in importance in all 
 parts of the United States. In Pennsylvania, dur¬ 
 ing the last session of the legislature, a bill was 
 passed remitting in part the taxes of land-owners 
 who planted,their land with forest trees in number 
 not less than 1200 to the acre, as follows: For a 
 period of ten years after the land has been so 
 planted a sum equal to ninety per cent, of all the 
 taxes annually assessed and paid upon the said land, 
 or so much of the said ninety per centum as shall 
 not exceed the sum of forty-five cents per acre. 
 
 For a second period of ten years a sum equal to 
 eighty per centum of the said taxes, or so much of 
 the said eighty per centum as shall not exceed the 
 sum of forty cents per acre. 
 
PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION. S 3 
 
 For a third and final period of ten years a sum 
 equal to fifty per cent, of the said taxes, or so 
 much of the said fifty per centum as shall not exceed 
 the sum of twenty-five cents per acre. 
 
 Here is an entering wedge for the introduction of 
 the specific method of taxing land. The value of 
 the whole tract that may be owned by any given 
 individual is not considered at all, except with 
 reference to the specific amount that may be taxed 
 out of each acre of it. And that is all that the 
 public, or the community, has to do with its value. 
 It has no right to know what that value is. That 
 value is the owner’s own business, and the commu¬ 
 nity has no rights in the premises except to provide 
 for its own expenses, and to see that the individual 
 does not interfere with the rights of other individ¬ 
 uals. The Pennsylvania law for the encouragement 
 of forestry is a significant, because an involuntary 
 and even an unconscious, recognition of the fact that 
 the regulation of land in the public interest must 
 sooner or later take cognizance of area, and that no 
 intelligent solution of the problem is possible with¬ 
 out recognizing area as the most important factor. 
 It is desirable to limit the area held by one tenant; 
 it is not desirable to limit the value of that area. 
 Therefore area, and not value, should be the subject 
 of the most important land laws. 
 
 It is as practicable to introdnce area taxation in 
 
84 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 any large city as it is to get a new city charter from 
 the legislature. The first step could be a law ex¬ 
 empting improvements from taxation, and taxing 
 lots according to the value per front foot. This 
 would be practicable according to Lord Beacons- 
 field’s sarcastic definition of the practical man ; for it 
 would retain one of the two big blunders of the old 
 law. After awhile it would occur to somebody of 
 a really practical turn of mind, that it would be a 
 good plan to assess a whole square front at one time 
 instead of assessing each lot on that square separ¬ 
 ately, and all the lots on that front could be classi¬ 
 fied as class A. If the lots on another square front¬ 
 ing on the same street, were considered as equally 
 valuable, or if a blockful of lots on any other street 
 were considered as valuable, they could all be thrown 
 into class A too. The next most valuable class of 
 lots, as defined by published and public boundaries 
 could be known as class B, the next as class C, and 
 so forth, until the whole city was classified in large 
 or small classes. After this, the substitution of a 
 specific tax rate per square foot would be a simple 
 matter. The work of classification should be 
 announced in the newspapers, so that the utmost 
 opportunity could be given for appeal and revision. 
 Such a system of assessment would be nothing more 
 revolutionary than the extension of the system by 
 which real estate in the city of Philadelphia is now 
 
PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION 85 
 
 divided into the three classes of city property, sub¬ 
 urban property, and farm property. The difference 
 which constitutes the basis of this classification ap¬ 
 pears in the three tax rates, fixed according to the 
 ad valorem or percentage principle. To have a few 
 more classes, and to fix a specific tax rate per square 
 foot for each, would be much easier than it looks. 
 There would be more work for the classifying and 
 rate-making authority, but the work of that authority 
 is done in “ the keen bright sunlight of publicity.” 
 There would be much less work for the assessors ; 
 so much less, in fact, that there might not necessarily 
 be any assessors ; but then the work of assessors is 
 done in the dark, and there would be room for a 
 sweeping reduction of expenses in any plan that con¬ 
 templated getting rid of this army of ward politicians. 
 Dispensing with assessors could be endured with 
 perfect equanimity by the entire business community, 
 for the official assessments are almost valueless to 
 that community, so far removed are they from the 
 actual, or, under ordinary circumstances, the prob¬ 
 able market valuations. In the cities as in the 
 country, buyers and sellers can value property for 
 themselves or secure expert opinion from those who 
 can ; they do not need the public valuation as such, 
 and they seldom rely on it as a safe guide. 
 
 The most important element of the practicability 
 of new legislation is that which is involved in the 
 
86 
 
 TAX THE AREA. 
 
 question: are the people ready for it? In fact,, 
 when the education of the public into a belief in the 
 need of the thing proposed is done, the thing itself 
 is practically done, and the politicians and others in 
 the legislative bodies will be quick to respond. It 
 may be asked then, why all this agitation of the 
 land question? Is it not premature? Is there 
 any general demand for reform legislation on the 
 subject ? 
 
 Such questions as these are asked because few 
 people have any idea of the extent to which land 
 monopoly has already been indulged in this country. 
 Enormous as our public domain is supposed to be, 
 the press of the West is already saying that all the 
 desirable large tracts of government land have been 
 taken up. The present national administration has 
 taken some steps to throw open desirable regions 
 to the public here and there; but it is for the local. 
 State, or territorial governments, in which police, 
 power and the right of direct taxation resides, to 
 adopt permanent measures for the arrest of the 
 monopoly tendency. If institutions which favor 
 the accumulation of the land by a few owners are 
 allowed to continue, the few owners will continue 
 to monopolize land. A world with an infinite area 
 is the only one to which the question of land 
 monopoly is unimportant, for it is the only con¬ 
 ceivable kind of world in which the land monopolist 
 
PRACTICABILITY OF AREA TAXATION. 87 
 
 can accumulate all the land he wants and still leave 
 plenty for every body else. 
 
 The people, however, who suffer because of the 
 monopolization of land are less numerous than those 
 who suffer because of the non-improvement of land. 
 We do not all want to go West to take up land. 
 Many, indeed, have not the means to go where they 
 can get land. But the cry of hard times can be 
 heard in the East as well as in the West. Every 
 State, every county, every good citizen, would like 
 to see better times right at home. For this the 
 repeal of the tax which handicaps improvement is 
 needed. But that is not all. The specific taxation 
 of the ground itself is needed to secure improve¬ 
 ments of all kinds, agricultural as well as architec¬ 
 tural, and to stimulate local development and pro¬ 
 duction. In this way our national dependence on 
 transportation facilities would be reduced to a 
 minimum, but without impairing the usefulness of 
 those facilities as factors in distribution and develop¬ 
 ment. If the agitation of any question of interest 
 to the public is premature, it is that of the question 
 of the distribution of the products of the soil in 
 advance of the discussion of the distribution of the 
 soil itself. The problem of interstate commerce is the 
 cart only; the land question is the horse. If we get the 
 horse into first rate condition, the cart will follow it 
 smoothly enough,and will require much less attention. 
 

marks the women of our households when they undertake to make their 
 homes bright and cheery. Nothing deters them. Their weary work may 
 be as long as the word which begins this paragraph, but they prove their 
 regard for decent homes by their indefatigability. What a pity that any 
 of them should add to their toil by neglecting to use Sapolio. It reduces 
 the labor of cleaning and scouring at least one-half. 10c. a cake. Sold by 
 all grocers. 
 
 AR ANmOKT PHYSIOS 
 
 Dr. A. W. Thompson, Northampton, Mass., says: “I have tested the 
 Gluten Suppositories, and consider them valuable, as indeed, I expected 
 from the excellence of their theory.’’ 
 
 Dr. Wm. Too Helmuth declares the Gluten Suppositories to be “ the 
 best remedy for constipation which I have ever prescribed.” 
 
 ‘‘As Sancho Panza said of sleep, so say I of your Gluten Suppositories : 
 God bless the man who invented them!”—E. L. Ripley, Burlington, Vt. 
 
 “ I prescribe the Gluten Suppositories almost daily in my practice and 
 am often astonished at the permanent results obtained.”— J. Montfort 
 Schley, M.D., Professor Physical Diagnosis Woman’s Medical College, 
 New York City. 
 
 HEALTH FOOD CO., 75 4th Avenue, N. Y.l 
 
 THE BEST 
 
 WASHING COMPOUND 
 
 EVER INVENTED. 
 
 No Lady, Married or 
 Single, Kich or Poor, 
 Housekeeping' or 
 Hoarding, will l>e 
 without it after test-- 
 ing its utility. 
 
 Sold by all first-class 
 Orocers,l»ut beware of 
 worthless imitations. 
 
SOCIALISM IN ACTION 
 
 i 
 
 It is the distinguishing feature of the Labor Movement that it 
 strives after the attainment of a social state for every human, 
 being, such as shall be the healthy stimulation of all his good 
 qualities, while his bad tendencies shall wither and drop away 
 from him by the impossibility of their sustenance. 
 
 
 To get at this conception of the possible life of man, has re¬ 
 quired the experience of every day and every year, since the race 
 arrived at the ability to keep a record of its progress. 
 
 The process of the seasons, the growth and ripening of the crops 
 has been the lesson nature has afforded for the study of her 
 methods, and this ceaseless repetition has finally awakened man to 
 the conception that his own life allies him to the same law of 
 development. 
 
 This is the measure of the socialist movement of the present, and 
 for those who desire to take part in its furtherance we would com¬ 
 mend the study of SOCIAL SOLUTIONS. * 
 
 The main purpose of this publication was to issue the transla¬ 
 tion by Marie Howland of the first public statement by M. Godin, 
 of the study and experience he has illustrated in the construction 
 and organization of the FAMILISTERE. 
 
 Though the translation of this most important demonstration of 
 the new life for labor was announced when it was prepared, by one 
 of the chief publishers of this country, yet being abandoned on the 
 ground “the labor question was too exciting,” it remained in 
 manuscript until, in the course of events, a more progressive pub¬ 
 lisher was found. In its preparation the plan adopted was that 
 j of twelve parts, each of which should contain such illustrative 
 material as the editor should either find or prepare. The twelve 
 parts are now published and for sale. While the complete trans¬ 
 lation of M. Godin’s work is contained in eleven of the parts, the 
 twelfth part is an admirable and complete exposition of the series 
 of social solutions proposed by the Credit Foncier of Sinaloa, for 
 the organization of the society on Topolobampo Bay, in Sinaloa, 
 Mexico, which has been gathered by the Credit Foncier of Sinaloa, 
 a paper published at Hammonton, New Jersey, at $1.00 a year. 
 
 * Social Solutions, published in 12 parts in Lovell’s Library, prioe 10 cents 
 each, or the 12 parts for $1.00. 
 
 JOHN W. LOVELL CO., 
 
 1J= and 16 Vesey St., New York. 
 

 Opinions of Eminent Men about 
 
 “MOONSHINE" 
 
 By FREDERIC ALLISON TTJPPER. 
 
 1 vol., 12mo, Lovelies Library, No. 895. 20 Cents. 
 
 JOHN G. WHITTIER says : 
 
 “I have read thy story of ‘Moonshine’ with a great deal of interest. 1 
 should judge from the book that it was written by an eye-witness of the 
 scenes it so graphically deswibes .” 
 
 GEN. BENJAMIN F. BUTLER says: 
 
 “ It takes its place with * Uncle Tom’s Cabin,’ Post’s story ‘ From Ocean to 
 Ocean,’ andTourgee’s ‘ Fool’s Errand,’ in teaching the people the acts, doings, 
 and feelings of each section. Accept my thanks for the book as a contribu¬ 
 tion to the truth of history .” 
 
 SENATOR JOHN SHERMAN says: 
 
 “ I have read the book with interest and pleasure .” 
 
 SENATOR JOHN A. LOGAN says: 
 
 “It seems to be a well-written book so far as I have had an opportunity 
 of examining it.” 
 
 SENATOR GEO. B. EDMUNDS says: 
 
 “ Scattered paragraphs that I have read interest me very much." 
 
 EX-SECRETARY GEO. S. BOUTWELL says : 
 
 “I have read your novel entitled ‘Moonshine,’ icith great interest. Your 
 picture of Southern outrages is a truthful representation as far as it relates 
 to the illicit distillation and sale of whiskey.” 
 
 press ncttices. 
 
 “ ‘ Moonshine ’ is a story, not of the moonshine of love or of nonsense, but 
 of the tragic moonshine of the ‘ moonshiners.’ It is vividly told and well 
 written. The hero is not the typical Northerner who used to go South and re¬ 
 turn a more than typical Southerner; but a Northerner rather inclined to 
 Democratic and Southern ideals, who goes South and returns with no dis¬ 
 position ever to stray again from his native heath.”— The Critic. 
 
 “The story is well written and has power in causing impressions of its 
 fidelity and in carrying convictions of its truth. It is a story that will enter¬ 
 tain many readers."—Boston Globe. 
 
 “Incidentally it affords a view of political subversion in Alabama. If the 
 ballot-box throughout the country were juggled with and polluted as it is in 
 South Carolina, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, the Republic 
 of the United States would be at an end. It is plain that the author writes 
 as an eye-witness."—Cincinnati Commercial Gazette. 
 
 “A sprightly story, graphic in description, and full of exciting incidents .” 
 —Chicago Inter-Ocean. 
 
 “ The style is easy and graceful."—Chicago Times. 
 
 “ Told with much vigor and shows no little dramatic power."—Zion's 
 Herald. 
 
 “ Full of life and incident."—Harvard Crimson. 
 
 “Mr. Tupper is a terse writer, clear in portrayal, elevated in sentiment, 
 and graphic in description.”— Newton (Mass.) Transcript. 
 
 JOHN W. LOVELL COMPANY, Publishers, 
 
 14 and 16 Vesey St., New York. 
 
II. RIDER HAGGARD’S NOVELS. 
 
 SHE : A HISTORY OF ADVENTURE. i 2 mo. Paper, 
 20 cents. 
 
 There are color, splendor, and passion everywhere; action in abundance ; con¬ 
 stant variety and absorbing interest. Mr. Haggard does not err on the side of 
 niggardliness ; he is only too affluent in description and ornament. . . . There is 
 
 a largeness, a freshness, and a strength about him which are firil of promise and 
 ' encouragement, the more since he has placed himself so unmistakably on the roman¬ 
 tic side of fiction ; that is, on the side of truth and permanent value. . . . He is 
 
 already one of the foremost modern romance writers.— N. Y. World. 
 
 It seems to me that Mr. Haggard has supplied to us in this book the complement 
 of “ Dr. Jeckyl.” He has shown us what woman’s love for man really means.— The 
 Journalist. 
 
 One cannot too much applaud Mr. Haggard for his power in working up to a 
 weird situation and holding the reader at the ghost-story pitch without ever abso¬ 
 lutely entering the realm of the supernatural. . . . It is a story to be read at 
 
 one sitting, not in weekly parts. But its sensationalism is fresh and stirring ; its 
 philosophy is conveyed in pages that glow with fine images and charm the reader 
 like the melodious verse of Swinburne.— N. Y. Times. 
 
 One of the most peculiar, vivid, and absorbing stories we have read for a long 
 time.— Boston Times. 
 
 JESS. A Novel. 121110. Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 Mr. Haggard has a genius, not to say a great talent, for story-telling. . . . 
 
 Tha t he should have a large circle of readers in England and this country, where so 
 many are trying to tell stories 'with no stories to tell, is a healthy sign, in that it 
 shows that the love of fiction, pure and simple, is as strong as it was in the days of 
 Dickens and Thackeray and Scott, the older days of Smollett and Fielding, and the 
 old, old days of Le Sage and Cervantes.— IV. Y Mail and Express. 
 
 This bare sketch of the story gives no conception of the beauty of the love- 
 passages between Jess and Niel, or of the many fine touches interpolated by the 
 author.— St. Lotiis Reptiblican. 
 
 Another feast of South African life and marvel for those who revelled in “ She.”— 
 Brooklyn Eagle. 
 
 The story has special and novel interest for the spirited reproduction of life, char¬ 
 acter, scenes, and incidents peculiar to the Transvaal.— Boston Advertiser. 
 
 Mr. Haggard is remarkable for his fertility of invention. . . . The story, like 
 
 the rest of his stories, is full of romance, movement, action, color, passion. “ Jess” 
 is to be commended because it is what it pretends to be—a story.— Philadelphia 
 Times. 
 
 KING SOLOMON’S MINES. A Novel. i 2 mo. Paper, 
 20 cents. 
 
 Few stories of the season are more exciting than this, for it contains an account 
 of the discovery of the legendary mines of King Solomon in South Africa. The 
 style is quaint and realistic throughout, and the adventures of the explorers in the 
 land of the Kukuana are full of stirring incidents. The characters, too, are vigor¬ 
 ously drawn.— News and Courier, Charleston. 
 
 This novel has achieved a wonderful popularity. It is one of the best selling 
 books of the season, and it deserves its great success.— Troy Daily Press. 
 
 THE WITCH’S HEAD. A Novel. i 2 mo. Paper, 20 cents. 
 DAWN. A Novel. i2mo. Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 Published by JOHN W. LOVELL COMPANY, New York. 
 
 YW~Any 0/the above works sent by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the 
 United States or Canada , on receipt of the price. 
 
Lovell's Household Library. 
 
 This admirable series of Popular Books is printed on 
 heavier and larger paper than other cheap series, and is 
 substantially bound in an attractive cover. 
 
 The following have been issued to date. The best works 
 of new fiction will be added as rapidly as they appear. , 
 
 1 A Wicked Girl, by M. C. Hay.25 
 
 2 The Moonstone, by Collins.25 
 
 3 Moths, by Ouida..25 
 
 4 Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll, by R. L. 
 
 Stevenson ; and Faust . 25 
 
 5 Peck’s Bad Boy and his Pa, by Geo. 
 
 W. Peck.25 
 
 6 Jane Eyre, by Charlotte Bront6 ... .25 
 i 7 Peck’s Sunshine, by Geo. W. Peck. .25 
 
 8 Adam Bede, by George Eliot..25 
 
 9 Bill Nye and Boomerang, by Bill 
 
 Nye Himself.25 
 
 10 What Will the World Say ?.25 
 
 11 Lime Kiln Club, by M. Quad.25 
 
 12 She, by H. Rider Haggard.25 
 
 13 Dora Thorne, by B. M. Clay.25 
 
 14 File No. 113, by E. Gaboriau.25 
 
 15 Phyllis, by The Duchess.25 
 
 16 Lady Yalworth’s Diamonds, and The 
 Haunted Chamber, by The Duchess. 25 
 
 17 A House Party, and A Rainy June, 
 
 by Ouida. 25 
 
 18 Set in Diamonds, by B. M. Clay.25 
 
 19 Her Mother’s Sin, by B. M. Clay_25 
 
 20 Other People’s Money, by Gaboriau.25 
 
 21 Airy Fairy Lilian, by The Duchess..25 
 
 22 In Peril of His Life, by Gaboriau_25 
 
 23 The Old Mam’selle’s Secret, by E. A. 
 
 Marlitt.■_25 
 
 24 The Guilty River and The New Mag¬ 
 
 dalen, by Wilkie Collins.25 
 
 25 John Halifax, byMissMulock.25 
 
 26 Marjorie, by B. M. Clay.25 
 
 27 Lady Audley’s Secret, by Braddon.. 25 
 
 28 Peck’s Fun, by George W. Peck.25 
 
 29 Thorns and Orange Blossoms, by B. 
 
 M. Clay. 25 
 
 30 East Lynne, by Mrs. Wood.25 
 
 31 King Solomon’s Mines, by Haggard..25 
 
 32 The Witch’s Head, by Haggard.25 
 
 33 The Master Passion, by Marryat.... 25 
 
 34 Jess, by H. Rider Haggard.25 
 
 35 Molly Bawn, by The Duchess.25 
 
 36 Fair Women, by Mrs. Forrester_25 
 
 37 The Merry Men, by Stevenson.25 
 
 38 Old Myddleton’s Money, by Hay_25 
 
 39 Mrs. Geoffrey, by The Duchess.25 
 
 40 Hypatia, by Rev. Charles Kingsley.. 25 
 
 41 What Would You Do Love ?. 25 
 
 42 Eli Perkins,Wit, Humor, and Pathos.25 
 
 43 Heart and Science, by Collins.25 
 
 44 Baled Hay, by Bill Nye..25 
 
 45 Harry Lorrequer, by Lever.25 
 
 46 Called Back and Dark Days, by Hugh 
 
 Conway.25 
 
 47 Endymion, by Benjamin Disraeli_25 
 
 48 Claribel’s Love Story, by B. M. Clay.25 
 
 49 Forty Liars, by Bill Nye.25 
 
 50 Dawn, by H. Rider Haggard.25 
 
 51 Shadow of a Sin, and Wedded and 
 
 Parted, by B. M. Clay. 25 
 
 52 Wee Wifle, by Rosa N. Carey.25 
 
 53 The Dead Secret, by Collins.25 
 
 54 Count of Monte Cristo, by Dumas...50 
 
 55 The Wandering Jew, by Sue.50 
 
 56 The Mysteries of Paris, by Sue.... ..50 
 
 57 Middlemarch, by George Eliot.50 
 
 58 Scottish Chiefs, by Jane Porter.50 
 
 59 Under Two Flags, by Ouida.50 
 
 60 David Copperfield, by Dickens ... 50 
 
 61 Monsieur Lecoq, by Gaboriau.50 
 
 62 Springhaven, by R. D. Blackmore.. .25 
 
 63 Speeches of Henry Ward Beecher on 
 
 the War.50 
 
 64 A Tramp Actor.25 
 
 65 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, by 
 
 Jules Verne.25 
 
 66 Tour of the World in 80 Days, by 
 
 Jules Verne.25 
 
 67 The Golden Hope, by Russell.25 
 
 68 Oliver Twist, by Dickens.25 
 
 69 Lovell’s Whim, by Shirley Smith... .25 
 
 70 Allan Quatermain, by Haggard.. .25 
 
 71 The Great Hesper, by Frank Barrett.25 
 
 72 As in a Looking Glass, by F. C. 
 
 Philips. .25 
 
 73 This Man’s Wife, by G. M. Fenn_25 
 
 74 Sabina Zembra, by Wm. Black.25 
 
 75 The Bag of Diamonds, by G. M. Fenn.25 
 
 76 £10,000, by T. E. Willson.25 
 
 77 Red Spider, by S. Baring-Gould_25 
 
 78 On the Scent, by Lady Margaret 
 
 Majendie.25 
 
 79 Beforehand, by T. L. Meade.25 
 
 80 The Dean and his Daughter, by the 
 
 author of “As in a Looking Glass.”25 
 
 81 A Modern Circe, by The Duchess_25 
 
 82 Scheherazade, by Florence Warden.25 
 
 83 “ The Duchess,” by The Duchess... .25 
 
 JOHN W. LOVELL COMPANY, 
 
 14 and 16 Vesey Street, New York. 
 
TEN MILLION DOLLARS CAPITAL 
 
 IS NOW ENGAGED IN THE 
 
 It is an organization of the manufacturers of many classes of 
 merchandise and thousands of private families who reside in all 
 parts of the United States, who have acquired some confidence in 
 one another, and trade direct between themselves, and thus effect a 
 large saving of money by avoiding the middlemen’s expenses, profits, 
 and losses. 
 
 All business by correspondence is consolidated and transacted 
 through the Members’ and Manufacturers’ Central Offices, located 
 at 68 Wall Street, and 14 and 16 Vesey Street, New York City. 
 
 The Association involves the use of Ten Million Dollars invested 
 in machinery and manufactured stock, and at least five thousand 
 employees. So perfectly is this vast syndicate’s systems adjusted, 
 that each member gets a direct benefit of the whole organization, by 
 saving from 10 to 50 per cent, on all goods purchased, and this 
 without assuming any responsibility of loss or making one obligation ; 
 while on the other hand, each manufacturer sells his wares for spot 
 cash, and only in such quantities as their high grade, quality, and 
 reputation warrant. 
 
 Every twenty-four hours the business is completed and not a dol¬ 
 lar remains due to either member or manufacturer. Hence the 
 magnificent achivements resulting after two years’ operations of 
 this organization. 
 
 Memberships are issued to persons, good for the exclusive use of 
 their families, upon payment of seventy-five (75) cents, which sum is 
 required to cover the expense of supplying the “Buyer’s Guide and 
 Instructor,” a large quarto volume of 250 pages, sent to all new 
 members free. 
 
 Confidence in the Association is needed before it is of any real 
 benefit to you. This can be obtained in two ways, viz.: 1st, Inquire 
 among your neighbors and find some friend who has had dealings 
 with the organization ; or 2d, Venture to send some small trial 
 orders and judge from the goods received whether the dealings are 
 fair and advantageous to you. 
 
 Orders for goods are received from and goods sent to all parts of 
 the United States, with Free 'Transportation when ten 
 or more members combine or club their orders, the freight charges 
 being paid by the Manufacturers at the Central Office. 
 
 Apply at once, and make all remittances for either merchandise or 
 membership fees payable to 
 
 A. J. BISHOP, Conductor, 
 
 People s Co-operative Supply Association, 
 
 68 Wall St, and 14 & 16 Yesey St., NEW YORK CITY. 
 
R. D. BLACKMORE’S NOVELS. 
 
 Mr. Blackmore always writes like a scholar and a gentleman.— 
 Athenaeum London. 
 
 His descriptions are wonderfully vivid and natural. His pages are 
 brightened everywhere with great humor; the quaint, dry turns of 
 thought remind you occasionally of Fielding .—London Times. 
 
 His tales, all of them, are pre-eminently meritorious. They are 
 remarkable for their careful elaboration, the conscientious finish of their 
 workmanship, their affluence of striking dramatic and narrative inci¬ 
 dent, their close observation and general interpretation of nature, their 
 profusion of picturesque description, and their quiet and sustained 
 humor. Besides, they are pervaded by a bright and elastic atmosphere 
 which diffuses a cheery feeling of healthful and robust vigor. While 
 they charm us by their sprightly vivacity and their naturalness, they 
 never in the slightest degree transcend the limits of delicacy or good taste. 
 While radiating warmth and brightness, they are as pure as the new- 
 fallen snow. . . . Their literary execution is admirable, and their 
 
 dramatic power is as exceptional as their moral purity.— Christian Intel¬ 
 ligencer , N. Y. 
 
 ALICE LORRAINE. A Tale of the South Downs. 
 12 mo, Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 CHRISTO WELL. 12 mo, Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 CLARA VAUGHAN. 12 mo, Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 CRADOCK NOWELL. 12 mo, Paper, Two Parts, each 
 20 cents. 
 
 CRIPPS, THE CARRIER. A Woodland Tale. 12 mo, 
 Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 EREMA; Or, My Father’s Sin. 12 mo, Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 LORNA DOONE. 12 mo, Paper,Two Parts, each 20 cents. 
 
 MARY ANERLEY. A Yorkshire Tale. 12 mo, Paper, 20 
 cents. 
 
 SPRINGHAVEN. A Tale of the Great War. 12 mo, Paper, 
 20 cents. 
 
 THE MAID OF SKER. 12 mo, Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 THE REMARKABLE HISTORY OF SIR THOMAS 
 UPMORE, BART, M.P. 12 mo, Paper, 20 cents. 
 
 JOHN W. LOVELL COMPANY, 
 
 14 and 16 Vesey Street, New York. 
 
Established 1836 
 
 LINDEMAN 
 
 PIANOFORTES 
 
 WAREROOMS, 146 Fifth Avenue, New York. 
 
 FACTORY, 401-419 E. Eighth Street, New York. 
 
 LINDEMAN &, SONS, Manufacturers. 
 
THE NEW NOVEL 
 
 “THE DUCHESS 5 ’ 
 
 By THE J) VC HESS, 
 
 Author of “ Molly Bawn,” “ Phyllis,” 
 etc., etc.. 
 
 Is the best of this popular writer’s 
 works, and is having an enormous sale. 
 
 No. 1072 Lovell’s Library, 
 Price, 20 Cents. 
 
 JOHN W. LOVELL CO., Publishers, 
 
 14 & 16 Vesey Street, New York. 
 
 A CLEAR COMPLEXION! 
 
 West 63cl St., N. Y., lady writes: 
 ‘‘I found Dr. Campbell’s Arsenic 
 Complexion Wafers did all you guar¬ 
 anteed they would do. I was delicate 
 from the effects of malaria, could not 
 sleep or eat, and had a ‘ WRETCHED 
 COMPLEXION;’ but NOW all is 
 changed. I not only sleep and eat 
 well, but my complexion is the envy 
 and talk of my lady friends. You may 
 refer to me.” (Name and address fur¬ 
 nished to ladies.) By mail, 50c. and 
 $ 1.00 ; samples, 25c. Harmless. Pre¬ 
 pared ONLY by 
 
 JAS. P. CAMPBELL, M.D., 
 146 West 16th Street, N. Y. 
 
 Sold by Druggists. 
 
 -“GUEE— 
 
 SICK H EADACHE! 
 
 BY USING THE GENUINE 
 
 Dr. 0. McLane’s 
 
 LIYER PILLS 
 
 PRICE, 25 CENTS. 
 
 FOR SALE BY ALL DRUGGISTS. 
 
 side wrapper from a box of the 
 genuine Dr. C. McLANE’S Cele¬ 
 brated Liver Pills, with your 
 address, plainly written, and we 
 will send you, by return mail, a 
 magnificent package of Chromatic 
 and Oleograpliic Cards. BHasiEisSSB 
 
 FLEMING BROS. 
 PITTSBURCH, PA. 
 
 CANDY 
 
 CANDY 
 
 Send *1.25, $2.25, 
 $3.50, or $5.00 for a 
 sample retail box, by 
 express, prepaid, of 
 the Best CANDIES 
 in America. Strictly 
 pure, and put up in 
 elegant boxes. Suit¬ 
 able for presents. 
 Refers to all Chicago. 
 Try it. Address, 
 
 C. F. GUNTHER, 
 
 Confectioner, 
 
 212 State St., and 
 78 Madison St., 
 CHICAGO. 
 
 FACE, HANDS, FEET, 
 
 and all their imperfec¬ 
 tions, including Facial 
 Development, Hair and 
 Scalp, Superfluous 
 Hair, Birth Marks, 
 Moles, Warts, Moth, 
 Breckles, Red Nose, Acne, Black 
 Heads, Scars, Pitting, and their 
 treatment. Send 10 c. for book of 
 50 pages, 4 th edition. 
 
 Dr. JOHN H. WOODBURY, 
 
 37 North Pearl St., Albany, N. Y. 
 
 6 parlors—3 for ladies. Established 1870. 
 
 HOSTETTER’S 
 
 STOMACH BITTERS 
 
 HAS FOR 35 YEARS BEEN 
 
 Adopted by Physicians and Invalids, 
 
 AS A REMEDY FOR 
 
 Indigestion, Dyspepsia, 
 
 Fever and Ague, Malaria, 
 Neuralgia,, Rheumatism, 
 
 General Debility, 
 And other KINDRED DISEASES, 
 
 AS CONFIRMED BY 
 
 THOUSANDS OF TESTIMONIALS IN 
 OUR POSSESSION. 
 
 Ash your Druggist for it, and take none but 
 
 HOSTETTER’S STOMACH BITTERS. 
 
lectric Corsets and Belts. 
 
 Corsets, $1.00, $1.50, $2.00, $3.00. Belts, $3.00. Nursing Corset, 
 Price, $1.50. Abdominal Corset, Price, $3.00. 
 
 Seventeen thousand families in the City of New York alone are now wearing 
 them daily. Every Man and Women, well or ill, should daily 
 wear either the Corset or Belt. 
 
 OUR CORSETS ARE DOUBLE STITCHED AND WILL NOT RIP. 
 
 If you have any pain, ache, or ill-feeling from any cause, if you seem “ pretty well,” yet lack 
 energy and do not “feel up to the mark,” if you sufferfrom disease, we beg you to tit once try these 
 remarkable curatives. They cannot and do not injure like medicine. Always doing good, never 
 harm. There is no shock or sensation felt in wearing them. Every mail brings us testimonials 
 like the following : 
 
 We guarantee safe delivery into 
 your hands. Remit in Post-Office 
 Money-order, Draft, Check, or in Cur¬ 
 rency by Registered Letter at our 
 risk. In ordering kindly mention 
 Lovell's Library, and state exact 
 size of corset usually worn. Make 
 all remittances payable to GEO. 
 A. SCOTT, 842 BROADWAY, 
 New York. 
 
 N. B.—Each article is 
 V stamped with the English 
 
 coat-of-arms, and the 
 name of the Proprie- 
 47. tors, THE PALL 
 VVV MALL ELECT- 
 R I C ASSOCIA¬ 
 TION. 
 
 The Celebrated Dr. W. A. 
 HAMMOND, of New York, formerly 
 Surgeon-General of the U S. Army, 
 lately lectured upon this subject, and 
 advised all medical men to make 
 trial of these agencies, describing at 
 the same time most remarkable 
 cures he had made, even in cases 
 which would seem hopeless. 
 
 The Corsets do not differ 
 in appearance from those 
 usually worn. They are 
 elegant in shape and 
 finish, made after the 
 best French pattern, 
 and warranted satisfac¬ 
 tory in ever;' respect. 
 
 Our Belts for both gents 
 and ladies are the gen¬ 
 uine Dr. Scott’s and are 
 reliable. 
 
 The prices are as 
 follows: $1, $1.50, $2 
 and $3 for the Cor¬ 
 sets, and $3 each 
 for the Belts. The 
 accompanying cut 
 represents our No. 
 
 2. or $1.50 Corset. 
 
 We have also a 
 beautiful French shap¬ 
 ed Sateen Corset at $3, 
 also a fine Sateen Abdom 
 inal Corset at $3, and a short 
 Sateen Corset at $2. The $1 
 and $1.50 goods are made of 
 fine Jean, elegant in shape, 
 strong and durable. Nur¬ 
 sing Corsets, $1.50; Miss¬ 
 es, 75c. All are double 
 stitched. Gents’ and 
 Ladies’ Belts, $3 each ; 
 
 Ladies’ Abdominal 
 Supporter, an invalu¬ 
 able article, $12. They 
 are sent out in a hand¬ 
 some box, accompanied by a 
 silver-plated compass by which 
 the Electro-Magnetic influence 
 can be tested. If you cannot 
 find them in your dry goods 
 store, remit to us direct. We 
 will send either kind to any 
 address, post-paid, on receipt 
 of price, with 20 cents added 
 for packing and postage. 
 
 Hollis Centre, Me. 
 
 I suffered severely from back 
 trouble for years and found no 
 relief till I wore Dr. Scott’s Elec¬ 
 tric Corsets. They cured me, 
 and I would not be without 
 them. Mrs. PI. D. BENSON. 
 
 tf L 
 
 5 °Iob§£ T 
 
 Chambersburg, Pa. 
 
 I found Dr. Scott’s Electric Cor¬ 
 sets possessed miraculous power 
 in stimulating and invigorating my 
 enfeebled body, and the Hair 
 Brush had a magic effect on my 
 scalp. Mrs. t. E. Snyder, 
 Fancy Goods Dealer. 
 
 Memphis, Tennessee. 
 Dr. Scott’s Electric Corsets 
 have given me much relief. I 
 suffered four years with breast 
 trouble, without finding any 
 benefit from other remedies. 
 They are invaluable. 
 
 Mrs. Jas. Campbell. 
 
 De Witt, N. Y. 
 
 I have an invalid sis¬ 
 ter who had not been 
 dressed for a year. 
 She has worn Dr. 
 Scott’s Electric 
 Corsets for two 
 weeks, and is now 
 able to be dressed 
 and sit up most ot 
 the time. 
 
 MELVA J. DOB. 
 
 Newark, N. Y. 
 
 Dr. Scott’s Electric Corsets 
 have entirely cured me of mus¬ 
 cular rheumatism, and also of 
 severe case of headache. 
 
 Mrs. L. C. Spencer. 
 
 Dr. Scott’s Electric Hair Brushes, $1.00, $1.50, $2.00, $2.50, $3.00; Flesh 
 Brushes, $3.00 ; Dr. Scott’s Electric Tooth Brushes, 50 cents; Insoles, 
 
 50 cents; CHEST PROCTECTOR, $3.00; ELECTRIC HAIR 
 CURLER, 50 cents; LUNG AND NERVE INVIGORA- 
 TORS, $5.00 and $10.00. 
 
 IHF” A Good Live Canvassing Agent WANTED In 
 your town for these splendidly advertised and 
 LIBERAL PAY, QUICK SALES. Satisfae* 
 GEO. A. SCOTT, 842 Broadway, N. Y. 
 
 A GREAT SUCCESS ... 
 
 best selling goods in the market, 
 tion guaranteed. Apply at once.