January 14, 1891 Vol. IX, No. 2Whole No. 211

THE STANDARD

PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY, BY WM. T. CROASDALE, AT NO. 42 UNIVERSITY PLACE.

VOL. IX. | NEW YORK, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1891. | No. 2.

p. 1, col. 1

BOSTON’S MAYOR ON TAXATION.

—The Mayor of Boston, in his inaugural message, discusses the problems of local government and taxation. He declares that the present condition of affairs is due “not only to defective administrative methods but to the loose, haphazard and unsystematic way in which public improvements have been undertaken, to a radically bad system of taxation, and to the dependence of the city government on the State legislature.” He complains that since the common law rights of abuttors in the soil of the highways has been taken away, and vested in the State, that successive legislatures have granted the use of these highways to private corporations without compensation to the abuttors, either as individuals or as members of the municipal corporation. The result is, he says, that the supposed business necessities of one generation have become a burden to another generation, and that a proper regard for public interests demands that the abuse shall cease.

He further says that if the city had the power to raise its taxes in such manner as it sees fit, it would certainly be profitable for Boston to levy its taxes less on credits and other forms of personal property than is done at present. The city might prefer, he thinks, to raise some portion of the $2,600,000 now collected from personal property by a tax on legacies and successions, but it would unquestionably decrease taxation on other forms of personal property. The Mayor further suggests that that the city should have the right to undertake for itself all functions of a public character now commonly intrusted to private enterprise. He thinks the city probably would not exercise these powers, but its possession of them would enable it to make better terms with individuals and corporations seeking municipal privileges. Here, again, we have the clear discrimination made by Mayor Sargent, of New Haven, between the resumption by government of public functions and duties and the assumption of the management of private enterprises. We have not been in the habit, in the past, of looking to mayors’ messages for the elucidation of politico-economic problems, but the growing difficulties of municipal management, and the increasing burden of taxation on urban populations is forcing all intelligent men concerned into a serious consideration of such problems.

There appears to be a note of regret in the allusion in the message to the taking away by the State of the common law rights, once possessed by abuttors, in the soil of the highways of the city. Does the Mayor imagine that there are many owners of land lying along the street railways of Boston who have suffered pecuniarily by the construction of such lines? We doubt if many instances of the kind could be found. The real sufferers are the people of Boston, who rightfully own

p. 4, col. 2 its streets, and whose property has been taken from them by the State and given over to private individuals to be used for their personal profit. The result is that the people thus robbed are now taxed on the products of their labor to meet public expenses that ought to be met out of a public revenue of which the city has been unjustly deprived.

THE TRANSPORTATION TRUST.

—The Western railway presidents completed their agreement last Saturday and formed a transportation trust which they called the “Western Traffic Association.” It includes all companies whose lines are situated west of Chicago and St. Louis. The business covered is all “State and inter-State traffic, both freight and passenger, which is competitive between any two or more of the members of this association,” in the territory subjected to its jurisdiction. Traffic to and from trans-Pacific ports is excluded from the arrangement.

The arrangements for carrying out the plan seem to be perfect. An advisory board, having power to establish and maintain uniform rates between competitive points, is established and it is given practically complete supervision over the affairs and management of all the companies concerned. Any agent or officer of a constituent company violating the orders of the advisory board must immediately be dismissed by the company employing him. Companies are allowed to appeal from the decisions of this board and a regular series of quasi-courts is established for hearing and finally determining such appeals. There is manifestly no thought of the possible intervention of the ordinary courts in the affairs of this happy family.

This is hardly to be wondered at, since the association is substantially an attempt to set up a new government for certain specific purposes, and such a government would naturally establish courts of its own. The language of the constitution is that of a governmental instrument. Section 2, Art. VII., provides that

On the application in writing to the Commissioners by any interested company for its share of the competitive traffic, either freight or passenger or both, of any one or more specified points, or of any designated territory, the commissioners shall make an equitable division thereof between the interested lines upon such basis and in such lawful manner as they deem advisable, subject to revision by the commisoners^sic after full investigation.

The idea that shippers shall have any say in the choice of route seems not to have been so much as thought of. Again, Sec. 1, Art. IX., reads even more like a treaty between great powers. It is as follows:

The territory served by the lines parties hereto shall be divided into four or more sections or divisions, observing as nearly as practicable the natural divisions of the territory as represented by existing associations, and each division may be put under the immediate supervision and direction of one of the commissioners chosen.

Nor is that sign and token of sovereignty, the taxing power, without which no government could exist, withheld. Sec. 2, Art. VII., provides that:

The commissioners shall apportion the expenses of the association among the members, render monthly statements thereof, and make drafts therefor.

Thus have these creatures of the several States freely, and seemingly successfully, exercised a power such as the States themselves are by the the Federal Constitution^sic specifically prohibited from exercising.

The object of the transportation trust is declared with perfect frankness in the resolution already quoted empowering the advisory board “to establish and maintain uniform rates between competitive points.” The object of this, as of all other trusts is, of course, to put an end to competition. The openness of the movement indicates that those concerned have been advised that their pool is not a violation of the inter-State Commerce law, but if this be so, the inquiry naturally arises as to what that law is for. Certainly throughout the territory over which the new power claims jurisdiction, the rates to be charged for freight and travel must continued on p. 5 →

[continued on page 5]

WOMEN AND SINGLE TAX.

—Quite a number of correspondents discuss not only the possible methods by which women can advance the Single Tax cause, but woman’s political position in general, in the Letters to The Editor on another page. This discussion has probably gone far enough to give opportunity for the expression of every phase of opinion, and the conclusion from it appears to be that all Single Taxers desire that women shall do their best to advance the cause, and that most of the men who have written on the subject believe that women are entitled to vote. Of course there has been no general expression of opinion on the latter question, and it is not necessary that there should be. There are doubtless thousands of earnest advocates of our principles who have given no attention to the question of woman suffrage or else entertain opinions adverse to it. At present that is no part of the Single Tax question, and we agree with Mrs. Russell that any declaration on the subject would have been out of place in the platform of the League.

So far as women’s work is concerned the truth is that its nature can rarely be settled by discussion. There are hundreds of women who belong to no organization, and who perhaps would not care to join one, who are skillfully using opportunities offered them in social intercourse, and otherwise, to propagate the Single Tax doctrine. Without either boring or shocking their friends these women do, to our knowledge, very effective work. Some find other fields of activity more congenial, and the question of methods must be left to individual judgment. We doubt if many men in the movement will throw any obstacle in the way of such activity, but, even if this were attempted, it will not stop an earnest woman from advocating the faith that is in her. A prolongation of the discussion on the present lines would be a waste of space, and space in THE STANDARD in its present form is very precious.

ADVOCATING SOCIALISM.

—The Journal of the Knights of Labor laments that THE STANDARD, “under its new management, has apparently determined to continue the policy to ostracise all those who do not regard free trade and Single Tax as the be-all and the end-all of the movement.” THE STANDARD does not “ostracise” anybody. It is a paper that aims at the establishment of free trade and the Single Tax, and it recognizes the fact that it cannot undertake to devote time and space to everything that others may choose to consider reforms. Free trade and the Single Tax are opposed to paternalism in government, and, therefore, opposed to socialism, and THE STANDARD antagonizes Socialism for precisely the same reasons that it antagonizes Protectionism—because it is opposed to both.

The Knights of Labor Journal thinks that poor sewing women in New York and unemployed miners in Pennsylvania are not likely to be appalled by the pros-

p. 5, col. 2

pect of being made wards of the community. It assumes that this is equivalent to saying that the Socialistic programme would put such people in the position of office-holders, drawing salaries from the government. This is an extension of the Socialistic doctrine that few of the orthodox Socialists have suggested. Does the Knights of Labor Journal advocate it ? Its recent article seems to indicate as much, and there are doubtless thousands of members of the order who would like definitely to know whether their official organ, read before their assemblies, has become an out and out advocate of State Socialism.

Surely the editor of the paper must know that it is impossible for any community to make all of its members office-holders and pay them salaries. If so, it is his duty not to encourage any foolish dream of distressed people looking in that direction, but to set about finding a real remedy for existing evils that will relieve the poverty that drives men and women into such vain imaginings. This is the work that THE STANDARD is engaged in. It seeks to educate the people, not to defer to their prejudices or to confirm them in foolish illusions.

ELLERY ANDERSON FOR SENATOR.

—The question as to Mr. Evarts’ successor in the United States Senate is apparently no nearer solution than it was immediately after the first announcement of the fact that the New York Legislature would be Democratic on joint ballot. Governor Hill does not act as if he wanted the position, despite the fact that he has announced that he will not be a candidate for Governor again. If he wants it everybody assumes that he can have it for the asking, and many who do not regard him as fit for that or any other high public station, would be glad to see him take it, and thus take himself and his preposterous presidential aspirations out of the way. This might save the State of New York from being put by machine politicians in the humiliating position of antagonizing in convention the assured nomination of her own most distinguised^sic citizen.

If Mr. Hill really does not want the place, there looms up once more the so-called Democrat—the protectionist Smith M. Weed. The impudence of his aspirations is only equalled by the baseness and lack of principle among Democratic legislators that make such an ambition possible. If Mr. Hill really does control the Democrats in the Legislature as completely as it is assumed that he does, he may bid farewell forever to all ambition if he permits Mr. Weed’s election. The political organization in this State that dares send a protectionist to represent it in the United States Senate will beg in vain for recognition by the triumphant Democracy of the nation as one of its constituent parts. Mr. Hill, even if he is still under the delusion that he is a possible presidential candidate, had far better go to the Senate himself than permit Mr. Weed to go. It may be that he is “between the devil and the deep sea,” but even then he had better take to the water. He may prove light enough to float.

But there is no reason why this high and honorable place should be made the make-weight in local politics. The Democratic party of New York State has plenty of men who are capable of fitly representing any State in the Senate. Better still, there are a number of such men in that part of the State in which Democrats live, and which sends to Albany the members without whose votes no Democratic Senator from this State would be dreamed of. Why not take a man from this city to replace Mr. Evarts ? Of course such a man must be a straight party man and not unsatisfactory to Tammany in order to secure a nomination. But such men can be found. We can easily name one. Why not elect E. Ellery Anderson United States Senator? He is a straight-out Democrat, sound as a nut on the tariff continued on p. 6 →

PROGRESS TOWARD FREE TRADE.—

The dinner recently given by the Harlem Democratic Club, like every other gathering of honest and intelligent Democrats that has taken place since the November elections, was a Cleveland demonstration. There were cheers for Hill as “our next Senator,” but they were forced and prefunctory^sic compared with the hearty and spontaneous enthusiasm that greeted every mention of Cleveland’s name, and particularly all references to him as our next President. This is but natural. The recent Democratic victory was won on the tariff issue, and Grover Cleveland is the man who gave his party that issue. Its victory is peculiarly his triumph, and the people instinctively recognize that fact.

The most important fact about the Harlem dinner was the demonstration it offered of the growth of a real free trade sentiment in the Democratic party. The declaration of the president of the club in favor of moderate protection, accompanied by his remark that there were no free traders present called forth no applause, and on the other hand, the response by one of the speakers that he, for one, was an absolute free trader called forth such general applause as to show the president of the club that he was mistaken. Again, the speech of Governor Abbett, of New Jersey, counselling moderation, amounting to cowardice in the treatment of the tariff question by the next Democratic House, fell very flat.

In broad contrast with this speech was that of John De Witt Warner, one of the Congressmen-elect from this city, which was, taking it all in all, the best speech of the occasion and the best received. Mr. Warner proclaimed himself a “tariff reformer,” and declared that the recent victory was a triumph for “tariff reform,” which he defined as meaning the reduction of tariff taxation. He advised his hearers not to worry about how far tariff reform might go, and denounced the prophecies of dire disaster from free trade, made by the Protectionists, as equivalent to “a protest against jumping over the bannisters, addressed to one who had mildly intimated his intention of going down stairs.” Mr. Warner thus continued:

No one has proposed to do more than take most moderate steps toward lighter taxes and freer trade. At each step the American people will pass upon it in the light of their experience. If they do not like the result of the first step they can refuse to go further. Indeed, they can have the McKinley bill forever if they want it. On the other hand, if the American people are pleased with the result of paying fewer taxes, and getting more of the necessaries and comforts of life for their money, they can, and they doubtless will, take further steps. They may, indeed, set absolute freedom of trade as the goal toward which they shall strive. And if they do, who shall say them nay? We have free trade in labor already; and if the American people, a majority of whom are laborers, want free trade in every thing else, why shall they not have it? It is comical to hear those who have grown fat by leeching others warn us not to be “too radical.” They may as well understand, first as well as last, that the most radical change of all in tariff matters is already assured. Tariffs are henceforth to be revised by the many who pay them, not by the few who get the proceeds.

This is admirably put, and there can be no doubt as to the kind of “revision” that will finally be made by the many who pay tariff taxes. As soon as they see a better way of raising revenue they will revise tariff taxes out of the statute book. No portion of Mr. Warner’s speech was more vigorously applauded than that just quoted. Other radical declarations, such as “Tariff reformers can permanently tolerate no vestige

p. 6, col. 2 of so-called ‘protective’ tariff taxation” and “Thou shalt not steal from me. The triumph of tariff reform means that the American people have at last resolved to obey that commandment,” were likewise received with enthusiastic demonstrations of approval.

It is such incidents as this that justify us in believing that the Democratic party is making real progress toward free trade, and it is this that causes THE STANDARD to desire that party’s continued and complete success.

THE IRISH MUDDLE.—

The Irish cause is suffering through the tomfoolery that O’Brien and Parnell are carrying on at Boulogne. No one possessed of sufficient capacity for leadership to fit him for the foremanship of a street cleaning gang could hesitate as to the proper attitude of all Irish patriots toward the treacherous or mad leader whose pride, obstinacy, conceit and selfishness has divided the Irish party and people, and almost sacrificed Ireland’s hope of justice on the altar of his own lust. Traitor or madman he must be adjudged, and the so-called Irish patriot who wastes time in negotiating with such a man is himself a traitor or a foolish person. We do not believe that William O’Brien is a traitor to the cause he has espoused; but we do believe that he understands the real cause of Ireland’s woes less than many of his co-workers. He is more a partisan supporter of the Irish party than a patriot like Michael Davitt who is more anxious to restore the Irish people to the land that is their heritage than to win power and glory through political success. We have never thought much of O’Brien since he turned his back on the workingmen of New York at the bidding of the rich politicians to whom he looked for contributions to the Irish Parliamentary Campaign Fund. Money is very necessary, but even it can be obtained too dearly.

Just now Mr. O’Brien appears to be suffering from an attack of what the vulgar call Big Head. He has gone to France apparently possessed of the idea that he is the one man to patch up a peace, by reconciling the irreconcilable and bringing about a so-called compromise that would disgrace all concerned in it, and effectually deprive them of the support and confidence of the very people whose good will every sane man knows is essential to the success of the Irish cause. Meanwhile, nothing definite is done, and the men who went through the fight and who understand the situation are put in the position of readiness to treat with a traitor in order that O’Brien may weep over the irretrievable and indulge in vain imaginings of impossible reconciliation. These mushy-headed weepers are always obstructing the course of justice at such crises, and they are worse than nuisances—actual agencies for harm and obstacles to the only real and healthy union possible.

Meanwhile, the seeming indecision of the Irish party is disgusting the English Liberals, and a strong pressure is being brought to induce the party to abandon Home Rule and thus recall its deserters. Should that come about it will be a long time before the Irish will again play a prominent part in British politics, or come so close to Home Rule. If this misfortune happens, the tears, the vaporings and the vanity of William O’Brien will have had much to do with it.

NEW HAMPSHIRE.—

Extended comment on the theft of New Hampshire is needless. The crime was engineered by William E. Chandler, who is proud to dispute with Zach Chandler the invention of the great fraud of 1876. This crime equals the other in enormity but not in extent. The people elected a majority of Democrats to the New Hampshire Legislature. There were voted for, at the same time, a number of candidates who hoped to be awarded seats if the figures of the last census showed that their respec- continued on p. 7 →

[text breaks off mid-word at the foot of the page; no continuation line printed]

THE “PROFESSOR” ARGUMENT.

Among the most amusing arguments used against the Single Tax is the triumphant challenge to produce a single professor of economic science who believes in it. Such a challenge was addressed to Henry George, in the discussion at the Social Science meeting, last September: and it has been put forward upon several occasions, with an evident belief that it is conclusive upon the merits of the case. Such a challenge would be sufficiently answered by asking some such professor to come forward and show that he had carefully studied it. Opinions, even of professors in colleges, upon subjects which they have not carefully studied, are of no especial value.

“Have any of the rulers believed on him?” was a question which, over 1800 years ago, was deemed conclusive. It makes no impression upon us now. The wisdom, justice and expediency of the Single Tax are not questions of pure economic science. They belong to the art or applied science of economics. They involve many considerations, founded upon questions of fact, which have thus far received little attention from colleges or professors of economic science. There is not a book in the English language, written by a professor of economics, if there is one at all, in which the incidence of taxation is carefully worked out. There is no clear and even tolerably full statement of the effect of indirect taxation upon the well-being of different classes of society. No professor of economics, so far as I can learn, has ever given to the English-reading public any statement of a science of taxation, or accom-

p. 7, col. 2 panied his declaration of preference for one or more forms of taxation with a statement of the facts and the theory upon which that preference is based. Every orthodox protectionist wisely asserts that there is no science of political economy; and the only free trade professors, who have definitely spoken upon the point, deny that there is any science of taxation.

But, even if all the professors had studied the subject and had written learned treatises in condemnation of the Single Tax, that would not be quite conclusive. All the orthodox professors of economics, until within a very few years, studied and sustained the doctrine of the “wage-fund.” A plain lawyer, Mr. F. D. Longe, studied it for himself and disproved it. Mr. Thornton, also no professor, but a poor, igrorant layman, followed, with such effect as to convert John Stuart Mill. Then Professor Walker, who had only recently begun his professorial career, took up the subject and crushed the whole wage-fund theory so effectually as to make it ridiculous.

The interference of the State for the protection of children from the poverty of their parents and the rapacity of their masters, and of women from the brutal exactions of their husbands and employers, was unanimously condemned by the, recognized authorities^sic of British political economy, when first proposed. Yet all the professors now recognize the perfect justice of such interference and admit that it involves no violation of real freedom of contract.

There are plain reasons why professors of political economy do not generally declare themselves in favor of the Single Tax, or even care to study it too closely. While large freedom is allowed to them, so that protectionist trustees allow free trade professors to teach in their col- leges, there is a limit to human tolerance, which is easily reached. No professor was allowed to teach anti-slavery doctrines in slave-holding colleges. No professor would be allowed to remain in a German college who should declare himself in favor of concentrating taxes on land, without compensation to the land owners. The doctrine of the Single Tax is now in the same position as the anti-slavery idea was forty years ago. It is tolerated in a few wealthy men as a harmless fad, and endured in a multitude of poor men, as an incurable misfortune; but its outspoken support by professors of economics, in most of our colleges, would be regarded by their managers as flat treason. The most richly endowed colleges derive most of their income from ground rents; and the other colleges are dependent for their existence upon the support of men who believe that their wealth would be taken from them by the Single Tax, whether it would be in fact or not. College professors do not mean to be influenced by such considerations; but they can no more help it than they can stop breathing. Most of them wisely refrain from giving serious thought to the subject.

I know of at least one very able and widely honored professor who does believe in the Single Tax and has said so publicly, but I refrain from mentioning him, because he has already been punished for his independence of thought upon other subjects, and might easily be made to suffer more if attention were called to his case.

Meanwhile, the professors who undertake to refute the doctrine disagree so delightfully in their reasoning that they effectually refute each other. The late Professor Sturtevant, like Mr. Edward Atkinson, saw clearly that the Single Tax followed as a logical inference from the Ricardian doctrine of rent, and, therefore, he threw himself, free-trader though he was, into the arms of Henry C. Carey, asserting that the value of land is never greater than the value of the labor expended upon it. President Walker, although bitterly opposed to the Single Tax, has demolished this theory so completely that there is not even a hole left to show continued on p. 8 →

[page ends mid-sentence; no continuation line printed — presumably continues on page 8]

BOUNTIES FOR BEGGARS AND THIEVES.

The editor asks me to tell the readers of THE STANDARD “exactly what the promoters of the pending Subsidy Bill are after, and how they propose to get it.”

Well, they are after all they can steal, and they propose to get it by fair means or foul—principally the latter. Those who have followed the legislation of the Senate will remember that Mr. Frye introduced two bills, one providing for subsidies to mail steamers, and the other for bounties to ships of all kinds, steam or sail, that go anywhere in the foreign trade, carrying valuable cargoes—coal, brick, lime or ballast—it was all the same. It was on the principle that “trade follows the flag.”

The Bounty Bill was similar to that championed in the House by Mr. Farquahar^sic, a representative from Buffalo, who was made chairman of his committee by Tom Reed because he knew the difference between a canal boat and a fore-and-aft schooner. At least I thought he did when I went before his committee, but I am not sure of it now.

When the Senate bills came before the House Farquahar did not require much penetration to see that the bounty measure had no standing by itself, so with the aid of Dingley, of Maine, he amalgamated the subsidy and bounty schemes in the cruci- ble of his brain and turned out the resultant slag. Nobody understands it precisely. Farquahar certainly does not. If the bill should be passed there will be no end of constructions and misconstructions. But the general impression of the lobby is that everybody who has a ship will get something. There have been various estimates of its cost to the country, varying from $3,000,000 to $200,000,000. My own opinion is that it will do nothing toward “restoring our commercial marine,” and I do not think that its promoters anticipate any such result. It will, however, for the moment, advance the quotations of Pacific mail stock, enable Mr. Thurber to sell out his Brazilian line and afford an opportunity for the owners of wooden sailing ships to dispose of them to advantage.

Now this is what “the promoters of the pending subsidy bill are after.” “How do they propose to get it?” They mean to get it by vigorous lying, and by the aid of an unscrupulous lobby. Dingley, their chief priest, harps on his stale assertion that England subsidizes all her ships for the promotion of shipbuilding, when he knows that not a single British sailing vessel is subsidized and that only

p. 8, col. 2 two per cent. of her vast steam fleet gets any payment, and that two per cent. gets it for the legitimate purpose of carrying the mails. Every time that this argument is knocked from under him he picks it up and starts with it again. Then he endeavors to fool the Western farmers with the idea that subsidized American ships will afford them the opportunity of shipping their produce at cheaper rates, when the farmers know well enough that they will have no reduction of freight because the ships receive a bounty. His specious pretences are so numerous that I have not space to enumerate them, but the farmers are not the idiots that he takes them to be.

Enough for these specimens of “argument.” The chief reliance of the promoters of the bill is the lobby. There are about fifty lobbyists continually at the door of the House. They are not there for nothing. They “offer inducements.” What is an “inducement?” Well, one inducement is an option on Pacific Mail. If the bill is passed that stock will advance five points, and the holders will reap the benefit. Another inducement, I am credibly informed, is the out and out promise of $2,000 in case a vote produces the decisive result. These are appeals to the pocket, which are most effective. Then there is the appeal to “patriotism,” in the stereotyped lie that the opponents of the bill are in receipt of “British gold.” Take it all in all there was never presented to Congress a measure of greater corruption than this misuamed^sic “tonnage bill,” the title of which should be “a bill for the benefit of beggars and thieves.”

New York.

JOHN CODMAN.

WHAT MEN CAN DO.

It is hard to think of any single tax work which a man should do, unless it be open-air speaking, that is not suited to women. You speak and your voice passes away; but what you write or what you make others read turns up again in the most unexpected places. For instance: Mr. Stickney wrote to Indiana, charging the little Kendallville Standard with some misstatements. The editor published the letter, the great Chicago Tribune noticed it, and with that for a text printed half a column of pure single tax. Write “letters to the editor” in plenty; he will read, even if he does not publish them.

Do not keep your STANDARDS. As Napoleon said when he coined the silver images of the Apostles, “Send them on their mission.”

Hardly anyone reads over his old papers; but if, as he reads his STANDARD, or even his daily paper, he keeps on his mind what can be done with it, he can do good to his neighbor, to the cause and to himself.

Cut out a page or an article, mark and send where it will do the most good, perhaps to some other paper. The remainder can go to someone else who needs it and who will notice it all the more because it is cut.

A marked paper will be read and talked about, when an unmarked one will be thrown away. If you do not know where to send your paper leave it in a barber shop or an hotel parlor.

THE STANDARD is a business enterprise on a business basis. If it were a charity it would be a make-shift or a patch, like the rest of the charities. At the same time THE STANDARD is more than a business venture. It is our representative, our teacher and our medium of communication. It is worth paying for.

We want free trade and free labor, not free tuition or free representation. Send items of news and interesting clippings to the editor.

Help those that help you. Get a subscriber this week. Get advertisements. It is easy to help a paper which has a paid circulation of intelligent readers. continued on p. 9 →

NOTES AND QUERIES.

In a private letter to Henry George, Mr. Charles L. Garland, a member of the New South Wales Parliament, says:

The prospects of our party have been wonderfully improved by your visit, and I ascribe the wane of protection largely to your able advocacy of the truths of free trade. The Single Tax doctrine gains strength every day, and each day we become more aggressive. Before your visit we could count Single Tax men by the hundred, now we count them by the thousand. Not only this, but we are liberalizing the free-trade associations all over the country, and weakening the revenue tariff party everywhere. Friends Johnson and Cotton are running the Democrat, a lively little cartoon paper run on Single Tax lines, and doing good work. In Parliament the Protectionist party is thoroughly disorganized and is rapidly disintegrating.

* * * *

S. M. Scott, a prominent Republican of Kansas, says that Ingalls will not be re-elected United States Senator, and he gives authority to quote him as saying so. It may be the “sockless” Simpson, after all.

* * * *

The Rev. Dr. Long, of the Strangers’ Church of Memphis, was

p. 9, col. 2 announced to deliver a lecture on the “Moral Phases of the Single Tax,” on Sunday evening, December 28. Among those who were attracted by the announcement was S. G. Spain, who claims not to be a Single Tax man, but who was much impressed by Mr. George’s address while in Memphis. Mr. Spain seems to be indignant at the presentation of the Single Tax by the minister, for he tackles him in a two and a half column letter in the Memphis Commercial, in which he charges the reverend gentleman with making, to say the least, unfair statements. Mr. Spain may contain himself in peace. The advocates of the Single Tax are not nearly so fiercely assailed in these days as they used to be. Meantime, despite the efforts of all the Dr. Longs, or whatever their names may be, the Single Tax cause is marching on.

* * * *

Senator Edmunds is known to be a man who rarely displays any warmth of temper. Yet, a Washington correspondent says, he got very angry a week or two ago. It seems that a change had been made in the Senate caterer. The new caterer was not aware of the New England fondness for the succulent bean prepared in Boston style. Now, to prepare the bean to suit the New England palate, involves a large amount of skill and energy which the new caterer thought unnecessary so long as he could get the article prepared in cans, and as a result he offered the latter to his patron. Senator Edmunds, who is a judge of beans, immediately detected the cheat that was being put upon him, and he raised a rumpus that ceased only when the genuine bean prepared in Boston style, on the spot, was placed before him. There are things over which the great New Englander will permit no trifling, and the bean of our forefathers is one of them.

* * * *

The Paterson Labor Standard says a panic can be averted and society saved, trampism stopped, revolution prevented and employment created by reducing working hours. Well, reduce them. The workingmen have ever had the solution of that problem in their own hands. Why do men work long hours for small wages? Not because they want to; for, despite the declarations of demagogues to the contrary, nobody wants to work any more than he can help.

* * * *

The Labor Standard has a knife in its boot for somebody or somebodies whom it calls “pusillanimous worms in breeches,” for it concludes an editorial paragraph about them thus:

Gentlemen, the Labor Standard smiles—and never forgets

* * * *

The Memphis Commercial made the mistake of editorially indorsing Charles A. Dana for United States Senator from this state. This article brought Walter B. Barker, of Meridian, Mississippi, to the front with a letter in protest, in which he said he failed to see how a Democrat, with any degree of consistency, could “reconcile the political course of Mr. Dana with pure, unadulterated democracy.” Mr. Barker asked the editor of the Commercial to recall Dana’s “niggardly support of General Hancock in 1880^sic, when his estimate of him as a presidential quantity was summed up in ‘a man six feet two inches high and weighing 250 pounds;’” also his support of Butler against Cleveland, the Democratic nominee, “when, too Mr. Dana^sic was a sneaking aspirant for the flesh pots of Egypt, at the disposal of the Chicago convention of 1884, which nominated Mr. Cleveland.” Further, speaking as a Southern man to the editor of a Southern Democratic paper, Mr. Barker asserts that in the first year or two of President Grant’s administration Mr. Dana, who was then a Republican, was “the most venomous and implacable enemy to the South that the country produced.” For these and other reasons, as a friend of the Commercial, Mr. Barker “earnestly protests against its advocacy of the claims of Charles A. Dana to any position within the gift of the Democratic party.” The protest seems to have had an effect, for since publishing Mr. Barker’s letter the Memphis Commercial has not had a word to say of Mr. Dana in any way, shape or form.

* * * *

The Liberty Bell of Sioux City, Iowa, announces that it opens its columns for a full and free discussion of the question of taxation.

* * * *

There are 167,255 miles of railroads in the United States, nearly enough to span the world seven times. Railroad building is declining, as is shown by the following: In 1887, 12,667 miles were built; in 1888, 6,679 miles; in 1889, 5,095 miles; in 1890, 5,981 miles.

* * * *

Mr. H. A. Porter, in a letter to the Dallas, Texas, Farmer, says it cannot be denied that “the cheapest and most effective plan for imposing and collecting the needed revenue for government is by a tariff.” It is denied—we deny it.

* * * *

The Republican Tribune and its side-partner, the Democratico-Republico Sun, ought to “get together.” They don’t agree about Governor Hill’s message. The first-named paper says it “is far from being a dignified State paper, but is largely a partisan harangue;” while the latter says “it is a model and masterpiece of continued on p. 10 →

[continued on page 10]

THE FREE TRADE FIGHT.

The Philadelphia Press (Rep.) recently advised Senator Plumb of Kansas to “drop his Republican mask and go over to the Democratic party.” The St. Louis Globe-Democrat (also Rep.) is moved by this advice to remark :

If he should happen to do so, and should be imitated by all the Republicans who indorse his opinions, the Democrats would easily elect the next President.

There is no doubt that if the free trade Republicans should take the advice offered by the Press to Senator Plumb, that party would not have much more than a skeleton organization.

* * * *

The Philadelphia Record says that

The well-protected pottery manufacturers of Trenton, N. J., start the new year by asking their sanitary-ware pressers to submit to a cut-down of 33 per cent. Thus the campaign for tariff reform goes steadily on.

* * * *

We all remember how, after Major McKinley was snowed under in the last election, the Republican papers consoled him by saying, “Never mind, dear boy : you shall be nominated for Governor of your State, and be elected by a majority that will paralyze those bad Democratic free traders.” And we all remember how, after the smoke of the battle had somewhat cleared away, other candidates for that governorship began to show their heads—especially Senator Sherman : but we said to ourselves, “No : the Major is the man whom the Republicans of Ohio will nominate for Governor. They must nominate the Major, so that the protective idea of which he is the incarnation may be vindicated, for he was slaughtered in November last because (so said President Harrison) the people did not understand the blessings that were to flow from the tap which McKinley had turned on.” But now! ah, but now! when the political atmosphere of Ohio is perfectly clear—so clear that even the Republican eye,can^sic see beyond its nose—in the far distant cerulean can be seen a speck that augurs ill for the Major’s gubernatorial aspirations. The Republican eye has seen that speck, and it has filled the party with fear. The party to which the eye belongs is splitting into two camps over McKinley’s nomination. One camp is afraid he will be beaten at the polls if nominated, because, in the words of the Minneapolis Journal, a Republican paper, “even in Ohio there is a growing feeling that the fiscal policy known as McKinleyism is not exactly what the Republican party or the country wants.” The feeling is said to have become so strong that even the Major himself has doubts about standing for the nomination, preferring to sequester himself yet longer behind a haystack on his farm.

* * * *

The protective tariff is a good thing after all—for some people, especially customs officers. The Treasury officials in Washington have discovered that over one million dollars have been embezzled by United States Consuls and consular agents on the Canadian border during the past twelve months. A million dollars! And our Canadian frontier isn’t so very long, either.

* * * *

St. Louis carpenters are demanding an increase of wages. Inasmuch as that is just what was promised to them, in common with other workingmen, as the result of the McKinley tariff, their just demands ought to be granted. But they won’t.

* * * *

A dispatch announces that “the Millvale Iron Works at Millvale, Pa., have been closed indefinitely by the company. About 800 men are thrown out of employment. The mill was closed because the men running the engines and the firemen demanded an advance of twenty-five cents per day, which the firm did not feel disposed to grant.” In commenting on this the St. Louis Republican says :

Ordinarily it would be hard to understand how extensive works would “close down indefinitely” rather than pay twenty-five cents a day advance to the few men employed in the engine-rooms, but under the McKinley bill and the Republican trust system there is no difficulty about explaining it.

* * * *

The Pittsburg Commercial Gazette says :

It cost the Republican party a supreme effort to place the revised tariff act upon the statute book, and it will, no doubt, require several supreme efforts on the part of the free trade Democrats to destroy its efficacy.

Well, the Democrats, with our assistance, have already given the tariff one blow, square in the neck ; and we have no doubt, if these same Democrats have any sense, that in the final round the tariff will be knocked out altogether.

* * * *

The coal miners of Alabama have been trying to get some of the blessings of our beneficent tariff laws to drop upon them, but do not appear to have been successful, for they have issued an appeal for financial aid, in order that they may continue their struggle for better wages. The protected mine owners are forcing the miners’ wages down. All contributions are to be sent to Robert Watchorn, 53 Clinton Building, Columbus, Ohio.

* * * *

The Pennsylvania protection press seems to be somewhat annoyed over the riot two weeks ago at the Edgar Thompson^sic Rolling Mills^sic

p. 11, col. 2 near Pittsburg. The Pittsburg Gazette blames the Hungarians for it all. And yet these same Hungarians were imported into this country, not so very long ago, to take the places of the American workmen who had refused to submit to further reductions of wages.

* * * *

Passavant & Co., importers, of this city, had a protest against an increase in the duty on gloves before the United States Board of General Appraisers. On Wednesday last the Board decided against the importers : and now men and women who wear gloves will have to pay more for them than they used to.

* * * *

A young hustler for McKinley in the recent Ohio campaign, trudging along a dusty road, asked an old-fashioned Democratic farmer for a ride. No sooner was his request granted than he began to talk politics. “See here,” said the farmer, “what business are you in?” “I’m a Republican.” responded^sic the young man. “Republican, eh?” sneered the old Democrat. “Why that’s not business young man, its a disease^sic.”

* * * *

The striking spinners at Clark’s thread mills, in East Newark, N. J., are now contemplating—with some amazement it is true—another phase of the system which “protects” the American workingman. The protected firm intends to beat the strikers if it can be done, and for a beginning have established agencies at Cohoes, Valatia^sic and Willimantic for the recruiting of hands to take the places of the strikers. Canadians are preferred, for obvious reasons, and the agency at Willimantic has been established because that class of labor flocks there. The firm is prepared for a siege. Provisions and other necesssaries^sic have been delivered in large quantities at the mills, and the new hands as they arrive are told that they will not be allowed to go outside again until further notice, for fear of being terrorized by the strikers. Thus doth the protection wing of the eagle bird “protect” our “protected workingmen.”

* * * *

The Atlanta Constitution thinks that the McKinley bill is not giving the working classes a very happy New Year. Twenty-three Northern blast furnaces have recently been shut down. It seems to be time for Mr. William McKinley to come to the rescue. This result of his celebrated law throws nearly ten thousand men out of employment.

* * * *

The American Harvester Company trust has gone to pieces through the demand of Mrs. McCormick that the McCormick Reaping Company withdraw from it. The old lady became frightened at the vigorous attacks being made on the trust from various directions, hence her demand.

* * * *

Cooper, Hewitt & Co.’s iron and steel works are about to be transferred to the South, because of the advantage to be gained by being near the coal and iron fields of Alabama and Tennessee. Let Jersey demand a protective tariff.

* * * *

The Hamilton, Ont., Times points out that free trade between the States of the Union has created a lake fleet of over two thousand vessels, more than one-half of which are steam vessels, while protection has all but swept American shipping from the high seas.

* * * *

Since the passage of the McKinley bill, which places a heavy duty on silver-bearing lead ores, formerly brought to the United States for reduction, a company has been established for the erection of smelting works at San Luis Potosi, with a capital of $4,000,000. The capital is mostly furnished by a New York syndicate. THE STANDARD, at the time this particular section was under consideration, told what its effects would be. Works were then building at Eagle Pass, Texas, and a railroad contemplated to the district in Mexico where the ore lay : but the silver and lead men had the greatest political “pull,” so that the Texas industry had to go to the wall, with the result that American capital was lost and American laborers thrown out of employment, and Mexico gets a smelting works that would otherwise have been built and operated in the United States.

* * * *

Jacob Gordon, a San Francisco tailor, told an Examiner reporter that the McKinley bill had increased the cost of a $30 suit of clothes $4.35. Here is a bill of particulars that the tailor furnished to prove his statement:

Increased duty on 3[½?] yards of cloth ………. $1 50 Increased duty on 3 yards of inner lining ………. [90?] Increased duty on binding ………. 25 Increased duty on Aberdeen cloth ………. 20 Increased duty on braid trimmings, buttons, twist, thread, etc ………. 1 50 Total increase ………. $4 35

Mind, this table shows only the addition to the old duty made by the McKinley bill, not the whole duty.

CURRENT THOUGHT.

CAN WE COERCE CANADA?

Erastus Wiman, of Dun-Wiman’s Commercial Agency, asks in the North American, “can we coerce Canada?” Mr. Wyman refers^sic to commercial coercion, and says: “Canada’s possibilities of commerce vastly exceed those of the distant Southern nationalities to whom Mr. Blaine has beckoned—as much money should be made by Pennsylvania out of Ontario as out of Ohio, Illinois and Indiana.” The Canadian “Liberals have adopted as the chief plank in their platform the policy that will break down the trade barriers that now exist between the two countries—the principle of reciprocity with nations on this Continent; favor to which has pervaded this people like the light of the morning, is all that is necessary.” The Tory party, however, has ruled that country for the past fifteen years. Whether their “policy of hostility” will receive the approbation of a majority of the Canadian people will be tested at the quintennial election now due within eighteen months, “though it may, by the action of the government, be precipitated at an earlier period.” “The strongest argument which the Tory party is able to urge” is, that “the outcome of all the agitation in favor of the obliteration of the barrier is the enactment of the McKinley bill and the exaction of higher duties than ever before.”

If the Liberals succeed, the consequence will be “that the area of^sic the trade of the United States could be doubled. He sees that if our ‘protective’ tariff against transatlantic goods continues, the Canadian tariff must be made to conform to ours, ’to prevent Canada from being a back door for smugglers into the United States.” The Canadians, though free-minded and independent, are intensely loyal. There is no desire for annexation; he says “there is not a single constituency in the whole of Canada to-day that could return a member pledged to annexation.”

We know little about Canada in the United States; and this article, by a leading Canadian, is well worth attention. Mr. Wiman pleads for concerted legislative action on “coasting laws, wrecking regulations, extradition powers, patent laws, insurance deposit rules,” and so on.

CONDITION OF THE JEWS.

“Vital Statistics of the Jews,” by J. S. Billings, M. D., U. S. Army, in the North American, is deprived of any special value by the insignificance of its data. To use his own words:

Schedules were sent to the heads of about 15,000 Hebrew families, according to lists furnished for that purpose by the presidents and rabbis of congregations. These lists included only the names of hends of families who had been in this country for five years or more. No attempt was made to obtain a complete census of the Jews; the effort being only to obtain the vital statistics of a sufficient number of persons of this race who had been so long in this country that any special influences here might be supposed to have at least commenced to act upon them, and to make use of the data thus obtained for purposes of comparison with the vital statistics of other races which might be obtained through the ordinary machinery of the census.

THE WAVE LAW.

Henry Clews, in the North American, attributes the late financial crisis to the “wave law,” and “the disruption of credit,” and “speculative methods,” among which “the creation of railroads stands foremost.” We commend to him the study of the discussion of this subject in Chap. 1, Book V., of “Progress and Poverty,” if he desires to find what causes his “causes.” Mr. Clews has some sensible remarks on the crippling of the banks by legislative restrictions.

WHAT IT COSTS TO GOVERN NEW YORK.

The total amount of money received by the Finance Department of the City of New York for the year 1890 was $67,726,854.43. Of this amount, $32,490,008.45 came from taxes, $2,130,492.61 from fees, fines, State school money, licenses, interest, rentals, sales, and unexpended balances. There was received $3,608,208.20 on special and trust accounts, assessments, etc. Sales of stocks and bonds brought [$29,461,805.17?]. Of this amount $18,786.96 was received on revenue bonds. During the year $36,250 was received from the Marine bank, which was 5 per cent. of the amount on deposit. The total amount received from the Marine bank so far is $650,000, or 65 per cent. of the amount on deposit at the time of the smash.

The city’s total expenditure was $71,799,747.93. The general expenses, salaries, supplies, state taxes, and interest on city debt accounted for $33,932,656.53, and on special and trust accounts, including revenue bonds, $37,867,091.40 was paid out. The increased expenditure is due to the purchase of new parks. During the year the city redeemed stocks and bonds amounting to $28,845,787.41, including revenue bonds. Twenty-five million dollars’ worth of property will be sold in March for unpaid taxes and assessments running back over a quarter of a century.

p. 13, col. 2

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

WORK, INSTEAD OF TALKING ABOUT IT.

Editor of THE STANDARD—Sir: During and since the conference much has been said and written about getting women interested in our movement, and how they could work to the best advantage. No matter what our individual views may be on the subject, under all and any circumstances it must not be forgotten that in the present state of the movement we need all the help we possibly can get. This being the case, do we want the women to help us?

We take their money, don’t we? If a woman hands us signed petitions we are glad to get them, aren’t we? If we hear a woman preaching Single Tax to a heathen of one of the old parties we pat her on the back, and call her a good and dear little soul, don’t we? If we see a woman in a railroad train or in a horse car pointing out object lessons to a non-Single Tax friend, we like to tell her how proud we are of her, don’t we? Why not, then, welcome and encourage the women? Several plans have been pointed out how women could work—either by joining existing clubs, forming clubs of their own, or working individually.

A women’s Single Tax club might do very well in New York, while it would be a waste of time and money in Swampoodle: joining existing clubs may be a success in Westfield, while in Kilkenny the conditions may be such that women could do better by working individually.

Belton Hall’s^sic plan is good, and may be carried out by women who are able and in a position to try and change the opinions of the leaders: other women, who, for some reason or other, are unable to write to newspapers, clergymen, politicians and others, may bend their energies in the direction of educating the masses, and when the people are ready for the change the leaders will appear.

As we cannot expect any help from the women of the Astors, Depews, Harrisons, Wanamakers and Dudleys, of the bonanza kings, the Goulds and Vanderbilts, or of the protected manufacturers, professional politicians, land speculators and others of these ilks, we must seek for support among the women and men who would derive the greatest benefit by the adoption of the Single Tax, and to reach these people we must seek them in their homes. For

p. 14, col. 2 this kind of work women are especially adapted, for a woman will get a hearing and succeed where a man would be refused.

Let the Single Tax women arm themselves with Congressional petitions and Single Tax literature and make a house to house canvass soliciting signatures and distributing literature. If people at first are not inclined to sign, leave a petition (or more, if necessary), an appropriate tract or two and promise to call, and do call, again. Take the people gently, for the majority of them are suspicious and will not believe in your disinterestedness.

After a time you may succeed in inducing some of the women to meet their friends and neighbors at their houses, and then will be the time to put in your “best licks.”

These women, once convinced of the justice of the Single Tax and what it will do for them, will do more to “carry the news to Mary” than half a dozen clubs passing resolutions and giving invitations to come in and “make yourself to home,” and moreover they will not rest until they have brought their fathers, husbands, brothers, etc., to their way of thinking: vide McKinley bill! Single Tax women not able to work as suggested, instead of moping at home and bewailing their inability to help, if they can afford it may best show their devotion to the cause by sendiug^sic in contributions, large or small, to the National Committee.

Ladies, whatever you intend to do to further our cause, do it at once.

The enemy is taking time by the forelock, and is fortifying his position in the best possible manner. It has been suggested that to push the movement “the best work could be done by men and women standing shoulder to shoulder.”

While in favor of it, it seems to me that at present it is not always convenient to make application of it. This, however, is not the time to break your heads about minor matters, but, individually or collectively, you want to go to work, do all you can, do it as best you can, and do it at once, or forever hold your peace.

Bryn Mawr, Pa.

UNCLE TOM.

NOT ONLY A MORAL RIGHT, BUT ALSO A LEGAL RIGHT.

To the Editor of THE STANDARD—SIR: I am glad the question of female suffrage is receiving some attention in your columns: and as Miss Gay assumes that the majority of Single Tax men are indifferent to the cause, I am glad to say that I have good reasons to differ with her. It is a subject to which I have devoted a great deal of thought, and I have earnestly advocated the cause wherever I could: so it has often been my good fortune to have others give their opinions to me. I am glad to say that the majority of intelligent men are willing to accord the same rights to women that they enjoy themselves. Mad ambition, greed and ignorance are the only obstacles in the way of woman suffrage, for they are not only morally, but legally entitled to that right, for the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution clearly says:

All persons born or naturallzed^sic in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

It is left to be inferred that it might be on account of sex, but this denial has not yet been attempted, nor could it be accomplished if it were, for here the Fourteenth Amendment again comes to their relief, saying:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.

Again, the Constitution is assuredly a contract between States and citizens, and section 10, article 1, provides that no State shall pass any law impairing contracts. Although they have been unjustly deprived of the right, they have really lost nothing, for the right has been worth nothing: but under the reformed system of voting, and the Single Tax, it will be a benefit, for even the ballot-box must stand upon land. I am in favor of every reform that will loosen the shackles of circumstances, which are far stronger than the fetters of law: but let us bear in mind that every reform must have a place to stand upon, and that can only be upon the land. When we can once stand upon the land without saying, “by your permission,” then all reforms will be more than half won. Should we not all work unitedly with muscle, brain and heart to get a firm foothold upon the land?

Bath-on-the-Hudson, N. Y.

MATTHEW KIRSCH.

WITHOUT DISTINCTION OF SEX.

Editor of THE STANDARD—SIR: I have had many letters asking me why I have not announced myself in favor of “Woman Suffrage.”

Many of these letters were from unknown ladies. They wished me to announce in THE STANDARD my position. And I will now do so.

I believe in equal rights without sex distinction.

“PA” CHASE.

ONE THING AT A TIME.

Editor of THE STANDARD—SIR: Yes! Let us waive woman suffrage, prison reform, the divided skirt, all minor reforms and give a long pull, a strong pull, but a pull all together for the Single Tax.

A SINGLE TAX WOMAN.

Plainfield, N. J.

OPINIONS ON TAXATION.

The Commercial Advertiser has been getting more answers to its circular sent to members of the Reform Club to ascertain their views on taxation, condensations of which appear below:

Oswald Ottendorfer, editor and proprietor of the Staats-Zeitung, would abolish the tax on raw materials, on machinery and on necessities. He favors the income tax and an inheritance tax, exempting only inheritances to the amount of $10,000. He believes “land should be taxed, like any other property, in accordance with its value, and the possibility to derive an income therefrom.”

E. Ellery Anderson, president of the Reform Club, would abolish all taxes on raw materials, etc., but he woald^sic not abolish the tariff altogether. He is opposed to the income and inheritance taxes. He would not object to a tax on land values if he could see how a just and stable method of imposing such tax could be devised. He thinks the old forms of internal taxation on fermented liquors and tobacco are better than any so far suggested in the letters.

Wiiliam^sic Lloyd Garrison says: “The Single Tax amply satisties all the needs of government, and is the only one that squares with absolute justice.”

Gustave H. Schwab would remove taxes on raw materials, would not favor a radical policy with regard to’ present^sic taxes on manufactured articles; would not abolish the tariff altogether; does not consider an income tax feasible; would favor a national tax on collateral inheritances; does not consider a tax on land values practicable or wise.

E. J. Shriver is opposed to all tariffs, because they operate as a hindrance to industry, and cause the lowering of wages. He opposes the income and inheritance taxes, but favors, unlimitedly, the single tax on land values.

Winthrop Parker is amusing. He is not convinced on the practical side of the land value tax theory, but thinks a personal property tax, based on the occupation of real estate, is entirely feasible and would have the merit of bearing evenly on all men. Let every man, says Mr. Parker, who occupies a house or piece of land, whether as owner or lessee, pay a tax on his personal property based on the assessed valuation of that house or land. In this way men would really pay an income tax, without the evils of that particular form, and the holding of unimproved real estate would be discouraged.

Louis T. Brush is a gradual reductionist, and is not a believer in the Henry George theory.

Theo. W. Morris would abolish the tariff on raw materials, but would not abolish the tariff altogether: opposes an income tax. He looks upon an inheritance tax and a tax on land values with much favor.

W. B. Hornblower is opposed to the entire protective system and in favor of a tax on land value, but “not in favor of Henry George’s theory of taxing land values apart from improvements.” He favors an income tax, but does not think it can be enforced: opposes the inheritance tax.

R. W. Morris would abolish the taxes on raw materials; is opposed to the income tax: favors the inheritance tax, and would not tax land values, but leave lands “as free as at all possible, in order that foreigners may be induced to buy and settle on them, and thus add, as they have always done, greatly to the material prosperity of the country.” These views are not subject to change.

Lewis F. Mott would abolish all taxes upon the materials of labor and the necessities of life: is in favor of a tax on land values and inheritances.

William Allaire Shortt is a free trader, but not a purist; objects to income and inheritance taxes, because they would be too uncertain for the sole basis of national revenue.

W. B. Kunhardt says that the question in his mind resolves itself down to whether the Government shall be supported by an income tax or by ground rent, which he does not regard as a tax at all. “If,” he says, “public opinion shall ever favor a trial of the latter more novel and experimental plan it will be reassuring to many doubting Thomases to know that the attempt can be very gradually and cautiously made without business disturbances or convulsions of any kind, and that if it fail to win general confidence there will be a very simple and effective method of withdrawing the ‘entering wedge’ at the polls.”

Alfred A. Whitman would gradually abolish all taxes on necessities; would favor a graduated income tax and graduated inheritance tax. He thinks land values should share in the expense of the Government.

H. DeF. Baldwin is in favor of free trade to a certain extent: but if it came to a question of raising money for the purposes of the Federal Government in some other way than by means of customs duties, almost any kind of a direct tax would be at least an improvement.

W. R. Warren believes that taxation should be for revenue only, “with such exceptions alone as are clearly in the interests of the whole people.” He would tax land up to its full value.

Samuel Greenbaum, with some modifications, is in favor of

p. 15, col. 2 eventual free trade, opposes an income tax, favors a tax on inheritances. “I am,” he says, “most heartily in favor of a tax on land values; this, in my opinion, is one of the fairest methods of taxation. Land cannot be stored away in a corner, nor concealed from the public authorities. Such a taxation appeals to me as one peculiarly adapted towards a fair and honest collection of taxes, and resulting in as equal a distribution of the burden of taxation as it is possible to make it.”

M. M. Friend favors a speedy reduction of the tariff: opposes the income tax; favors a tax on inheritances, but, in his opinion, the land value tax would obviate the necessity of, any other^sic form of taxation. It is just and fair, advocated by the best thinkers of modern times, and he has never heard or seen a reasonable objection.

A. A. Healy would abolish the tariff on raw materials, machinery and necessities, and he would favor an average reduction of at least 50 per cent. from the present McKinley rates upon the remaining articles on the list. Entire abolition of the tariff should follow within a few years, and experience, meanwhile, would determine whether we should then, under absolute free trade, retain the present internal revenue system, the tax on inheritances and the land tax, or dispense with the first two, and have a single tax upon land values.

Robert L. Harrison would abolish taxes on raw materials, machinery and necessities, and would favor taxes on inheritances and land values. He would favor an income tax if it could be collected.

Henry A. [Bogert?] would tax land values—that is, real estate and nothing else.

M. B. Edinger and M. Jacobi would abolish taxes on raw materials, machinery and necessities, and would favor taxes on inheritances and land values.

G. H. Kent would abolish the tariff gradually, with the assistance and advice of a commission or bureau established for this purpose. To make up the consequent financial shortage he would tax all the property in the country, excluding stocks, bonds, notes and such certificates of indebtedness and the stocks of merchants in trade, but aiming to tax the ultimate holder with his actual possessions. He would not favor an income tax or a tax on inheritances.

C. Schumacher favors absolute free trade and the abolition of all custom houses. He would favor the raising of the necessary revenue for the support of government by the voluntary, direct and self-imposed contributions of its citizens.

Waldo G. Morse would raise all revenues by taxing “real estate”—not land values.

George Haven Putnam would abolish taxes on raw materials, machinery and necessities, and will favor free trade eventually; is against an income tax and in favor of a tax on inheritances; would favor a tax on real estate, but is opposed to a tax on land values.

J. S. Moore is a tariff reductionist; he would favor a tax on incomes over $2,500, but he thinks such a tax cannot be collected.

J. C. Morgenthau would abolish the tariff entirely except as a means of revenue, and in that case would tax only luxuries. He favors the income and inheritance taxes.

A. P. Smith favors a graded income tax; would abolish taxes on raw materials and necessities, and would favor, eventually, the abolition of the tariff.

Robert Rutter believes the tariff laws should be modified and simplified, and is opposed to income and inheritance taxes. He is not fully satistied^sic as to the wisdom of putting a tax on land values only.

M. L. Hiller would make a reduction in the tariff at once, and would keep on reducing as long as reduction was beneficial. He favors taxes on incomes and inheritances. He would tax all land held for speculative purposes, but would exempt as far as possible all land in use.

R. Dullon is not in favor of a tariff for protection. He would retain the internal revenue tax on spirits and tobacco, and increase the free list on raw materials. He is opposed to income and inheritance taxes.

George C. Rand would favor tariff reduction. He is opposed to taxing incomes, inheritances and land values.

Henry J. Davison, Jr., belives^sic in absolute free trade, but does not consider it practicable under our present system of government. He is opposed to an income tax, and in favor of taxing inheritances and land.

Jason Hinman would abolish the tariff gradually: opposes an income tax, and favors a tax on inheritances and land values.

Constant A. Andrews believes in absolute free trade, but is not convinced that an immediate total abolition of the entire tariff would be good practical politics. He would favor a tax on incomes, inheritances and land values.

Robert M. Thompson is a tariff reductionist. He would tax incomes, inheritances and land values, except farm lands.

David A. Boody favors tariff reform: is opposed to income, inheritance and land values taxes.

J. F. Moore is opposed to an income tax, thinks the inheritance continued on p. 16 →

[text breaks off here mid-sentence at the foot of column 2; no “continued” line printed; about 300 px of blank paper below — continuation presumably on the next page]

TEACHING WORKINGMEN ECONOMICS.

Eighteen months ago I became impressed with the possibilities afforded of inculcating good economic principles in workingmen through labor organizations, and, in order to test the matter, I joined the Knights of Labor Assembly No. 3,706. At that time our organization was feeble in numbers and exerted no perceptable^sic influence among workingmen. We had a membership of about twenty-five, with an average attendance of fifteen. I found that, outside rates of wages, strikes and boycotts, very little attention was paid to economic matters.

At a conference held with three or four bright members of our assembly we decided that something would have to be done to awaken the workingmen if we would save our organization, and we adopted the plan of popularizing our open meetings by having in the programme the distribution of refreshments. It worked like a charm. We have had a continuously increasing attendance, and the “refreshments” which drew the first audiences are now a matter of minor consideration. We are all pretty well posted in the “primer of political economy,” and when anything is now said about a tariff for the protection of American workingmen at our meetings, it is greeted with shouts of derisive laughter, and when our Republican press characterizes us as socialists and dynamiters, we smile in scorn at their want of intelligence.

At our last meeting one of our members recited “What Mary Meant by Rats.” We hold our meetings in the City Hall, and the City Council, who were in session in a room below us, thought the applause “would bring down the house.”

Our committee will secure a larger hall for our next meeting, one capable of seating 500 people. Nearly 100 persons had to be turned away at our last meeting because we could crowd no more into the room.

J. W. BRENTLINGER.

Pueblo, Col.

Secy. Commonwealth S. T. Club.

BOLTON SMITH, Memphis, Tenn.—“I like the new STANDARD, its appearance, tone and matter. Long life to it^sic.

p. 16, col. 2

COMMENTS ON “THE STANDARD.”

DR. WALTER MENDELSON, New York.—“Allow me to congraulate^sic you on the new form and general make-up of THE STANDARD. Every one must like it, I think^sic.

FRANKLIN D. BOWEN, New York Independent.—“I want to send you a line on the splendid appearance of THE STANDARD. It certainly looks attractive and readable.”

The Harlem Reporter says:

THE STANDARD, which was founded by Mr. Henry George and is now under the ownership and editorial direction of Mr. William T. Croasdale, a liberal-minded, able and experienced journalist, has just entered upon its ninth volume In^sic additton^sic to its continued advocacy of what it calls “the new political economy first given to the world by Henry George in the pages of ‘Progress and Poverty,’” it will give in each number a weekly review of public affairs. THE STANDARD now appears in a twenty-four-page form, and is crowded with matter that is calculated to set the reader thinking seriously on political and social topics of vital interest.

WM. S. RANN, Buffalo.—The old STANDARD was good, but the uew^sic is far better. My appetite for the paper grows by what it feeds on. In my opinion its educational value surpasses that of any other paper published. I congratulate you.

E. H. UNDERHILL, Boston, Mass.—I am very much pleased with it. It is a decided improvement over the old form.

B. B. MARTIS, Troy, N. Y.—We are all pleased with the new STANDARD.

G. F. STEPHENS, Philadelphia.—I wish you all success in your new form.

WARREN WORTH BAILEY, Chicago.—Permit me to offer my congratulations on the change you have made in THE STANDARD. It pleases me very much and my impression is that you have done well.

DAVITT ON PARNELL.

Mr. Michael Davitt’s paper, the Labor World, in its issue of January 3, contains an open letter of Mr. Davitt commenting on a speech delivered by Mr. Parnell in Kilkenny. Parnell had taken umbrage at some remarks by Davitt, and delivered a bitter tirade in which he charged Davitt with being first a physical force man, then a Land Leaguer, then a Patrick Ford man, then a Gladstone supporter, and finally a labor party man, treasonably deserting each old cause whenever he took up with a new one. Mr. Davitt refutes these charges in this letter, showing that his course was a consistent one throughout, and especially calling attention to the fact that he has been, from the formation of the Land League till to-day, a steady advocate of land nationalization as the real solution of the Irish and labor problems. He then proceeds to “inquire a little into the consistency” of the man who comes into court to make charges against him. This is what he says:

Mr. Parnell accepted Patrick Ford’s money in 1880 and 1891^sic, to denounce Patrick Ford in the House of Commons in 1882.

Mr. Parnell joined the Land League in 1879, and bartered away the Land League in the “Kilmainham Treaty” in order to get out of prison in 1882.

Mr. Parnell promised to co-operate with the Liberal party in promoting Liberal principles in Ireland as a condition of his release in 1882, and in 1890 denounces the Liberal party for objecting to any longer co-operate with a convicted adulterer.

Mr. Parnell employed Captain O’Shea to negotiate his release from prison, and repaid him by seducing his wife.

Mr. Parnell declared war against the landlords and Conservatives in 188[9?], and accepted his election expenses from the Tories of Cork in the general election of the same year.

Mr. Parnell allied himself with the Tories in 18[8?]5, and denounced the “Radical crew” of England in the famous manifesto to the Irish electors of Great Britain.

Mr. Parnell allied himself with the “Radical crew” in 1886, and denounced his Tory allies of the previous year in equally vigorous terms.

Mr. Parnell advocated the abolition of landlordism “root and branch” in 1879-80-81, and in the first session of Parliament in 1890 he outlined a scheme for the reformation and perpetuation of the same landlordism in Ireland.

Mr. Parnell praised Mr. Gladstone as his leader, lauded his scheme of Home Rule, and upheld the Liberal party in speeches delivered in Liverpool, at the Eighty Club in London, and in the Westminster Palace Hotel, since the famous Hawarden interview: while he now libels Mr. Gladstone, attacks the Home Rule plan which he had previously praised, and falls foul of the same party which he declared a few months ago would give liberty to Ireland!

Mr. Parnell and his organs in the press denounced me for founding the Irish Democratic Labor Federation in Cork early in 1890, and in December of the same year declared himself willing to take over the same organization.

Mr. Parnell told me “he would come out of the O’Shea divorce case without a stain on his name or reputation,” and now stands convicted before the world as a sneaking and cowardly betrayer of his friend’s wife.

And, finally, it is the same Mr. Parnell, “the honest man,” “the patriot,” the “self-sacrificing leader,” who, in 1890, sacrifices national unity, and the national cause of Ireland rather than retire from a leadership which he had disgraced and betrayed by his base and dishonorable conduct!

Verily, this is the man to accuse me of “inconsistency” and “treachery.” My record in the service of Ireland needs no defence. It is known to the Irish race. I have no cause to blush or to apologize for it. It has not brought me either testimonials or honors. A life of political torture has been my lot, while the miserable man who now traduces me has been lifted from bankruptcy to wealth, from political obscurity to eminence and power, by a movement which I founded after undergoing nine years’ imprisonment for a cause which Mr. Parnell has now tried to betray, but which, thank God, he is powerless to destroy.

This is my reply to Mr. Parnell’s crazy charges.

SINGLE TAX NEWS.

MAINE.

H. G. Casey, Auburn.—We have elected A. C. Dunning president of the club, three vice-presidents, a treasurer and executive board, and H. G. Casey, secretary. The Governor of Maine has come out squarely for the Australian system and there is no doubt that Maine will adopt a secret ballot. Our club is in good condition for work and we are going to do some.

MASSACHUSETTS.

S. T., Boston.—The Single Tax League of this city held a public meeting at G. A. R. Hall, 616 Washington street, last Sunday afternoon, when Rev. Samuel Brazier spoke on the “Moral Phases of the Single Tax^sic.” The Cambridge Single Tax League, at its meeting on Friday evening, January 9, at 539 Main street, listened to addresses by Davis J. King, F. O. Anderson. L. H. Turner^sic and E. M. White of Boston ard^sic W. H. Morrell of Cambridge.

S. T., Boston.—Every Saturday evening during the winter a course of labor lectures will be held at Wells Memorial Hall, 987 Washington street, the following being the lecturers: Edwin M. Chamberlain, Rev. W. D. P. Bliss, Judge Charles Cowley, George E. McNeill, Henry Lemon, Frank K. Foster, Harry Lloyd, Levi H. Turner, Captain E. S. Huntington, Robert. Howard^sic, Edward Rogers, Henry R. Legate, James H. Mellen, J. Foster Biscoe, Mrs. S. H. Merrifield and Rev. Jesse H. Jones.

D. Webster Groh, Boston.—At the Boston Question Club every Sunday morning for the past four weeks the hall has been crowded by those anxious to hear a discussion of the question: “Is the Single Tax Sound Economic Policy,” and from present indications we will probably continue this question a month longer.

CONNECTICUT.

Edwin E. Baldwin, Branford.—Twenty petitions, gathered since my uncle, just after the last election, converted me from a protectionist to a Henry George Single Tax man.

NEW JERSEY.

Wm. M. Callingham, Camden.—Among those who have joined our ranks during the past year is the Rev. J. H. Townsend, Rector of St. John’s Episcopal Church of this city. The gentleman is very popular and greatly respected by all classes of citizens and has the courage of his convictions. He is a hard worked pastor, and if his church work will permit he will be of much service to the cause through the club. Our lecture course for January includes “The Need of Social Reform,” by H. V. Hetzell on the 3d; “Henry George and His Theory,” by J. C. Frost on the 10th: “The New Political Economy,” by G. F. Stephens on the 17th: “The Ethics of the Single Tax.” by I. Feinberg on the 24th. and “The Proper Use of Economic Terms,” by A. H. Stephens on the 31st.

J. A. Craig, Paterson.—W. J. Gorsuch will deliver a lecture on the tariff before our club on the 15th inst., and Mrs. Gorsuch will give a dramatic reading. This is the first of a series of lectures which we are arranging to have every month, till the warm weather sets in. Readers of THE STANDARD who can attend are respectfully invited to do so, and bring their friends with them.

PENNSYLVANIA.

C. Estella Bachman, Vauch Chunk.—The aim of the Women’s Enrollment Committee is to secure the names of all women who are now working for, or who wish to work for the advancement of the Single Tax. Our object in asking all such to enroll with us is simply that we may have the benefit of that enthusiasm which numbers. working^sic together in a great cause, always gives; and also that we may help each other by suggestions as to methods of work, and by making known any plans that have been successful in interesting people, especially women, in the Single Tax. We have received a number of letters from women who are enthusiastically working for the Single Tax, in response to the “call” which appeared in THE STANDARD of December 17th. It is noticeable that they are somewhat widely scattered; five States, Alabama. Massachusetts^sic, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Tennessee being now represented on our list. But we want women from all the other States anu^sic many more from these. We earnestly request every woman who desires to advance the knowledge of the Single Tax among her sister women to send her name and address to our secretary, with any advice or suggestions that might help to forward our work. We especially beg those who are members of Single Tax clubs to write us of methods of work which they have found successful in interesting and enlisting women in our cause. Will not all who are interested in this great cause please respond promptly?

G. F. Stephens, Philadelphia.—We started the New Year with a housewarming, splendidly attended, at which cold turkey and economics were mingled in most elegant fashion. The Sunday previous F. A. Herwig, of the Kensington Reform Club, discussed the “Immoralities of the Tariff,” and did what could be done in one evening with a subject of such magnitude. The following Sunday John Moore, president of the same club, spoke on “Protection Wages,” and on Thursday last Michael Geiselman discussed “The Disadvantages of Immediate Free Trade,” so it may be seen that we are getting what good we can out of the McKinley bill, expensive as the luxury is. Our society has decided, after considerable thought, to establish regular dues for members, not simply as a source of revenue, for the voluntary contributions would probably suffice even for the increased

p. 18, col. 2 expense of our new club house, but we wish to know, by direct experiment upon the pocket nerve, how many of our large membership can be relied upon for actual service, thus determining what Irish-American authorities in municipal politics have found to be the essence of the science of government, knowing who’s “wid yer” and who’s “agin yer.”

“Uncle Tom,” Bryn Mawr.—Three petitions since November 28, 1890. These make thirty-two, as my share toward the 100,000. As the man who found it so easy to get signatures, but never sent them in, has not been heard from lately, it is reasonable to suppose that he is either dead, is snowed in, imitates Rip Van Winkle, or is playing the role of Micawber. His intentions were good, but ——.

LOUISIANA.

S. T., Abbeville.—The Eclectic Club indulged in a banquet on January 1st, in which it celebrated the late Democratic victory. Among the regular toasts was “Single Tax—‘white parasols and elephants, mad with pride, are the fruits of a grant of land.’” This toast was reponded^sic to by Mr. W. P. Edwards.

TEXAS.

H. F. King, Houston.—“I have sent out a circular and letter to all our single tax friends asking them to subscribe directly to THE STANDARD and to contribute to the fund of the national committee. I have been doing more work, locally, here in Houston than ever before. We have a club of over fifty members and our Tuesday night meetings are well attended.”

E. W. Brown, Houston.—We are more than satisfied at the way our idea is spreading in this city: our meetings are well attended, and our membership is increasing at every meeting.

OHIO.

S. T., Granville.—There are but two avowed Single Tax men beside myself in our town, but we lose no opportunity of spreading the gospel and have set many to thinking^sic;

W. H. Longhead, Zanesville.—“We still live,” and have adopted the platform. Recently I had the opportunity of talking to the association of carpenters and contractors of this city, and about a week later gave an exposition of the tax question before the County Farmers’ Alliance.

ILLINOIS.

Warren Worth Bailey, Chicago.—Prof. Garland arrived in the city on Thursday afternoon, January 9^sic, from his western trip, and that evening our club had the pleasure of hearing him read a portion of his “Under the Wheel.”

I am informed that new clubs are shortly to be formed at Peoria, Lanark and Braceville, in this State. My correspondence with the brethren throughout Illinois breathes a hopeful spirit, and I think I can safely say that our State will be able to report considerable progress when the next conference meets in Chicago.

Mr. Herne passed through the city January 10, en route to South Bend, Ind., where he played that night, and where he expected to speak and read “Under the Lion’s Paw.” Dr. Hammond and other friends of the cause in that town had the meeting in charge.

Announcements: January 15, Henry D. Lloyd; January 22, Chas. W. Phillips, “What is Socialism and who are Socialists?” January 29, H. E. Bartholomew; February 5, Leon Hornstein; February 12, Edward Osgood Brown; February 19, James Malcolm.

Wm. McMaster, Elgin.—Inclosed find petitions. I hope to form a club here soon.

IOWA.

O. L. Brewer.—Three petitions. The work is going on but slowly here. The farmers are beginning to move on the tariff, however.

MICHIGAN.

Charles Gerow, Menominee.—Inclosed find petitions. It is wonderful what a change there has taken place on the tariff within the last year in the minds of the men that work in the lumber camps. There was a time when they would not listen to this kind of talk, but now they are all attention.

J. R. Gibbons, Saginaw, E. S.—Three petitions. The cause is gaining ground, slowly but surely. THE STANDARD will always be welcome to me at any price. I wish Mr. Croasdale success in its management.

MINNESOTA.

C. J. Buell, Minneapolis.—Ninety four petitions. Most of them are members of the Farmers’ Alliance who were recently holding a session in St. Paul. Some were obtained at one of Professor Garland’s meetings here. No. 1 is an ex-president of the Alliance; No. 2 is Congressman-elect Halvorson, of the Fifth District; 3 is a dairy farmer and grain dealer, of Northern Minnesota; 4 is Governor Merriam’s private secretary; 5 is editor of the Progressive Age; 6 is a son of ex-Governor Ames, of Mississippi; 7 is manager of the Chester Oil Company, and formerly Mayor of Bismarck, N. D.—a Free Trader and a Single Taxer; 8 and 9 are professors in Augsburg Seminary—a noted Norwegian school here; 10 is ex-State Auditor of Minnesota—almost a Single Taxer. Set the letter writers on him. 11 is a Minneapolis real estate dealer—a Single Taxer; 12 is a teacher and one of Professor Garland’s former pupils in Boston; 13 was the Alliance candidate for lieutenant-governor last fall. Will send more soon. Get them easily.

MISSOURI.

Percy Pepoon, St. Louis.—The Single Tax League, at its business meeting Monday night, re-elected the following officers for the ensuing six months: H. H. Hoffman, president; Percy Pepoon, vice-president; J. W. Steele, recording secretary; T. J. Donohue, financial secretary; E. F. Meyer, treasurer, and Sheridan Webster, corresponding secretary. Colonel W. F. Tuttle, who was unanimously nominated and almost unanimously elected Speaker of the Missouri House, is a Single Taxer, and delivered a Single Tax Free Trade address in St. Louis last summer. On the floor of the continued on p. 19 →

[page ends mid-sentence; no continuation line printed; about 600 px of blank paper below the last line in both columns]

KANSAS.

W. L. Troughton, Seneca.—Sixty-seven petitions. Among them is A. J. Felt, Lieutenant-Governor; three bankers, six farmers, who, in their own right, are using from 1,200 to 160 acres^sic of land; some are town lot speculators and one is a hardware merchant. I have our late Representative reading “Progress and Poverty.” He is a man of strong character and a large farmer, but the Alliance candidate beat him for re-election this fall, he having made himself an Ingalls candidate.

WYOMING.

William Mathews, Black Buttes.—Twenty-seven petitions. In soliciting these few petitioners I was most agreeably surprised in finding three Single Taxers, and many others favorable toward the cause, where opposition was expected.

CALIFORNIA.

D. Stuart, Oakland.—Fifty petitions. If each worker will do his best and ask for signers on all suitable occasions, by the end of January we will have reached the one hundred thousand notch. I would be glad to see this done, and will try to do what I can to that end.

O. L. Long, San Jose.—There are a good many Single Taxers here, but they all stand back and wait for some one to take the lead.

OREGON.

Wallace Yates, Portland.—While Oregon is the slowest State in the Union, I am glad to say that our cause has made some progress even here, and I have frequent calls for Single Tax literature from this State and Washington. Also keep the pot boiling by contributed articles to various newspapers. Mr. J. P. Kohler, formerly of Brooklyn, and one of our most earnest Single Taxers, delivered a most excellent address on the Single Tax before the Universal Reform Club of this city a couple of weeks ago. This club, by the way, is doing a good work. Its well attended meetings every Sunday afternoon are addressed by reformers of all stripes—perfect impartiality being maintained. Moses Hull, during his lecture course here, made the club a most excellent speech on free trade which shook the faith of many an old moss-back protectionist. Portland is full of Single Tax men (on the quiet), who will come out of their holes whenever some kind of authoritative tocsin sounds in the shape of the public endorsement of the cause by some party or other. There are very many among the business men who quietly accept the truth of the George theory. We are glad to hear of Mr. George’s improvement in health, and decidedly advocate his taking a rest and letting some of the younger warriors bear the brunt of the battle for awhile.

WASHINGTON.

F. M. Marquis, Walla Walla.—Inclosed find petitions. In addition to the suggestion of Mr. J. H. Marsh, of Providence, R. I., in THE STANDARD of December 10, to place sets of George’s works in normal school libraries, etc., I would suggest that copies or whole sets of the same works be placed in hotels and especially here on this coast, where the male population predominates. Cheap hotels, say one dollar per day houses, are crowded with mechanics, business men and immigrants from the East. Reading matter of all kinds furnished by the house is readily and eagerly devoured. If a set of those works were put in a neat case and placed in the care of the proprietor, or with a request that he look after them, and labeled “Please read and return,” they would find many readers and provoke discussion among those whom it is especially desirable to reach. Instead of awaiting the arrival of school children upon the stage of action, our ideas would reach those who have already the power to make and unmake laws, and furnish legislators with the key to solve the problems of our times. I think Miss Gay does her Single Tax masculine friends an injustice. If she will put the question to a vote I think woman suffrage would carry by almost an unanimous vote.

P. K. Mohr, Kent.—Three petitions. We have now organized a Knights of Labor assembly here and can do much good work.

INDIAN TERRITORY.

Isaac McCloskey. Pawnee^sic.—Seven petitions, among them the name of a Methodist minister, who signed when told that its object was to prevent the holding land out of use^sic for the purpose of speculating on it.

BRITISH COLUMBIA.

William Berridge, Victoria.—We are doing all we can here.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA.

In South Australia, the home of ballot reform, the question of taxing land values has already come before the people and the Government in probably a more prominent way than in any other country. Papers recently received tell of the passage by the lower house of Parliament of a clause in the Corporations bill. permitting^sic the assessment by local bodies of the unimproved value of land in their districts. This clause was passed by the lower house by a substantial majority, but rejected by the “petty house of lords” by a vote of 13 to 5. According to the speeches delivered at a meeting held in Port Pirie, presided over by the Mayor. the discussion^sic of the bill throughout the country was conducted on Single Tax lines. The bill was called a reflex of a growing public opinion that taxation should not be a fine on improvement. The speakers pointed out the injustice and absurdity of allowing landlords to grow rich without labor at the expense of the community; they demanded that vacant land should be taxed as heavily as improved land. and showed^sic that this forces idle land into use. But the important thing is that the members of Parliament were forced to discuss the whole question in the plainest way, one of the land-owning majority of “the house of lords” covering himself with glory by trying to prove that there was an unearned increment of value which attached to

p. 19, col. 2 newspapers and other things just as to land. The Single Tax agitation in South Australia is largely the outgrowth of the old land nationalization movement, and is due to the activity of a few determined men who have been working for years. The Port Pirie Advocate is an outspoken Single Tax paper that has done much for the cause.

“SHALL WE MAKE IT A MILLION?”

The following are a few of the letters referring to the ten-cent edition of “Protection or Free Trade?” received lately. If the same enthusiasm and disposition to work is shown everywhere we can easily make the edition a million copies. The work being done with these subscription blanks in canvassing protectionists for orders by Brokaw in Dakota, White in Clinton, Mass.: Tyson^sic in Toronto, Wood in Philadelphia, Stern in Nebraska, Snay, in Ohio^sic, Cooper in Brooklyn, Miss Bachman in Mauch Chunk, and others, counts for more than double, and it is work every one of us can do, and should do to insure the success of the edition. We may not all be able to subscribe for a hundred, or even for ten copies, but there is not a man or woman among us who cannot get subscriptions for a thousand copies.

W. I. Boreman, Parkersburg, W. Va.—“Put our club down for two hundred copies of ‘Protection or Free Trade?’ We may take more after a bit. The tariff question is the stepping-stone to free land and free men.”

C. Estella Bachman, Mauch Chunk, Pa.—“I have a few subscriptions already and will try for more as soon as you send the blanks. I wish we could make the edition a million copies.”

W. E. Brokaw, Watertown, South Dakota.—“Please send a large supply of subscription blanks so that I can help you get a million subscriptions. It is a move I have been longing to see made for some time.”

Edward Osgood Brown, Chicago, Ill.—“I consider the plan a most excellent one in every respect. Nothing in the world could be better for us.”

R. G. Brown, Memphis, Tenn.—“Send me subscription blanks to help. It’s a grand scheme.”

C. J. Buell, Minneapolis, Minn.—“I think we can use ten thousand copies or more.”

James W. Bucklin, Grand Junction, Col.—“This method seems to me the best way of pushing our cause, and I hope that at least one million copies will be distributed before tne next presidential campaign.”

Wm. M. Callingham, Camden, N. J.—“We think the scheme admirable.”

Pa Chase, St. Louis, Mo.—“Will get all the subscriptions I can. It’s fun to work for the truth.”

C. B. Cooper, Brooklyn, N. Y.—“We will make the edition a million sure.”

P. J. Crowley, Cambridgeport, Mass.—“I have got subscriptions from two-thirds of the voters in our shop.”

A. S. Cushman, Oxford, Mass.—“I will use these cheap copies to lend to men who will not take the trouble to get the book from a library. Even a few copies will do great good in this little village.”

A. W. Eastlake, New York.—“I am more than pleased with the plan. Send blanks. Have got four subscriptions to-day for ten copies each, and will undoubtedly get more.”

C. H. Fuller, Middletown. N. Y^sic.—“If our state takes say 150,000 copies, Middletown’s share will be about 400.”

Jose Gros, Morristown. N. J^sic.—“Put me down for one hundred copies. I think we should reach as many western farmers as possible.”

L. W. Hoch. Adrian. Mich^sic.—“Send me five hundred subscription blanks.”

J. A. Haggstrom. St. Paul^sic, Neb.—“Send subscription blanks. Am a member of the farmers’ alliance, and, of course, try to introduce the ‘cat’ one way or another.”

H. D. Halbert, Vanceburg, Ky.—“Send blanks. Am heartily in favor of plan and will take at least one hundred copies.”

N. A. Hall. Deweys^sic, Montana.—“Will try to get my fellow-workmen to subscribe.”

Henry L. Hinton, Grand View-on-the-Hudson, N. Y.—“I send in subscription at once for fifty copies (as I hope all interested will do) to help establish the demand. with the hope^sic it will prove great enough to make the edition a million copies.”

John G. Hummel, St. Louis, Mo.—“Enclosed find subscription for fifty copies.”

W. W. Kile, Dayton, Ohio.—“Shall try to get every member of our club to work for the success of the enterprise. It seems to me just the right move. Am only sorry I haven’t a thousand dollars to contribute.”

George Lemke. Menominee. Mich^sic.—“It gives me pleasure to see practical plans and measures suggested, which cannot fail to educate the masses and point out to them clearly where their success and happiness lie. Placing Henry George’s ‘Protection or Free Trade?’ in the hands of every person old enough to read and understand will convert half of all who study. fairly consider^sic and think. The balance can be won over later. Please put me down for five hundred copies, and I hope to increase this to five thousand.”

N. W. Lemond, Thomaston. Me^sic.—“Send some blanks and I will see what I can do here.”

Edgar B. Moore, Rutland. Vt^sic.—“I think you have struck the key note. If Single Tax Clubs and men will push the work, at least a million will be sold. The Knights of Labor ought to help. I won’t feel satified^sic if we don’t subscribe for at least five hundred copies right off. Our club is small and unfortunately poor, but where there’s a will the way will be found.”

J. E. [Morier?], Troy, N. Y.—“We consider ‘Protection or Free Trade?’ the best of Henry George’s books for propaganda work, by long odds, and are greatly pleased with the plan for a cheap edition. Put us down for fifty copies each^sic.”

Wm. P. Nichols, Vineland, N. J.—“Send blanks and I will do my best to flood this town with ‘Protection or Free Trade?’”

Billy Radcliffe, Youngstown. Ohio^sic.—“Our club is in a comatose state, but I think this new move will wake them up. I will take one hundred copies at least.”

S. C. Reese, Pana, Ill.—“If half the voters read ‘Protection or Free Trade?’ free trade would be a foregone conclusion.” continued on p. 20 →

PERSONAL.

The Boston Globe, in view of the difficulty the Democratic party of this State is having in finding an available man for United States Senator, asks how Thomas G. Shearman of Brooklyn would do. He will do.

* * *

John D. Rockefeller has an income of $[600,000?] a year, or $684 an hour, or about five dollars while you are reading this squib.

* * *

A. Hilton, of Alexandria, La., has been very ill with the grip for a long time, but writes that he is in hopes of getting out in a day. He says he feels that he will not live to see the Single Tax carried out, but he has faith that it will come in the near future. Never say die, old friend.

* * *

T. [E.?] Lane has a letter in the Flushing Daily Journal on “The Needs of Flushing.” What that town needs, in Mr. Lane’s opinion, is the adoption of the Single Tax.

* * *

It is said that George William Curtis, of Harper’s Weekly, is getting to look like Gladstone.

* * *

Miss C. Estella Bachman, of Mauch Chunk, Pa., had a Single Tax article over a column long in the Pittsburg Post of December 20. Miss Bachman is secretary of the recently organized Women’s Enrollment Committee.

* * *

Henry George continues to improve in health and goes about the city quite freely. He will probably sail for Bermuda next week.

THAT SHUTS DANA OUT.

New York World.

The supreme qualification for New York’s Senatorship—the crucial test of the candidate’s fitness and Democracy—is earnest devotion to the reform of a tariff which sorely taxes the many for the enrichment of the privileged few. The Democrats in the Legislature cannot afford to make any mistake in this matter.

p. 20, col. 2

THE CHILDREN’S HERITAGE.

IN AID OF COMBINATIONS.

Boston Post.

At no period have combinations for the restriction of production and the increase of prices to consumers sprung up so rapidly or assumed such substantial form as during the few months in which they have enjoyed the “protection” of the McKinley tariff act. The agricultural machine trust, against which the Western farmers are preparing to rise in revolt, is of the greatest importance locally among the more recent combinations; but one that has a wider range is that of the plate glass manufacturers. The latest movement of this combination is to decree an advance of 30 per cent. in prices, following the example of the manufacturers of window glass. The increase of the tariff tax upon imported plate glass—which affects mainly the small sizes, alhough^sic the administrative customes^sic act adds to the burden on all sizes—gives a considerable margin. of which^sic advantage is taken. The manner in which the foreign producer is to be made to pay this tax would puzzle even the Boston Journal to show.

THE YEAR THAT HAS GONE.

Boston Globe.

Social problems were never so much considered in any year of the world’s history, we believe, as in the last twelvemonth; and the idea that enforced poverty and idleness is a disease which can be cured has now become a settled conviction with thousands who not long ago regarded these disagreeable things as the natural and inevitable lot of the great majority—just as, a short time ago, it was thought that pulmonary consumption would always remain as a scourge of the human race. In this country the aroused political perceptions of the people have borne some practical fruit in the most sweeping popular victory at the elections that any party ever won in this country. The year just closing was red hot with discussion about a great question involving the people’s liberty to exchange the products of their labor, and at last there is no longer any doubt that the walls of prejudice are breaking down.

THE DIFFERENCE IS IN THE STANDPOINT.

Chicago Herald.

Editor of the Daily Protective Tariff (at home)—Want a new dress^sic! You must be crazy, Maria, to ask for such a thing with prices way up out of sight on account of the McKinley bill.

The same great mind (in his sanctum writing)—As a matter of fact, the material for women’s wearing attire, which vulgar people call “clothes,” such as silks, Henriettas, plushes, furs, etc., is sold at a lower price since the passage of the poor man’s blessing, the McKinley bill.

IT’S A NEW WORD, BUT FITS.

The American Stationer.

“A big house McKinlied last week.”

“McKinlied?”

“Yes; went up.”

IT COSTS TOO MUCH.

New York Herald, January 1.

It costs us very close on nine hundred dollars a minute to keep the Federal government in running order.

THE SINGLE TAX PLATFORM.

SINGLE TAX LEAGUE OF THE UNITED STATES.

[Advertisement] Scott’s Emulsion

Stop that

CHRONIC COUGH NOW!

For if you do not it may become consumptive. For Consumption, Scrofula, General Debility and Wasting Diseases, there is nothing like

SCOTT’S EMULSION

Of Pure Cod Liver Oil and HYPOPHOSPHITES Of Lime and Soda.

It is almost as palatable as milk. Far better than other so-called Emulsions. A wonderful flesh producer.

Scott’s Emulsion

There are poor imitations. Get the genuine.

Back Numbers Wanted

We need, to complete Volume I. of THE STANDARD, Nos. 1 and 2.

We will send twenty cents’ worth of Tracts in exchange for either of these numbers.

[Advertisement] Concord Co-operative Printing Co. 

Concord Co-operative Printing Co. (Ld.)

104 ELM ST., COR. CANAL, NEW YORK.

Book, Job and Newspaper Printing.

[Advertisement] Henry George & Co., Publishers

HENRY GEORGE & CO.,

PUBLISHERS,

42 University Place, New York City.

THE STANDARD

CONTENTS.

Editorial: To Sail for Bermuda—George Bancroft—Mr. Davies’ Lecture—Irish Politics—Governor Abbett’s Message—A Legislator Arrested—Senatorial Nominations—The New Hampshire Thieves—Nebraska’s Troubles—A Single Tax Assessor—Taxing Personal Property—Mr. Thurber’s Letter—Torpid Single Taxers—Taxing Foreign Capital—Deepening the Hudson—Citizens’ Alliance—A Real Estate Agent’s Argument—A Foolish Paper—State Ownership of Land—How to Get Immigrants—The Oleomargarine Tax—The Speech of Ingalls—Hill for Senator—The Force Bill—Connecticut—Constitution Tinkering—Gold Mortgages—Trusts Triumphant—The Adirondack Park—What Real Wool Growers Want—New York’s Assessment.

Is a Tax on Ground-Rent Paid by the Tenant? - - - Thomas G. Shearman

Equalizing Local Assessments, - - - - - - - - - E. J. Shriver

Notes and Queries.

The Fight for Free Trade.

Current Thought.

Letters to the Editor.

Comments on “The Standard.”

Open Letter from F. B. Thurber.

Single Tax in France.

Missouri Democrats and Single Tax.

Undervaluation of Real Estate.

The Single Tax Clubs.

Live Mayors in Massachusetts.

Single Tax News.

[Advertisement] The Single Tax Library.

(Entered at Post Office, New York, as second-class mail matter.)

A Set of Tracts (exclusive of Books), from Nos. 1 to 36, will be sent for 40 cents. The price will increase with the addition of new Tracts.

Cents.

1. A Syllabus of Progress and Poverty. Louis F. Post. 8 pages …. 3
2. Out of print.
3. First Principles. Henry George. 4 pages …. 2
4. The Right to the Use of the Earth. Herbert Spencer. 4 pages…. 2
5. Farmers and the Single Tax. Thomas G. Shearman. 8 Pages …. 3
6. The Canons of Taxation. Henry George. 4 pages …. 2
7. A Lawyer’s Reply to Criticisms. Samuel B. Clark. 16 pages…. 4
8. Back to the Land. Bishop Nulty. 16 pages …. 4
9. The Single Tax. Thomas G. Shearman. 8 pages. …. 3
10. The American Farmer. Henry George. 4 pages…. 2
11. Unemployed Labor. Henry George. 4 pages …. 2
12. The Case Plainly Stated. H. F. Ring. 8 pages…. 3
13. Social Problems. 342 pages. 12mo. Paper…. 35
14. Objections to the Land Tax. Thomas G. Shearman. 4 pages …. 2
15. Land Taxation. A Conversation Between David Dudley Field and Henry George. 4 pages …. 2
16. How to Increase Profits. A. J. Steers. 2 pages …. 1
17. The New Political Economy. E. O. Brown. 4 pages …. 2
18. Thy Kingdom Come. Henry George. 4 pages. …. 2
19. The Functions of Government. Henry George. 8 pages …. 3
20. The Menace of Plutocracy. Thomas G. Shearman. 8 pages…. 3
21. Tenement House Morality. J. O. S. Huntington. 4 pages…. 2 22, 23, 24, out of print.
22. Taxing Land Values. Henry George. 8 pages…. 3
23. Henry George’s Mistakes. Thomas G. Shearman. 8 pages …. 3
24. The Democratic Principle. Henry George. 8 pages …. 3
25. Progress and Poverty. Henry George. 512 pages …. 35
26. Out of print.
27. Property in Land. Henry George. 77 pages …. 15 31 and 32, out of print
28. The Gospel and the People. Bishop Huntington. 4 pages …. 2
29. Single Tax Platform. By Henry George. 2 pages. …. 1
30. Justice the Object—Taxation the Means. Henry George. 8 pages…. 3
31. One Tax Enough. Thomas G. Shearman. 8 pages…. 3

[Advertisement] THE SINGLE TAX OF HYGIENE.

[Advertisement] MORRIS R. GEORGE,

Manufacturing Jeweler

AND

ENGRAVER.

Society Badges and Jewels Made to Order

S. E. COR. 11th and SANSOM STS ,

PHILADELPHIA.

JOBBING. DIAMONDS RESET, ETC.

[Advertisement] A Single Tax Button in Gold.

We have just received a neat button in gold, with blue enamel ground. It has the cat’s head in the centre with “Single” above it and “Tax” below it. It is round in shape and smaller than a three-cent piece. Sent to any address on receipt of fifty cents.

HENRY GEORGE & CO., 42 University Place, New York.

THE STANDARD.

[Advertisement] Consumption Cured.

An old physician, retired from practice, had placed in his hands by an East India missionary the formula of a simple vegetable remedy for the speedy and permanent cure of Consumption, Bronchitis, Catarrh, Asthma and all Throat and Lung Affections, also a positive and radical cure for Nervous Debility and all Nervous Complaints. Having tested its wonderful curative powers in thousands of cases, and desiring to relieve human suffer- ing, I will send free of charge to all who wish it this recipe in German, French or English, with full directions for preparing and using. Sent by mail, by addressing, with stamp, naming this paper, W. A. NOYES, [820?] Powers’ Block, Rochester, N. Y.

[Advertisement] MASON & HAMLIN

MASON & HAMLIN

[Illustration: an upright piano/organ cabinet]

ORGANS:

Highest Honors at all Great World’s Exhibitions since 1867. One hundred styles, $22 to $900. For Cash, Easy Payments and rented.

PIANOS:

The Improved Mode of Stringing Pianos, invented by Mason & Hamlin in [1882?], is a great advance in Piano construction, experts pronouncing it the

Greatest Improvement in Pianos in Half a Century.

Illustrated Catalogues Free.

ORGAN & PIANO CO.

BOSTON. NEW YORK. CHICAGO.

[Advertisement] Handy Binders for The Standard.

Handy Binders for The Standard.

A lot of Handy Binders, made especially for filing THE STANDARD, are now ready.

Price—75 Cents, to any address.

Address

THE STANDARD,

42 University Place, New York City.

[Advertisement] [Holland’s?] Coffee and Dining Rooms

[Holland’s?] Coffee and Dining Rooms

[illegible] Fourth Av., bet. 13th and 14th Sts.

p. 24, col. 2

[Advertisement] LOVELY AS A ROSE! (Glenn’s Sulphur Soap)

LOVELY AS A ROSE!

As we gaze upon a new-blown rose, we involuntarily exclaim, “How lovely!” Our admiration is excited by the color and delicate tints of the flower. So it is with

A Beautiful Maiden.

Her clear velvet-like skin and peach-bloom complexion fascinate us. These exquisite charms always result from the use of

GLENN’S SULPHUR SOAP.

A never-failing remedy for removing all imperfections from the skin and making the complexion

PEERLESSLY BEAUTIFUL.

FOR SALE BY ALL DRUGGISTS. BEWARE OF IMITATIONS.

Glenn’s Soap will be sent by mail for 30 cts. for one cake, or 75 cts. for three cakes by C. N. CRITTENTON, Sole Proprietor, 115 Fulton Street, New York City.

[Advertisement] Concord Co-operative Printing Co. (Ld.)

Concord Co-operative Printing Co. (Ld.)

[104?] ELM ST., COR. CANAL, NEW YORK.

Book, Job and Newspaper Printing.

p. 24, col. 3

[Advertisement] Scott’s Emulsion

[Illustration: a mother seated with a child leaning against her; a schoolbag/slate in the child’s hand]

Some Children Growing Too Fast

become listless, fretful, without energy, thin and weak. But you can fortify them and build them up, by the use of

SCOTT’S EMULSION

OF PURE COD LIVER OIL AND HYPOPHOSPHITES

Of Lime and Soda.

They will take it readily, for it is almost as palatable as milk. And it should be remembered that AS A PREVENTIVE OR CURE OF COUGHS OR COLDS, IN BOTH THE OLD AND YOUNG, IT IS UNEQUALLED. Avoid substitutions offered.

[Advertisement] Van Houten’s Cocoa

[Display advertisement in a decorative scroll border; lettering transcribed below]

VAN HOUTEN’S COCOA

PURE. SOLUBLE, Delicious

THE STANDARD COCOA OF THE WORLD. A SUBSTITUTE FOR TEA & COFFEE. Easily Digested—Made Instantly.

HIGHEST AWARDS AT PRINCIPAL EXHIBITIONS. The Original—Take no other.

“Best & Goes Farthest—Largest Sale in the World—Once Tried, Always Used.”

[Advertisement] Ely’s Cream Balm

[Display advertisement, white lettering on black; at right a phrenological profile head lettered with the ailments the balm cures]

Ely’s Cream Balm For

CATARRH

THE POSITIVE CURE.

ELY BROTHERS, [56?] Warren St., New York. Price [50?] cts.

[Lettering on the head:] THE CURE FOR CATARRH COLD IN HEAD HAY FEVER [DEAFNESS?] [HEADACHE?] ELY’S CREAM BALM

[Advertisement] “PROTECTION OR FREE TRADE?” FOR TEN CENTS.

“PROTECTION OR FREE TRADE?”

FOR TEN CENTS.

To insure the success of the half million edition of “Protection or Free Trade?” at TEN cents a copy, postage paid, every Reformer is urgently requested to fill out this blank, subscribe for as many copies as possible, and ask his friends to do the same. “He gives twice who gives quickly.”

[Order form. Printed vertically at left:] Return when signed to W. J. ATKINSON, [12?] UNION SQUARE, N. Y.

I hereby subscribe for . . . . . . . . . . copies of a special paper covered edition of “PROTECTION OR FREE TRADE” by Henry George, for which I agree to pay ten cents per copy.

Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

No. and Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

City or Town . . . . . . . . . . State . . . . . . . . . .

Deliver to. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

“Written with a clearness, a vigor and a terseness that at once attract.”—Philadelphia Record.

“Whatever may be Henry George’s defects as an author he never writes a dull book.”—Home Weekly^sic

“The fullest and clearest presentation of a much disputed subject yet made.”—Kansas City Times.

“An argument of great ingenuity and power, logically worked out and attractively formu-lated.”—Chicago Times.

“Another great book, written in that clear, eloquent, analytical style that made fame for”Progress and Poverty.” The most thorough investigation of the subject that has yet been put into type.”—N. Y. News.

[Advertisement] Pears’ Soap

Pears’ Soap

Fair white hands.

Bright clear complexion

Soft healthful skin.

“PEARS’—The Great English Complexion SOAP,—Sold Everywhere.”