January 28, 1891 Vol. IX, No. 4Whole No. 213

THE FORCE BILL.

—The setting aside of the gag law resolutions will probably render it impossible to again get the Force bill before the Senate, and will certainly make it highly improbable that that measure can become a law. Nevertheless, it is well that all over the country Democratic Legislatures have practically given notice that if such a bill is to be passed by the discredited representatives of a minority of the people, who still, unfortunately, hold power at Washington, no money will be appropriated by their respective States for the World’s Fair. This is an entirely logical proceeding. If the United States are to have such a fair, it must be a visible token of their unity and prosperity. The attempt to offer the world such a token in the face of the passage of a monstrous measure designed to destroy the freedom of elections, perpetuate sectional hatred and subject a large portion of our people to the irresponsible domination of a partisan judiciary, would be a piece of gross hypocrisy. If, after more than a century of free government in the United States, we have come to such a pass, instead of rejoicing, we should have a national fast day of humiliation and prayer to express our regret that Columbus ever discovered America.

NEBRASKA’S NEW MUDDLE.

—The Supreme Court of Nebraska, after admonishing ex-Governor Thayer to quietly surrender his office, has now decided as to the Powers-Boyd contest (Powers is the Alliance claimant), that the Legislature could not constitutionally meet in joint convention to count the votes for Governor without obtaining the Governor’s signature. There must now be another joint convention called after six days’ notice, and if the ex-Governor refuses to sign the resolution calling it, according to the Supreme Court decision, he can thus prevent any canvass of the votes and hold over himself. No more utter nonsense was ever uttered by a judicial body, and we cannot believe that Nebraskans have already been civilized into the effeminacy that makes such trifling with the people’s mandate possible.

HOW LONG?

—“How much longer,” shrieked Mr. Henderson, of Illinois, “is the House to sit and hear the Speaker insulted day by day?” Until the 4th of March, we presume, if the just denunciation of the outrageous usurpations of power and the gross unfairness of Speaker Reed are to be regarded as insults. There ought to be no mincing of words in speaking of Mr. Reed. Strong language is not always to be commended, but when men conspire to overthrow freedom of debate and to prevent deliberation in a legislative body, it is a necessary part of any truly educational campaign to denounce them as the scoundrels that they are.

SENATORS BY POPULAR VOTE.

—The Minnesota House of Representatives has adopted a joint resolution asking the Minnesota Congressional delegation to support the submission of a constitutional amendment providing for the election of United States Senators by popular vote. This demand is also made by the Farmers’ Alliance and by the new confederation of farmers and workingmen’s organizations recently formed in Washington. There is every reason why such an amendment should be passed, since, so long as we must put

p. 1, col. 2 up with the United States Senate, it is desirable that it should represent the people instead of the monopolists who now control it. Whatever may have been the theory that suggested the election of Senators by the State Legislatures, abundant experience has proved that it does not work well in practice, that it is a potent source of corruption, and that it has an evil effect in tying together, more closely than is necessary or desirable, State and national issues. The Democratic party of Illinois set a good example in putting Mr. Palmer before the people of that State, and any successful combination between the Republicans and the three independent farmers in the Legislature to defeat General Palmer, will create a feeling of indignation in Illinois that will give a wonderful impetus to the new movement and may result in incorporating a demand for such a constitutional amendment in the platform of one or both the great political parties.

WHY DID THEY DO IT?

—Ex-Congressman Hansbrough, a Republican, was, on the seventeenth ballot, elected United States Senator from North Dakota to succeed Senator Pierce. The Republicans were divided and the Democrats finally voted for Hansbrough and elected him. An Associated Press despatch says, “Pierce was objected to because of the way he distributed patronage.” This certainly cannot account for Democratic support for his opponent. Unless the new Senator is less a Republican partisan than Pierce the action of the Democrats is unaccountable.

INVESTIGATING IMMIGRANTS.

—The American Patriotic League sends to THE STANDARD office a petition urging Congress to insert in any bill for the regulation of immigration a requirement that the emigrant shall give to the American Consul at the point of embarkation previous notice of his intention, in order that said Consul may issue to him, in case he is so disposed, a certificate stating that said emigrant is not inimical to American institutions, that he can read his native language, that he is physically and mentally sound, not under contract to perform labor of any kind in the United States, and that he is not, and never has been, a criminal or a pauper. THE STANDARD does not propose to urge any such course, for the simple and sufficient reason that it does not believe in setting up an inquisitorial investigation into the opinions of immigrants, and has no fear that under proper conditions of justice there is any likelihood of too many people coming to the United States. Imagine an ordinary consul appointed to please some party boss sitting in judgment on what opinions are inimical to American institutions!

TAXING UNSEEN COAL.

—The Supreme Court of Illinois has just sustained the right of James D. Baker, collector of St. Clair County, to collect from the Consolidated Coal Company, of St. Louis, a tax on an assessment made by Assessor Stookey, of St. Clair Township, on coal owned by the company, under the [surface?] of that township. The present case involves the trifling sum of $50, but the effect of the decision is of great importance to Illinois, and, says a despatch from St. Louis, “it will bring into the Treasury thousands of dollars each year in taxes from the vast coal [fields?] that have never been taxed, and relieve the continued on p. 2 →

[continued on page 2]

A LIBERAL VICTORY.

—The election of Mr. Furness, the Gladstonian candidate, at Hartlepool last week, to fill a vacancy caused by the death of a Unionist, has naturally elated the Liberals and cast down the Tories. This is the first election that has taken place since Parnell split the Irish party into two factions, and the fight was made and won on the Home Rule issue, the Liberal leaders seeing no reason for abandoning their principles because Parnell has betrayed and derided his party. They simply recognize McCarthy, the new leader of the Irish party, and ignore the seceders. Nevertheless, the mad ex-leader has the tremendous assurance to claim as his own, and as against Gladstone, this victory for a Gladstonian candidate in an English constituency. Mr. Parnell’s followers must be people of small intelligence if he dare make such claims in addressing them.

KALAKAUA DEAD.

—The useless career of King Kalakaua terminated on January 20, with the death of the preposterous monarch of the toy kingdom. He died at San Francisco from Bright’s disease. As kings go, Kalakaua is rather to be commended, since he did more harm to himself than he ever did to his kingdom, and was, take him all in all, a good fellow in the eyes of the naval officers and travelers who from time to time visited his domain. He will be succeeded by his sister, who is married to an American, and it is probable that the fiction of royal rule will be kept up in the Hawaiian Islands, though the foreign residents will still have as much, or more, than ever to say in running the government. The queer thing about this kingdom is that it probably could not exist, as such, for a year if it were not for the quiet but effective protection given to it by the king-hating American republic. By the way, the name of the American husband of the new Queen Liliuokalani is John O. Dominis. Perhaps his name led her to believe that he was of royal extraction, and a born ruler of men.

THE ARGENTINE COLLAPSE.

—We regret that the pressure on our space will not permit us to reproduce in full the admirable article of Mr. E. Yancey Cohen in the Commercial Advertiser of January 21. An abstract of it appears elsewhere. Mr. Cohen unmistakably puts his finger on the cause of the commercial calamity in the South American republic, which nearly ruined the great banking house of the Barings, and for a time demoralized the financial and commercial centres of two continents. He also shows that the crazy speculation in land that seeks to make communities rich by rendering the access of labor to natural opportunities for production difficult is now operative in new countries throughout the world, and that it is closing up the avenue of Europe’s escape from the consequences of the maintenance of the same policy in the old countries. The whole article will repay perusal, and we sincerely hope that it will stir to thought the large and growing circle of the Commercial’s readers. By the way, people who are really interested in the investigation of important economic problems cannot afford to neglect the Commercial. It is in many ways the best evening paper printed in New York^sic,

p. 2, col. 2

BALLOT REFORM IN NEW JERSEY.

—The New Jersey edition of the World for January 18 contained a paragraph declaring that the existing ballot law in that State will require amendment in several particulars, which is doubtless true. One remark in the paragraph, however, causes alarm among sincere ballot reformers. It is: “The cost under the new system is enormous, and it can be reduced materially by having the registry list do for four or five years, instead of having a new one every year.” Any such change as is here suggested would be a dangerous step backward. It would open a way for the continuance of the election frauds for which Hudson County has long been notorious, and make easy the voting of dead men, and the impersonation of absentees. We have tried the system of annual personal registry in New York for years, and it is an absolute essential to pure elections. The plea that it is expensive is absurd. The necessary cost of pure and free elections must be met. The alternative is to save money by abolishing all elections.

SENATORS RE-ELECTED.

—Senators Platt, of Connecticut; West, of Missouri^sicsic: Teller, of Colorado; Jones, of Arkansas; Mitchell, of Oregon; Voorhees, of Indiana^sic: Vance, of North Carolina, and Squire, of Washington, have been re-elected, practically without serious opposition, though at one time there was a prospect that the Farmers’ Alliance members in North Carolina would try to defeat Mr. Vance. In none of these cases, of course, does the election cause any change in the political complexion of the Senate.

THE CHEROKEE STRIP.

—This is the name of the latest tract of land about to be acquired through pressure on the Indians, and it was expected that it would be opened to settlers yesterday or to-day. Despatches to the daily press indicate that from seven to ten thousand people are spread out along the border waiting for the signal to rush in and take possession of the coveted country. There are no soldiers present, and fights for specially valuable locations are anticipated. Does this indicate that there is plenty of good land out West to be had for the asking?

FUSION IN THE NORTHWEST.

—The agreement in sentiment on the tariff question between the Democrats and the Alliance men of the West, points to the possibility of a union between the two parties in that portion of the country. If the Democrats accept the pawnbroker plank in the Farmers’ platform they will alienate their supporters in the East, while their acceptance of the free coinage plank will have a similar tendency, though it will not be so fatal to unity as would be a plank in the national platform accepting the proposal of the Farmers’ Alliance. If the latter organization could be persuaded to get rid of that silly plank, which is doubtless kept in its platform for the very purpose of creating a third party diversion, we should doubtless see a combination that would unquestionably sweep the Republican party out of existence and put an end to the protective system. That once accomplished the formation of new parties on new issues would be entirely justifiable and perhaps necessary.

AN EXTRA SESSION.

—The malignity and persistence of Messrs. Hoar and Aldrich have probably already made it impossible to pass the necessary appropriation bills at this session of Congress. Should such prove to be the case an extra session will be necessary, and there is a growing opinion that it cannot be avoided. We are not of those who regard the early meeting of the new Congress with dread. In the first place, we know of no reason for suspecting the members-elect of unwisdom or a tendency toward impru- continued on p. 3 →

[continued on page 3]

GOVERNOR PATTISON INAUGURATED.

—Governor Pattison of Pennsylvania was inaugurated on Tuesday of last week and began his administration auspiciously by appointing William F. Harrity Secretary of State: W. U. Hensel, Attorney-General; and Wm. McClelland, Adjutant-General. They are all men of strength and ability, with a reputation that extends beyond their own commonwealth. The Governor, in his message dwelt specially on the necessity for the establishment of the Australian system of voting. Unfortunately he addresses a Legislature Republican in both branches, to which it is now believed his advice will be given in vain. The Democratic caucus of the Pennsylvania Legislature also honored itself by nominating Hon. Chauncey F. Black as its candidate for United States Senator, against Cameron. Of course Cameron was elected, as the Republicans have a large majority on joint ballot.

INGALLS’ CHANCES.

—The latest despatches from Topeka declare that, despite his persistent boasting, Ingalls is out of the race for the Senatorship, and that an Alliance man will certainly be elected to succeed him. The daily press has so absolutely failed to give any trustworthy news from Kansas that its predictions as to who will succeed Ingalls are not worth recording. A despatch to yesterday’s Times said that Willetts^sic, the Alliance candidate for Governor, was the coming man, and it declared that “he is fully as ignorant as Congressman Simpson, without the wit of the latter!” This despatch is colored by the malignant prejudice that impregnates and colors the whole news management of the Times, and which practically neutralizes the value of the editorial page of the paper. Simpson is a man who does not make any pretuse^sic to elegance, and he has not been conventionally educated, but he has positive convictions well thought out, and he is able to back them up by sound argument. He is, doubtless, one of the most capable men mentioned in connection with the Kansas Senatorship. Unfortunately there was no chance for the election of so good a man, if a despatch to Tuesday’s evening papers announcing that Pfeffer^sic, editor of the Kansas Farmer, had received the Alliance caucus nomination, turns out to be true. There are still rumors of treachery by Republican Alliance men in the interests of Ingalls. The question will doubtless be settled before this issue of THE STANDARD reaches its readers.

SINGLE TAX CLUBS.

—Mr. James J. Meade laments that there are only two Single Tax club rooms in this great city, which has a population greater than that of many states. He is strongly of the opinion that if a proper effort were made a club could be established in each assembly district. We do not share Mr. Meade’s opinion. The work necessarily done by a Single Tax club is one of propaganda, requiring the sacrifice of time and money. In times of excitement men are willing to make such sacrifices, but no cause can command

p. 3, col. 2 them the year round. Take the tariff question as an instance. It interests a much larger body of people than we have thus far been able to attract to the Single Tax movement. These people have been able to establish a great club, which has raised large sums of money for propaganda work. That club, however, has never been able to command the personal services of a tenth of its members. Its small body of workers, however, possessed of extraordinary zeal and activity, have accomplished wonders, and made the name of the Reform Club famous throughout the United States. The fact that it is a social organizanion^sic has assisted in attracting to it people who are able and willing to contribute the money necessary to enable its workers to carry out their plans. In the city of New York those who had belonged to various small clubs resolved to unite their energies in forming the Manhattan Club. That club may not have done everything that our friends could desire, but probably it has done as much as any other organization in proportion to the means at its disposal. Of course it has no right to oppose the formation of other clubs, but if it were to use its energies and what little money it has to promote the formation of clubs where they do not spring up naturally, it would unquestionably so diffuse its efforts that the only result would be the formation of organizations that, in all probability, would not long remain in existence. We appreciate the feeling that prompts Mr. Meade’s suggestion, but at the same time we think he is mistaken, and that it is far better to build up one strong and powerful club in a city, which shall, through its committees, hold meetings when occasions arise, rather than have a dozen or twenty feeble organizations chiefly concerned with the struggle for their own existence.

THE GAG LAW PROPOSAL.

—Of course everybody understands that the Democrats in the United States Senate are purposely consuming time in debate, to prevent the adoption of the gag law that Mr. Aldrich is trying to force through the Senate, as a preliminary to the passage of the Force bill. In doing this, the Democrats are exercising an extraordinary power, used from time to time in some important crisis, for which they must expect to be called to account before the people. As they are trying to prevent a discredited party from enacting laws already condemned by the people, the Democrats are not afraid of being called to account for their conduct. They have no doubt that the people will justify it. They are, however, acting strictly within their legal rights, and the proposed closure resolution can only be passed by a revolutionary defiance of existing rules through an arbitrary decision by Vice-President Morton, in open and deliberate violation of rules that he has sworn to obey and enforce.

There cannot be two opinions about the lawlessness of the Republican attitude. The following colloquy during the debate of last Thursday is conclusive as to this:

Mr. Stewart inquired whether it was proper for the Senate to violate its own rules. [Democratic laughter.]

Mr. Aldrich answered that that was a question be did not exactly understand. When a bill was under consideration the body was bound to follow the rules it had adopted until they were changed. It was clearly the right of the Senate under the Constitution and in accordance with the provisions of unwritten law in every country to change its rules.

Mr. Harris inquired whether, in changing its rules, the Senate must not be governed by its existing rules.

Mr. Aldrich replied that it should not, if the existing rules were of such a nature as to prevent action.

Here we have the open confession of the author of the pending proposal, that he and those acting with him, the Vice-President presumably among them, intend to refuse to be governed by existing rules while making new rules, temporary in their character and for a specific evil purpose. This was clearly shown by Senator Stewart (Republican), of Nevada, in his argument against the continued on p. 4 →

[text breaks off mid-sentence at the foot of the column; no continuation line is printed on this page]

THE BOULOGNE FOLLY.

THE BOULOGNE FOLLY.—No one can accuse the London Star of blind devotion to the Liberal party. It is a Radical, rather than a Liberal, organ, and its support of Home Rule for Ireland has been based on the conviction that the proposed change is just, rather than on any idea that it is a clever trick to win support for a party. As a friend of Home Rule, the Star takes precisely the same view of Mr. Parnell’s conduct that has been freely expressed by THE STANDARD, and it views with impatience, if not alarm, the silly conferences in which Mr. O’Brien has been engaged. In its issue of January 10 it said: “We entirely sympathize with the feeling of uneasiness created among many English supporters of Home Rule by the repeated pourparleurs^sic at Boulogne.” It desires, it says, “to see an end put to negotiations with a man who has no longer any proper or regular association with Irish Nationalism at all.” It thus continues:

We look at Mr. Parnell’s position purely in the light of the service or the disservice he can do to such an ideal. Obviously he can do nothing but mar, and, finally, efface it. What part can he play in constitutional agitation after his appeal to physical force? What moral aid can he give to his countrymen when he has preferred his private pleasures to their interests, and has, in a moment of selfish pique, stamped on his own record, broken up his own battalions and taken to the hills, with a mere band of guerillas drawn from the old hopeless revolutionary campaign? How is such a man possible? What is the object of negotiating with him? What possible end can he have in view but an ambitious one, which can only be compassed at Ireland’s cost, and to her ultimate ruin?

We are glad to find the Star taking this position. Now and then we hear the suggestion made on this side of the Atlantic that it is unfair to single out Mr. Parnell for attack because of a sin of which so many other public men are guilty. Such critics show an utter misunderstanding of the situation. Mr. Parnell is not attacked simply on account of his relations with Mrs. O’Shea, though his political offence arises out of that affair. When that scandal was made public, the question that Mr. Parnell, as a public man, was bound to put to himself was: How will this exposure affect my party and its cause? There could be little doubt as to the answer; but there was no doubt whatever after Mr. Parnell had privately heard from Mr. Gladstone, before the first meeting of the Irish members of Parliament to consider the crisis. The concealment of Mr. Gladstone’s opinion from those then assembled was a shameful piece of deceit; but it was only the beginning of a long series of treacheries that have made it impossible for any sensible man to trust Mr. Parnell, and hence negotiation with him is absurd.

From the moment that it became manifest that Mr. Parnell’s retirement was not only essential to the continued co-operation of the English Liberal party but to the unity of the Irish party there was but one course open to Mr. Parnell as a patriot or as an honorable man, and that was to retire. His refusal to adopt that course was a political offence of the gravest character, without the least regard to the origin of the difficulty. When his retirement meant union among the Irish and continued support of Home Rule by the English Liberals, he not only refused to retire but defied a majority vote dismissing him from the leadership, and he has since that time omitted no effort to divide the Irish and [word divided “alien-/ate” across the column break; given whole at the start of c2]

p. 6, col. 2 alienate their only possible allies. But one of two interpretations of his course can be accepted. Either he is a selfish traitor, wilfully sacrificing his party and its cause, or he is dominated by that insane conceit and egotism which is characteristic of the earlier stages of paresis. Negotiations with such a man are worse than foolish, and their continuance deservedly forfeits the confidence alike of friends and foes.

HOW TO GET RICH.

HOW TO GET RICH.—A meeting of moneyed men was recently held at the Mount Morris Bank Building, in Harlem, to organize a corporation to “operate” in real estate in “the Twenty-third and Twenty-fourth Wards of New York City, and the adjacent towns of Westchester County. The circular^sic calling the meeting refers to the rapid growth of population in New York, and calls attention to the fact that the city can only grow northward, that is, in the Twelfth, Twenty-third and Twenty-fourth Wards. It thus continues:

In the last ten years the Twelfth Ward has grown three hundred and thirty-seven per cent. in population; in assessed valuation, from seventy-five million dollars to two hundred and eight million dollars. The population of the Twenty-third and Twenty-fourth Wards has increased from forty-one thousand in 1880 to eighty-one thousand in 1890. Rapid transit reached Harlem River in 1879—thus the Twelfth Ward has reaped a harvest in the last ten years. Rapid transit and other improvements are now being rapidly pushed in every direction in the Twenty-third and Twenty-fourth Wards, and millions of dollars are being annually expended in public and private improvements in these wards. The next ten years will see the Twenty-third and Twenty-fourth Wards as successful as the Twelfth Ward has been the last ten years. The very outskirts of these wards can now be reached from the City Hall in less time than Eightieth street could twelve years ago. The two thousand acres of land taken in these wards by the city for ten separate public parks will greatly enhance the value of real estate there.

We give an instance, taken from the report of the Commission on these parks, made to the Legislature in 1884, of rise in value of real estate adjoining Central Park: “The property in question is bounded by Seventy-ninth and Eightieth streets, Fifth and Madison avenues—one block of ground. In 1852, the year before the Park bill was passed, it sold for $3,000; in 1853, for $4,500; after the bill had been passed it sold for $10,000. In 1859 it was sold to George Douglass for $40,000, an increase of 1,300 per cent. in five years. In 1869, twelve years later, Mr. Douglass refused one million two hundred and fifty thousand dollars from two different parties.” Commissioner Coleman, of the Tax Department, stated before the Fasset Committee^sic in October last, that Robert Bonner had lately sold one lot adjoining Central Park for one million dollars. History repeats itself, it will do so in the Twenty-third and Twenty-fourth Wards.

The gentlemen issuing this circular are right. History will repeat itself in the Annexed District, across the Harlem, with absolute certainty. The public improvements made at the common expense and the private improvements made for individual use and benefit will enormously increase land values. Unless Brooklyn and New York are consolidated the only suburbs that this city can possibly have will be in the Annexed District and in Westchester County. The men who get hold of the land in that region, and hold it, will make fortunes through their legal power to compel others to pay roundly for the privilege of living there. If the gentlemen who met last month in Harlem do not get this vast profit some one else will, and it is not necessary that those who finally obtain it shall do much toward promoting the improvements that are to make them rich.

There is a charming frankness about this circular, however, that will be keenly appreciated by our readers. Its authors make no pretense that the people who profited by the enormous increase of land values in Harlem caused that increase. They ascribe the rise to rapid transit. Certainly the builders of the elevated roads did not, as such, profit by this rise in values. They show the same thing as clearly in their statements about property near Central Park. That great improvement was paid for by the people of New York and it is worth to them all it cost them. It was these same people, however, who caused the incidental though inevitable increase in value in the lands adjacent to the park. But the public did not get that increase. It went to continued on p. 7 →

[continued on next page]

SHIFTING A TAX UPON GROUND RENT.

He who believes that an ad valorem tax upon [land?] can be shifted from landlord to tenant, forgets [the?] cause of ground rent. It is the competition of [individuals?] seeking to get the most desirable locations, [illegible] weighing the relative advantages of attainable [sites?] continued on p. 8 →

[The page ends here mid-sentence; the article continues on a later page. The right edge of the scan cuts off the last letters of the lines at the foot of this column.]

AN OPEN LETTER.

F. B. THURBER, Esq.—DEAR SIR: As you have undertaken to “whip me over the back” of the editor of THE STANDARD, I may be permitted to administer some correction to your brother over yours, the question at issue being between him, for whom you are a champion, and myself. I adopt this intermediate method the more readily because Mr. H. K. Thurber is still owing me a letter, as will appear by the following correspondence:

H. K. THURBER, Esq.—DEAR SIR: In a letter to the press you say that I [am?] “known as the paid promoter of foreign steamship interests,” and you [reaffirm?] this assertion emphatically in the last number of Export and Finance. Will you kindly inform me whence you derived your knowledge? Yours truly,

St. Denis Hotel, New York, November 6, 1889.

JOHN CODMAN.

To which Mr. Thurber made this reply:

JOHN CODMAN, Esq.—DEAR SIR: Your favor of 6th inst. came duly to hand this morning, and I hastily answer the same. In regard to what has [been?] published in the Export and Finance I have not seen it, and do not know what they have published. They may have interviewed me. In regard to the letter in the press that, of course, I assume the whole responsibility of; and, in relation to my statement of your being the paid agent of foreign steamship companies, I would ask your indulgence for a few days, in [order?] to answer your question, and if I am wrong will frankly acknowledge the same. Yours truly,

[146?] West Twelfth street, November 7, 1889.

H. K. THURBER.

In answer to this I said “Certainly. Take all the time you need, and let me know the result of your inquiries.” Of course a reasonable time was understood. Now, don’t you think that fourteen months is rather long to wait for an answer to come from the next street? Please remind your excellent brother, and ask him to send either the apology that is due for his false statement or his proof of its truth with a demand for the $10,000 to which he is entitled if he can substantiate it.

Aside from this personal matter, which is introduced to show the pertinence of the old proverb, Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, and thereby to test the value of those statements of Mr. H. K. Thurber, which directly interest the public. I will take up your paragraphs seriatim.

I am not pecuniarily interested in American shipping, but like many other Americans, both Republicans and Democrats, I glory in the memories of Paul Jones and Captain Lawrence, and am not yet ready to “give up the ship.”

So do I. But I cannot see what bearing it has, excepting that the ship commanded by Paul Jones was foreign built, and, therefore, according to your theory, should not have been entitled to the American flag.

Now let us see how far the men who are asking aid for American shipping deserve the denunciation of yourself and Captain Codman.

I know one who does not, and that is my brother, Mr. H. K. Thurber, who, some years ago, invested $[300,000?] in the Brazil Steamship Company, [not?] to make money, but because, as he expressed it, it was a shame that an American merchant should have to send his letters to South America by the way of Liverpool. He afterward accepted the presidency of that line,

p. 8, col. 2 > without salary, and has served it faithfully in order to show that one American steamship line could be made a success.

Well, I am one of those who do not know this. The little incident just related does not strengthen my belief in any assertion that your brother may choose to make. But I do know that he has been a very prosperous man in the grocery trade, and I don’t believe that he ever invested $200,000 in it without some idea of making money. You are injuring his credit as a business man when you tell the public that he put up this large sum of money and served the company without salary so that letters might go directly to South America, instead of by way of Liverpool, especially since this patriotic attempt on his part has been unsuccessful; for the fact is that to-day a letter can reach Rio de Janeiro or Buenos Ayres quicker by way of England than by the slow ships of what is nominally the “United States and Brazilian Mail Steamship Company.”

The Government of Brazil has paid $90,000 annually for carrying its mails. Tne^sic United States Government has paid less than one-tenth of this sum, not enough to pay for the boat hire in landing the mails at the eight ports visited by the ships of this line.

There is sufficient reason why the Government of Brazil should pay this $90,000, and there is no reason why the United States should pay a corresponding sum or anything like it. The ships of this line do not get the $90,000 because of its misnomer, but because, although they terminate their voyages in the United States, they are in effect Brazilian coasters, calling at all the small Brazilian ports on their way, for the convenience of mails and passengers.

If Captain Codman’s theory is correct, every one of the mail carriers on such routes is a thief or a beggar.

Not at all. I have repeatedly urged the propriety of establishing fast mail lines when they are needed, and particularly of giving an ample mail contract to any line that will make the same time to Rio de Janeiro that is made to that port from Southampton. The “United States and Brazil Mail Steamship Line” of slow ships and many delays is as far as possible from being one of that character.

Captain Codman speaks of the lobby at Washington in favor of the shipping bill. It is a shame that American citizens should have to leave their^sic homes and go to Washington to ask for the passage of a bill to place American shipping on an equality with that of other nations. He states that only two per cent. of the English steamers receive compensation for carrying the mails, but he neglects to state that in the beginning every principal line was subsidized until trade developed, so that it could be self-sustaining, when the subsidies, or mail pay, were gradually withdrawn.

Every commercial nation on the face of the earth has practised this policy except the United States.

Perhaps I have been rather hard on the lobby and have not properly estimated the patriotism of those disinterested individuals. Their object is “to place American shipping on an equality with that of other nations” at the expense of other people. “It is a shame that they should be obliged to leave. their homes and go to Washington” when all their employers get out of it is thirty cents per ton for every thousand miles run by their ships which, according to their own estimates, will cost the country $47,000,000. Men who expect to secure this amount of plunder, and, doubtless, to make more, can give up the comforts of home and become reconciled to the table d’hote of the Arlington for a season.

I did “neglect to state that in the beginning every principal line was subsidized,” because it is not true, most of the steamship lines from New York, for instance, never having received any subsidy at all. “Every commercial nation on the face of the earth” has certainly subsidized certain lines of steamships to carry its mails, or what is the same thing, made postal contracts with them. But one thing you “neglect to state,” and that is that “every commercial nation on the face of the earth excepting the United States” has continued on p. 9 →

[continued on next page]

THE TIN PLATE HUMBUG.

The Chicago Tribune of the 8th inst. has very aptly described the tin plate industry in that city as the “The Chicago Tin Plate Humbug^sic.” The article declares that the much vaunted new enterprise of tin plate manufacturing in Chicago is simply the process of coating with imported tin imported black (iron) plates. It is not necessary to go to Chicago to find that enterprise. Black sheets have been tinned in the United States for a good many years, and retinning is very frequently resorted to. There are scores of factories in this city where this is done. Now will any wonderfully wise protectionist please inform me how an industry which requires for its supply imported black plates and imported tin can be developed by excessive duties on the pig tin and the black plates ? And will any economist of the Carey school be able to prove that the protection which is afforded iron makers and tin miners of the United States by a high duty on those articles, can benefit the tin plate manufacturers who do not use a pound of American black plate or American pig tin ?

The Nortons, of Chicago, who are now claiming the right to be listed among especially patriotic Americans because they have inaugurated what they are pleased to call a tin plate industry in Chicago, have gotten up as an advertisement quite a number of enameled tin plate rulers for desk work, upon which they, doubtless with great pride, inform the public that these implements are manufactured from American-made tin plates. But they have no better right to make this announcement than would any of the numerous New York manufacturers, who make more artistic ware from tin plates which they import. The mere act of putting the tin on prepared plates is the simplest kind of mechanical operation, which is generally done by boys and girls. The fine work (that which requires skill, experience and perfection of material) is the manufacture of the black plates, and well the iron barons of Pennsylvania understood this when they placed that excessive duty, imposed by the McKinley bill, on tin plates. It was not the tin mine owners of the West, nor the struggling tin plate industry of the whole country (which only existed in imagination), but it was the Pennsylvania iron roofing asssociations^sic that caused the excessive duty to be imposed—a duty which takes from the American people $15,000,000 (assuming that the American manufacturers would be able to supply the American market), and puts it into the hands of a few grasping monopolists. Simple arithmetic shows that this tax amounts to $1.50 to every man in the United States, a sum that will procure for him for six months an excellent weekly newspaper, which, if he reads it with care, will teach him to know what to do when he goes to the polls to vote at the next election. It will inform him that that variety of sheet iron which is largely made in this country for roofing purposes could be more readily sold, and at advanced prices, if the better material for that purpose (the old, well-tried and highly satisfactory tin plate,) could be kept out of the market. It will tell him that the object of the two and two-tenths of a cent duty per pound placed upon tin plates was to keep foreign roofing tin plates from the American market as much as possible, and give the iron barons greater privileges. If he be a level-headed man who prefers a good roof over his head

p. 9, col. 2 to the renown which may come to his country by a general advertisement of “Carnegie’s Coaching Tour Through England,” or other such brilliant “triumphs” of wealthy American monopolists, he will see that his vote counts one against any further form of “protection to Home Industry.”

New York City. JAS. A. B. DILWORTH.

NOTES AND QUERIES.

The comments called forth from the unthinking whenever the Single Tax is presented to them by some new incident like, the message^sic of Mayor Sargent, are closely akin to those offered by an old Scotchman who had spent nearly all his life in building railways in the Highlands of his native country, but in his later years settled down on one of our own Western prairies. In course of time a project to build a railroad through the district came up, and the old Scotchman was naturally applied to as a man of experience for advice. “Hoot mon!” said he to the spokesman of the scheme, “ye canna build a ra’lway across this kentry.” “Why not, Mr. Ferguson?” “Why not?” he repeated, with an air of settling the whole matter, “why not? And dinna ye see the kentry’s as flat as a flure, and ye have naw place whatever to run your toonnels through!”

* * * *

The Newtown (L. I.) Register calls the attention of its readers to the fact that the Episcopal diocese of Long Island owns eighty-two acres of the best land in Newtown, and that it is exempt from taxation under the law. If the land were used for burial or other church purposes the Register would not object, but that paper claims that the land is being held for speculative purposes, and that meantime the taxes that ought to be paid on it are shifted to other shoulders. “Imagine,” says the Register, “what a great opportunity it would be for a private speculator if he were allowed to hold such lands for, say, fifty years, without paying any taxes on the same, and then selling at a price enhanced by the manifold surrounding improvements of half a century, toward which he had not paid a single cent.” There is food for the imagination in this. There are, however, two ways out of the dilemma for the parties who have to pay the taxes of the Episcopal corporation owning this land. One is to bring about the adoption of the Single Tax, and the other, to have all the Newtown property owners organize themselves into a church corporation of some sort, and claim the same immunity from taxation for their property now enjoyed by the Episcopal corporation.

* * * *

> DENVER, COL.—I have noticed in the colums^sic of THE STANDARD in the past, and in the first number under the new auspices, the expression, “Single Tax limited.” I would like to know what the difference, or why insist on a distinction. The word and the object of the Single Tax to me means to levy all taxes on-land^sic according to value. Surely no one would have the Government collect more taxes than it needed. But, of course, that does not imply that the Government could not or would not undertake new duties. But when we collect all taxes on land values solely, I think we are all of one opinion about the tax, and the object taxed, and the manner; but, of course, we may differ after on other duties of Government. Now, to me it seems unnecessary to say that a man is an advocate of the “Single Tax limited.” > > JOHN M. DOYLE.

The phrase commented on was first used by Henry George in alluding to some of those who accept, from economic considerations, the idea that all public revenues shall be derived from a Single Tax on land values, while protesting against the acceptance of Mr. George’s argument that because such values are created by the public they belong to the public, and should all be taken for public use. It was to relieve such men from the appearance of identifying themselves with a theory against which they protest, that the qualifying word, limited, is frequently used. It is not designed to create a distinction, but to acknowledge a distinction that really exists. Mr. Doyle is right in thinking that the difference is not important. When society comes into its estate it will probably find that its wants equal its income.

* * * *

All the power of royalty and the aristocracy has been unable to keep from the public the fact that the Duke of Bedford committed suicide. With perhaps one or two exceptions, the greatest landlord in the world, and with a power over the condition of other men, probably greater than that of the Queen herself, one would suppose that his life, the “consummate flower” of landlordism, would have been satisfactory to himself, if not to his tenants. As for them the instances of the ruined lives, even of insanity, caused by the noble duke’s extreme rackrenting, are plentiful. The story of the Bedford Estate would be a better commentary on landlordism than the history of Ireland.

* * * *

In the last number of the Journal of the Knights of Labor T. V. Powderly gives it as his opinion that the Arbitration Board of this State ought to be abolished. He is right. Ever since the organiza- continued on p. 10 →

[continued on next page: text breaks off mid-word at foot of column]

THE FIGHT FOR FREE TRADE.

The Atlanta Constitution says “the McKinley law has fixed it so that the trusts can flourish in any kind of weather.”

* * * *

Since the late election (says William Mathews, of Black Buttes, Wy.) the enthusiasm on the tariff issue seems to have entirely subsided on the Republican side, and it is now hard to find opposition.

* * * *

Mr. Blaine has informed a man from Oregon that he will not be a candidate for President in 1892. Referring to this, the Kansas City Star says: “But Cleveland will run in 1892, and will run like a fast mail train. Perhaps Mr. Blaine has this circumstance in mind.”

* * * *

The Detroit Free Press, a Republican and protectionist paper, does not seem to be able to catch on to the ways of the American manufacturers. Let it speak for itself:

The manufacturers wanted an increased tariff, we are told, so that they might maintain the high scale of American wages and protect the American workingman from the low wages paid his pauper competitor beyond the sea. The manufacturers got their increased duty. They got all they asked for, and in some cases more than they asked for. And having gotten it, they have begun to reduce wages. This is especially noticeable in the iron and steel business, which had no excuse for a high duty except the alleged need for maintaining wages. What does it mean?

What does it mean? Silly boy!

* * * *

J. E. Sutton is doing good work among the farmers around the town he lives in, Olathe, Kansas. His specialty is the tariff and who pays the tax, and having had a personal experience of more than seven years in a large importer’s office he knows whereof he speaks. He spends his spare time in proving to his farmer friends that the tariff is a tax on the consumer—that he not only pays the duty on the foreign goods, but the percentage of the importer and the retail merchant on said tax. In brief, he puts the case thus: Say the importer buys in Hamburg or London goods amounting to $100, on which there is a tariff of fifty per cent. Then the cost to the American importer is $150, isn’t it? Well, the importer’s profit of, say, fifty per cent., must be added to this, so that when the retail

p. 11, col. 2 merchant buys the goods from the importer he must pay $225 for them. Then, of course, the retailer puts on a profit, which will average twenty-five per cent., amounting to $56.25. This, added to the $225 which he paid to the importer, makes the total of $281.25, which the consumer pays for what originally cost $100 in Hamburg or London. See?

* * * *

The hat industry is one of the highly protected industries of the country, and one, therefore, in which it would be reasonable to expect there would be no trouble on account of wages. Yet last week the girls and hatters in a Newark factory quit work because of a notice of a ten per cent. reduction in wages.

* * * *

Protection is still showing its blessings on our workingmen in the protected industries. The Cambria Iron Company, of Johnstown, Pa., has notified its 5,000 workers that, commencing February 1, their wages will be reduced ten per cent.

* * * *

The Washington Star tells of a clerk in the Treasury Department who on being reprimanded for being late at the office, attributed his tardiness to the McKinley bill. “How do you make that out?” inquired his chief. “Because the cars were all going up and none were coming down,” was the answer.

* * * *

At the coming Lincoln banquet in Toledo Major McKinley is to answer the speech of Mr. Cleveland at the late Jackson banquet in Philadelphia. Commenting on this the Boston Globe cruelly says: “Cleveland and McKinley! The quick and the dead!”

* * * *

Several St. Louis importers have decided to follow in the footsteps of Marshal Field & Co^sic., of Chicago. Through their agents they have filed suit against the United States Government to test the constitutionality of the McKinley law. These firms bought goods in Europe after October 1 and were assessed the duty on them when they were taken out of bond. They paid the excess duty under protest to the Board of Appraisers in New York. The law will be attacked from several points. It will be claimed that it is unconstitutional, for the reason that the bill passed by the Senate was not the same bill signed by the President, as through a clerical error an entire section was left out. Other equally important points will be made. The John Shillito Company, the monster dry goods firm of Cincinnati, Ohio, have filed a similar suit, and the Enquurer^sic of that city predicts that it is a case that will attract the attention of the entire country.

* * * *

The Western farmers, according to the Minneapolis Tribune, are much delighted over the prospective reduction in prices of agricultural machinery, resulting from the dissolution of the American Harvester Trust.

* * * *

The German Reichstag has decided to keep American pork out of the empire, despite the desire of the people to have it.

* * * *

The latest scheme for protecting American labor is, according to the Boston Globe, to double up on the price of every workingman’s tin kettle, in order to start a single tin plate factory in Pennsylvania for the benefit of monopolists.

* * * *

News comes from Pittsburg that the miners of the United States have completed their plans for the great industrial battle between themselves and the mine owners for eight hours a day. It will begin on May 1, and will involve 150,000 men.

* * * *

The Journal of the Knights of Labor warns miners and mine laborers to “stay away from Alabama, as there is a strike in the State, and crowds of idle men are around everywhere.” They must also “stay away from Bryan, Indian Territory, as the place is crowded with idle men.” Mechanics and laborers are warned to “stay away from Galveston, Texas. The place is crowded with men out of employment. There is no work to be had, and wages are down to starvation point.”

* * * *

C. M. Crain, of The Dalles, Oregon, writes that he found two men in his town who claimed to be staunch Single Taxers, but who would not sign the petition because they were in favor of a prohibitive tariff tax. He “rastled” with them until he felt as he did one day last Winter after he had helped a cow out of a snow bank, only a few yards from good grazing. “No sooner,” says he, “was she on her feet than she came at me, with her tail up and her head down, and, to save myself from being gored, I was compelled to knock her down. There she was, no better off than when I found her. I might,” he continues, “have explained to her that there was good grass nearby, and, if she would let me help her to it, she would, doubtless, be able to ‘rustle’ a living. But it was no use, she couldn’t understand. So, though not liking to do so, I was compelled to leave her to her fate, the same as I had to leave my friends, the protectionist Single Taxers.”

CURRENT THOUGHT.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

A LAST WORD.

Editor of THE STANDARD—SIR: If your very excellent summing up of the present aspect of the discussion of the woman question in the Single Tax cause be an absolute bar to further communication on the subject, I shall regret that I did not sooner carry out my intention of writing this letter. But I trust with your usual kindness you will allow me to do myself justice. In one important particular I have been misunderstood. This would not be of the slightest consequeace^sic were it not that almost every letter on the woman question written by a Single Tax man was called out by the assertion in my article, “The point of least resistance,” that the majority of Single Tax men did not care that women should have the ballot. My name has been mentioned many times, and several gentlemen have qualified their agreement with my belief in the justice of woman suffrage in a way which proves that they think I wish Single Tax men and women to work for it.

Nothing could be further from my thought. It is very difficult to bring about the most superficial reform in our laws. Did we not know that truth must prevail, had we not perfect faith in the righteousness of our cause and firm conviction of its necessity, we would be justified in thinking the task before us impossible of accomplishment. So mighty is it that I doubt not many of us would lose courage could we foresee our struggles and trials.

The successful ending of our movement means nothing less than revolution—first, revolution in the ideas of civilized mankind; second, revolution in their laws. It will take all our devotion, all our strength, all our perseverance, all our energy, faith and courage to bring about this revolution. Our reform is radical; it is the great tap root of progress. All other reforms are secondary, they are but branches and twigs, or at most lateral roots.

Therefore, I say, let every Single Tax man and every Single Tax woman work for the Single Tax and the Single Tax alone. But let them think rightly on every question involving human rights, and let them act up to the thought whenever the occasion arises.

p. 13, col. 2 The only excuse for the discussion running in THE STANDARD since the tenth of September last is the fact that the occasion for action on equal rights for women did arise at the conference, and the use made of that occasion showed that there was a great deal of wrong thinking on this subject among Single Taxers. Or, shall we say, a great deal of no thinking at all? I sincerely hope that all the Single Tax men and women in the country are now asking themselves what is the meaning of the words “equal opportunities for all” in relation to woman? If they honestly face their old prejudices, their unconsciously formed opinions, they cannot fail to see that their words mean that she has equal moral, economic, social and political rights, and that they must not be denied.

They are largely denied by the civilized world at present. Only her spiritual rights has woman in perfection. A female soul is admitted into Heaven on an equality with a male—at least I think so. In this particular we are further ahead of the Mohammedans than in any of the others.

If we were engaged in any secondary reform, such as Tariff Reform, Civil Service Reform, High License, Ballot Reform, it would be of less consequence what we thought on other questions involving human rights; but men who have promised their own consciences to fight for the great fundamental reform of their day and generation, must hold themselves ready to go wherever liberty leads. If they distrust her, can they stand the shock of the big battle?

At present we are skirmishing; we are driving in the Tariff Reform outposts. When we have captured the Free Trade and Internal Revenue earthworks and have reached the citadel, when we are brought face to face with land monopoly, will the half-hearted soldier follow the liberty-cap?

The Chicago and Boston Clubs have let us know that they have active women in membership, and the Plainfield, N. J., Club has sent official notice of their position to THE STANDARD of December 31. It is a pity that other clubs did not take action on this matter and report to THE STANDARD before the discussion was necessarily closed.

In saying that I am greatly obliged to Mr. Croasdale for his generosity and courtesy in allowing us to use THE STANDARD so freely, I feel sure I am expressing the sentiments of all those of every shade of opinion who have written to the paper on this subject.

And for those who share my opinions, let me express our satisfaction that we find ourselves so numerous.

Staten Island.

SARAH MIFFLIN GAY.

THE STANDARD’S NEW FORM.

Editor of THE STANDARD—SIR: An intense and unreasoning protectionist picked up THE STANDARD in my office; read it for ten minutes. He remarked, “THE STANDARD is much improved over the old form.” He then proceeded to discourse upon Thurber’s letter. The impression on my mind was—here is a paper which is so strikingly arranged and so clearly printed that even an opponent will catch the character and drift of each article at a glance. It strikes me that this is a tribute to the improvement you have made, at least typographically speaking. In the selection of material and their arrangement I think the change is no less attractive.

New York City.

ALFRED J. WOLF.

HOW THE PRICE OF SILVER IS QUOTED.

To the Editor of THE STANDARD—SIR: In THE STANDARD of January 21 I find, among “Notes and Queries,” the following statement:

“The Free Coinage act, passed last week by the Senate, fixes the value of silver for coinage purposes at $1 for 412½ grains, this would be about $1.16 per ounce.”

While this is true as regards silver containing the amount of alloy used in “silver for coinage purposes.” it is likely^sic to leave an erroneous impression in the case of any one who is unaware of the fact that the market quotations for silver in the United States, as published in financial journals and other prints, are for the ounce of pure metal, and not the ounce of metal of the degree of fineness (nine-tenths pure) used in our coinage.

It would have been better to say that the bill in question fixes the value of silver at $1 for 371¼ grains of pure metal, which is about $1.29 per fine ounce.

Washington, D. C.

E. T. PETERS.

CAUGHT AT LAST.

Editor of THE STANDARD—SIR: Some weeks ago I wrote you of a good friend of ours who protects himself from the bores of his acquaintance during his daily rides in and out of the city where he works by talk—talk—talking Free Trade and Single Tax until the bores, beaten at their own game, retire disgusted. When asked if he wasn’t afraid that he would convert one and so give the cause a set-back, he always replied: “No danger. They are not listening to my arguments, they are just watching for a chance to drag in their own hobbies, and,” he would add with a smile, “they never get it.”

But our poor friend doesn’t smile now when asked how his system of “protection to the American laboring man” is getting along. He doesn’t smile because he has met his match at last. It is another Single Tax man.

JOHN DOE.

THE EVILS OF LAND SPECULATION.

In a long and admirably written article in the Commercial Advertiser of^sic January 21, Mr. E. Yancey Cohen, of the Reform and Manhattan Single Tax Clubs, seeks the explanation of the present widespread commercial depression. What has become of the prosperous international trade of the past four or five years? Why has the demand for goods, that came in such volume to the industrial centres of Europe, so disastrously fallen off? What is the cause of the general commercial falling to pieces that appears to be going on throughout the newer settlements of the globe, and has led to a cessation of demand for the products of older countries?

“Evidently,” says Mr. Cohen, “a universal cause underlies this universal phenomenon.” He lets the facts speak for themselves.

The sudden increase in international trade, which for a few seasons assumed colossal proportions, came about in the following way:

About three or four years ago, the despondent manufacturers of Europe discovered a demand for goods that came with sudden urgency and vigor from an unlooked-for set of customers. For a long time back the fatuous policy of Europe devised, it should seem, to drive people in wrath and despair away from their homes, had operated, by swelling the tide of emigration, in establishing countless settlements in distant portions of the globe. Until a few years ago, very quietly in these remote places, production had been proceeding. Pleasant were the accounts that reached Europe of the boundless domains that were being opened up; of the fertility of the land and its easy acquisition; of the simple, rough life, yet great returns to labor and capital in many favored localities in the southern hemisphere. Toward these a continuous migratien^sic had set in. From the sheep-rearing districts of Australia and New England young men sent home to England letters of enthusiasm; and the peasants of Italy learned with incredulity of their brothers in the Argentine Republic, so overwhelmed with the products of their farms that at harvest time they were fain often to remain out in the moonlight gathering in their crops. An accession of labor so great as continued to pour in upon the young communities was the more eagerly welcomed, in that it added so distinctly to the common weal; until at length, at the very time when certain statisticians of Westminster were printing a doleful blue-book on the depression in trade, the hardy emigrants who had left the old world with a determination no longer to endure the taxation and tyranny heaped upon them in their native lands, were, in Australia, in South America, in South Africa, engaged in a production of wealth so splendid and potential, as, before long, to revivify the moribund industries of Europe and change them to soundness and lustiness once again.

And such a result was natural enough. For evidently it is these primary and fundamental occupations, which extract wealth directly from nature, that create a demand for the products of secondary or subsidiary employments. Trade being always the exchange of commodities for commodities, the greater the production on farms, ranches and in mines, the greater must be production in manufacturing centres, because, with increasing production and increasing wealth, the wants of laborers broaden, and they seek to satisfy their desires by exchanging the products of their labor for articles of comfort, convenience and pleasure, produced in more advanced and better organized societies. Endless exchanges, constituting, it may be, a vast and splendid commerce, are thus born of the extraction of the bounties of nature from pampas, mines and plantations in these days often thousands of leagues away.

England, Germany, France, Italy, even the tariff-bound United States, profited by the great and increasing demand for their manufactured products. The increase in trade became so great that in 1887 it was realized that the merchant fleets of the world were not large enough to carry on the enormous exchange of products. New vessels were built; and, as they were brought into use, trade developed. From 1885 to 1889 the increase was steady; when, in the early part of the latter year, it developed into wild speculation. Business men, manufacturers and traders, finding their utmost expectations more than realized, began to produce, to buy and to ship in excessive quantities.

Tnen^sic there came a cessation. The enormous foreign trade of the European countries dwindled away to such an extent that some branches of manufacturing industries were in a worse condition than they had experienced for years. The cause of the increase of trade has been pointed out. What was the cause of the stagnation, the collapse?

To explain this, Mr. Cohen takes up the particular case of the Argentine Republic, where, he says, we will find the same general phenomena that characterize all the localities whose development was the basis of the revival of industry. In the Argentine Republic there was capital in abundance; immigration had been steady, and the country’s natural resources were boundless. But something happened to stop the operations of production and exchange; the country experienced a “set-back,” such as was experienced by other countries with land, labor and capital in abundance. “The cause is not far to seek,” says Mr. Cohen.

That increase of production and increment of population are everywhere necessarily causing land to advance in value is a fact as well known to the ordinary man as to the political economist. In the United States we are familiar enough with this natural law. It is the foundation of all success in land speculation and has proved to be the “open sesame” for millionaires. That land rises in value because of material progress is, I repeat, a proposition thoroughly understood and greatly appreciated in this country. Now, the sages of the Argentine Republic undertook to demonstrate a proposition differing very importantly from this. According to them,

p. 14, col. 2 > before material progress can be inaugurated you must first make the value of land high. “Do not,” said they, “wait for population or progress in the arts: elevate the price of land at once!” And so, following out this programme, the great sneculation^sic in land that has distinguished the recent economic history of nearly every progressive nation in the world, was in the Argentine Republic actually made a special function or department of Government. “Land,” cried the Argentine Minister of Finance in a speech delivered in the House of Deputies in 1889, “is the great patrimony, the immense capital (sic) of the country, and every facility should be given to mobilize that capital and increase its value.”

So, in order to “mobilize” land, it was decided to start a national mortgage bank and territorial banks to make loans on real estate. These banks issued mortgage bonds (cedulas) to landowners up to half the value of their property, presumably, but really, as it turned out in many cases, to far more than the whole value of the land and improvements. The tendency of land to acquire a fictitious, speculative value was thus enormously increased by the ease with which money could be borrowed on it, and by the desire to borrow all that it was possible to get. Land was soon “booming,” as they say. This mortgage bond loaning was, of course, peculiar to the Argentine Republic, but the regular loaning of money by private individuals in Africa, Australia, Canada and the United States has had much the same effect in those countries; while in all of them the inevitable tendency for land to assume a speculative value, based on the prospects of the country, has been at work. The result of such overvaluation of land upon production and trade is thus described by Mr. Cohen:

We have but to analyze the phenomenon known as a “land-boom” to realize the far-reaching evil consequences to which it directly gives birth. Wealth being the product of labor exerted upon land, when land is locked up during a time of violent speculation the production of wealth receives an unmistakable check. For it is a well-recognized fact that during these periods intending producers are often barred from production by reason of the fictitious and prohibitory prices demanded by landowners for the occupation and use of land. Production, at the same time, is lessened in another way. Producers actually engaged, who happen to be mere tenants or laborers, find their wages reduced by the abnormal increment of rent, and, becoming dissatisfied, seek other employments. If they have been engaged in the country they flock to the cities and towns in search of more remunerative wages. A large percentage of such as these cease henceforth to aid in production, for they either become household servants or in other ways minister to the comfort and enjoyment of the wealthy, or, failing to find employment, they but add to the growing class of paupers.

In the Argentine Republic the farmers in many cases ceased to work their farms; speculation had become a mania; the desire was to get rich without doing anything, and they flocked to the cities. In the meantime the deserted farms retained their speculative value, and new immigrants who came with a desire to use them found that they could not afford to buy or rent. Thus “the intending producers were barred from production,” and the primary industries on which all others depend were paralyzed. At once the cessation of agriculture made itself felt in the stoppage of trade in the cities, Buenos Ayres and others, and by March, 1890, the inevitable crash had come. Foreclosures and failures in every direction marked a period of depression in the great South American Republic.

This has been the recent history to a greater or less extent of every one of the new communities in South America, Australia, Africa and North America. First has come the gradual, natural development of population and production, then land speculation, then a slow or sudden stoppage of production, because labor and capital could not afford to pay the price demanded for the privilege of applying themselves to the soil.

The paralysis of production in these newer countries had its effect at once on the trade and production of the older countries. Ships were found to be far more plentiful than was necessary, and in the Spring of 1890 the reports of the London Economist showed that the export trade of England had fallen off to an enormous extent. And so the disturbance in production ran through the closely connected and interdependent branches of industry until a general depression ensued. The financial crisis in the great money centres of the world a few weeks ago was but a phase of the same general phenomenon. The depression is still on us and its results are apparent on every hand. Men are thrown out of work, wages are reduced, strikes are failing and the trades unions are losing the ground they gained a year or two ago. Worse still, the old outlet for unemployed labor, the free fields of Africa, Australia and South America are no longer free, but monopolized, and held at high prices, so that the depression will last now longer than it has ever lasted before, if indeed it is not continuous.

In conclusion Mr. Cohen says:

This is a menace to civilization that must be faced. When the laborer is robbed of the product of his labor production continues only on restricted lines. Production ceases when laborers cannot gain access to natural opportunities, upon which alone labor can be exerted in production. These recurring paroxysms of violent land speculation, followed by abnormal debility and depression, are manifestations of a fatal disorder in social relations which threatens to put an end to progress, if not to shatter the present fabric of our civilization.

A CASE OF UNEARNED INCREMENT.

NEW LONDON, Conn., January 22.—At the outbreak of the civil war there was located in Augusta, Georgia, a business man named Daniel Hand. He was the son of a New England farmer and had been settled in Augusta for many years. Not sympathizing with the Southern cause, he found it profitable and advisable to sell his stock of goods, real estate and other property and return to his old home in Guilford, Conn. But there was one piece of property—a tract of Georgia pine land—which he did not sell, for the reason that he looked on it as practicably unsalable and valueless. This pine land he left in the care of his partner, a Mr. Williams.

As the war progressed Mr. Hand was in his quiet home in the little New England village, away from the sounds of strife and scenes of bloodshed, and tcok^sic no concern for the Georgia pine lands. With the return of peace came renewed prosperity and an influx of Northern capital to the South. The value of land in Georgia began to rise, and pine land proved no exception to the rule. Still Mr. Hand was careless and ignorant of what was going on. He had made plenty of money to live on and did not have to trouble himself about his pine lands in the South.

If my memory serves me, it was some time in 1885, twenty-five years or so after he had left his Georgia store, that Mr. Hand received a letter from his former partner, Mr. Williams, stating that he had succeeded in finding a purchaser for that tract of pine land that they had considered valueless. Mr. Williams also stated that a sale had been effected, and that on account of such sale Mr. Hand had standing to his credit in bank and subject to his order the nice little sum of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

This appears to me to be a pretty clear case of the pocketing of an unearned increment. As far as Mr. Hand personally was concerned that tract of land had practically ceased to exist. His whole interest in it had gone out of his mind entirely.

And yet while he was at his home in Guilford, Conn., passing his old age peacefully and happily, utterly oblivious of this whole matter, $750,000 were accumulating for his special benefit.

To Mr. Hand’s credit it ought to be said—which, however, in no way breaks the force of the story—that he has invested the whole sum and placed it in the hands of trustees to be used as a perpetual fund for to defray^sic the educational expenses of worthy colored students in the Southern States: but this only shows how much the community could have for public use and benefits if no individual were allowed to pocket what he did not create.

W. C. MINER.

AN OLD-TIME LAND REFORMER.

It is not hard to talk on the land question in these days. With our public land all gone, a million and a half or so of tenant farmers, ninety-five per cent. of some of our city populations owning no land, and landowners who draw from two to four millions a year in rents, people begin to realize what the land question is. But back in the forties it was different. Nevertheless there were men who had some idea of what we were coming to, even then, but they found it difficult to make people believe them.

In 1848 there was a public meeting in Chicago to consider the application of the Illinois Central Railway Company for a grant of land to aid in the construction of its road. It was presided over by a well known physician and addressed by prominent speakers. Everybody wanted the railroad, and everything went ahead like a well oiled machine till the resolutions, calling for the granting of the necessary lands, were presented. At this point a middle-aged man, dressed like a mechanic, arose from his place on the platform and said he had a substitute to offer. He was an employee of the McCormick Reaper Company, Elias Smalley by name. He handed a slip of paper to the secretary, who read as follows:

“Whereas, land, or the upper strata of the earth’s crust, is the only place on which human beings can live——” Here almost the entire audience broke out in spasms of uproarious laughter and jeering——“And, whereas, the Government land belongs to all the people, it is manifestly unjust to grant or convey its ownership to any corporation or class to the exclusion of others.” [More confusion and additional derisive laughter.] “Therefore, resolved, that we, the citizens of Illinois, while we are in favor of all public enterprises which conduce to the welfare of the people, ask Congress to grant to every head of a family who is a citizen of the United States one hundred and sixty acress^sic of Government land in consideration of five years’ residence on the same.”

Someone seconded the resolution as a joke, and Mr. Smalley was asked to speak. He complied willingly, and for half an hour he spoke on the evils of land monopoly. He showed how it was the rock on which the civilizations of the past had split, and how its evils were repeating themselves in this country. He said he had been forced to come from New York to Chicago because he could not afford to buy land in the older State.

It was such incidents as this, however, such courageous attempts to do something, by a few men like Smalley, that finally resulted in the passage of our Homestead and Pre-emption laws, and Smalley saw the day when the ideas he expressed were, to a large extent, embodied in the laws.

Some years after the meeting described, Smalley became a Government official and since then held several small elective offices.

p. 15, col. 2

He is still living, 76 years of age. He resides at 392 Oakley avenue, Chicago.

TAXATION IN NEW JERSEY.

The New Jersey Legislature appointed a committee of six members last Spring, to inquire into the taxation of property throughout the State, and report to the next Legislature. This committee has been holding meetings in every county of the State for the past six months, and it has made a preliminary report, which Governor Abbett embodies, in part, in his annual message. The report is mainly devoted to showing the inequalities cf assessments^sic, and the methods of tax evasion whereby “many citizens of wealth practically escape taxation,” and a consideration of the best methods of securing the equal taxation of all kinds of property. The committee makes several recommendations, two of which are of the greatest importance to the Single Tax cause. The first and most important is that “the assessing officers be compelled to assess separately the value of the land and the value of the improvements thereon.” This recommendation, as has been noted, is endorsed by Governor Abbett, and in his message he suggests that an act should be passed embodying this provision.

The second recommendation of the committee, which will tend to advance the Single Tax idea, if it is acted upon, is “that personal property of the value of $200 in the hands of all taxpayers should be exempt from taxation, in analogy to the existing provision of the laws of the State, respecting the collection of debts; this is upon the ground that it is impolitic to levy taxes upon that property of the laboring class of the community which is absolutely essential to enable them to obtain a livelihood and to exist in the merest decency.”

’Of course^sic, the reasons given by the committee for these two recommendations are not such as Single Tax men would give; but that only shows how easy it will be to secure, in New Jersey, the legislation that Single Tax men in other States have been trying to obtain for a long time past. The separate assessment of land and improvements will furnish an unlimited amount of data for Single Tax arguments, besides showing in the most glaring manner the absurdity and injustice of taxing improvements; while the exemption of even a small amount of personal property from taxation is a step towards the exemption of all the products of labor.

This presents an opportunity for New Jersey Single Tax men to do effective work that will show itself in immediate, practical results. Every effort should be made to secure the support of the members of the Legislature for the enactment of a law embodying these recommendations. While an Assemblyman or Senator is not open to the Single Tax argument, he will be open to the same arguments as those advanced by the committee, and there is no reason why, with this report and the Governor’s endorsement, the necessary legislation should not easily be secured.

HENRY GEORGE.

Slow pacing under midnight skies, Around him all the ocean vast, The plunging bows that fall and rise, The gray lights mingling at the mast. Oh, prophet of these elder years, With heart and teeming brain oppressed, The salt sea singing in his ears, The Problem would not let him rest.

Who read the mystery aright? Who tell if God his truth had shot In soul of sailor youth that night? To this our prophet sayeth not. But if to Buddha angels came, If unto Paul the Holies spoke— Then God’s great spirit flashed in flame The Answer that the Problem woke!

Jersey City, N. J.

JOSEPH DANA MILLER.

A SUPERB REVENGE.

New York Commercial Advertiser.

Mr. F. B. Thurber has added his name to the long list of those whose tempers are not sufficiently under control to withstand the blunt way of telling the truth that distinguishes the letters of our esteemed friend “J. C.” Captain Codman recently told the readers of THE STANDARD just what he thought of subsidy-seekers, applying to them certain epithets that summed up his belief that they are attempting to transfer money from other people’s pockets to their own. One of the subsidy men, it appears, is Mr. H. K. Thurber, and his brother is—or was—a subscriber to THE STANDARD. The revenge of the brothers upon the captain is superb—they have stopped reading the journal that printed his views.

DO UNTO OTHERS, ETC.

Boston Globe.

A writer in THE STANDARD says reciprocity is doing by others as they do unto you, while Free Trade is doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. We may add that “Protection” is doing unto others what would make you as mad as a setting hen if they did unto you. But then we have high Republican authority for saying that the Ten Commandments have no place in politics, and perhaps the Golden Rule hasn’t either.

HENRY GEORGE SAILS FOR BERMUDA.

Mr. George, accompanied by his wife, sailed last Thursday afternoon for the Bermudas on the steamship Orinoco. Just before the steamer sailed a committee from the Brooklyn Single Tax Club, consisting of W. E. Hicks, A. J. Wolf and R. P. Beggs, entered the steamer’s cabin bearing a huge basket of flowers, which they presented to Mr. George, together with the following resolutions:

DEAR MR. GEORGE: The Brooklyn Single Tax Club wishes you Godspeed on your voyage and hopes that you will return with renewed physical and mental strength, prepared to continue the battle you have so long waged for the elevation of the downtrodden and oppressed. We wish you and Mrs. George a pleasant trip, and assure you that the sunny isles to which you go will extend to you a greeting no warmer, no more genial, than are the farewell wishes of your Brooklyn friends.

In presenting the flowers Mr. Hicks said:

Just as the captain of this steamer will take you from a land of wintry darkness and gloom to a land of sunny skies, so a few more years of that work which you have already given to humanity will lead this dark and gloomy civilization to a land where the skies are always sunshine, the land of peace, of brotherhood and of love.

Mr. and Mrs. Simon Mendelson were fellow passengers with Mr. and Mrs. George. Among those gathered on the dock to speed our parting friends were August Lewis, G. St. John Leavens, William T. Croasdale, E. J. Shriver, W. J. and G. H. Atkinson, E. K. Morris, Miss Jennie George, Miss Mendelson.

COMMENTS ON THE STANDARD.

MISS S. M. GAY, West New Brighton, S. I.—Let me congratulate you upon the new dress of THE STANDARD. Size and shape, column and type are all great improvements, and the large capitals at the beginning of the beginning of the editorial^sic paragraphs are indeed a comfort.

L. W. HOCH, Ardrian, Mich^sic.—I want to congratulate you upon the change in the make-up of THE STANDARD. It is charming. The only criticism I have to offer is that you are a little modest in the heading, which ought to be a trifle larger. [The heading is a photographic reproduction of the old one.—Ed. STANDARD.]

CHARLES A. SIRINGO, Denver, Col.—Your paper looms up like a “two-time” winner in its new dress. May it continue to improve and hold the lead in the race of progress.

W. B. DU BOIS, Bayonne.—I am very much pleased with the revised form of THE STANDARD.

HENRY GEORGE, Jr., Washington, D. C.—The new STANDARD makes a fine appearance and its variety of reading matter gives evidence of good work. Good luck to it and warm regards to everybody.

Z. W. Norton, Webster, Mass.—The new STANDARD was an agreeable surprise to all here.

S. B. Rigger, Portland, Ore.—I like the STANDARD very much in its new dress, and I hope it will have financial success in some proportion at least to that which its excellent character deserves.

THE STANDARD, formerly Henry George’s paper, but now changed in size and form, commencing with the new year, and owned and edited by Mr. William T. Croasdale, a former associate of, and firm believer in the doctrines advocated by Mr. Henry George, is the ablest journal of advanced thought that comes to our table. It deals principally with questions of politically philosophy^sic and civil government, and is radically, ably and honestly a journal of reform. Although its columns are replete with discussions of every living political issue of the day, its hobby is the “Single Tax” problem. Some might ask, what is this “Single Tax?” It is a system that would exempt all property that is the prodnct^sic of labor from taxation altogether, excepting “land values.” It would not assess brick blocks, buildings or improvements of any kind whatever, which are the products of labor and enterprise. It would simply assess land values which accrue from the general progress of the community or the increase of population. “Land values” are not those values produced by the labor or enterprise of the owners of the lands; they are the values produced by the community, and consequently the only values the community has any right to tax, according to the “Single Tax” idea. The “Single Tax” is not a new idea. It is as old as the principle of justice. This principle is merely revived by Henry George and his adherents, who are rapidly increasing in numbers all over the civilized world, and are the modern exponents of an ancient principal^sic that can never grow old. Carried out to its logical conclusion, it is absolute Free Trade. Societies are being organized in many places for the discussion and clearer understanding of this great problem of taxation, which is the paramount question of political economy. We recognize in THE STANDARD an able exponent of democratic ideas, in the broader sense of the term, and the radical opponent of the accumulation of large fortunes in the hands of the few, and the consequent starvation of the many.—Aplena, Mich., Journal^sic.

The Single Tax men find their old friend THE STANDARD in a new dress this week. W. T. Croasdale, who has really had editorial charge during the past year, is now in full control of the paper and gives evidence of his good newspaper sense by changing the form, type and make-up in a manner which will at once commend itself to all readers of the paper. THE STANDARD is now a twenty-four page paper of a size which readily permits the addition of pages for advertising matter. The type is large, clear and beautiful. A sub-head has been added to the title, so that the paper is now called “THE STANDARD. A Weekly Review of Public Affairs.” The ninth volume opens with the current number, and Single Tax men are promised that “it will remain in the future what it has been in the past, the exponent, advocate and defender of the new political p. 16, col. 2 economy, first given to the world in the pages of ‘Progress and Poverty,’ by Henry George.” Mr. Croasdale’s first number fully justifies the hopes which Single Tax men have in him. The new STANDARD is typographically far ahead of anything they have enjoyed heretofore in their paper, and the editorial comment is, of course, fully up to the mark. The departments—“Notes and Queries,” “The Fight for Free Trade,” “Current Thought,” “Personal,” “Letters to the Editor” and Single Tax News^sic“—give a hint of the systematic and business-like way in which the news of the moment is to be treated hereafter. Henry George’s work in the editorial columns is missing, it is true. but^sic this is only temporary.—St. Louis Republic.

The New York STANDARD, lately owned by Henry George, and published as the organ of Free Trade and Single Tax ideas, enters on its ninth volume enlarged and greatly improved in its mechanical department, and under a new ownership. The present owner and editor, Mr. Wm. T. Croasdale, has been the real editor during the past year, owing to Mr. George’s absence, and by his ability and wide range of information has made THE STANDARD the foremost free trade and Single Tax newspaper in the country. That paper is now recognized as the highest authority on those subjects, and is the source to which readers seeking information on those topics can go with confidence that they will be enlightened. Send for a sample copy and you will be certain to learn more about free trade and the Single Tax principle than can be gathered from a year’s reading of any other paper.—Petersburg, Va., Index-Appeal.

Since the retirement of Mr. Henry George the paper has been not a little changed in appearance. The pages have been made smaller, their number increased, and a larger type used (with two-line initials and cap side-heads, set flush, for the editorials.) THE STANDARD looks well and contains a great deal of interesting and instructive matter. We wish it all possible success.—Hayes Valley, Cal., Advertiser.

The New York STANDARD appears in a new dress and form. It has now twenty-four instead of sixteen pages. Henry George has retired from the editorial management. Wm. T. Croasdale is editor and publisher. Long may it wave.—San Francisco Star.

THE STANDARD comes out in a new dress, type and make up. THE STANDARD is a full fledged free-trade advocate, and the national organ of the Single Tax party. Mr. George, who is thoroughly posted on these subjects, and a brilliant and interesting writer generally, has retired from the editorship on account of ill health, and Mr. W. T. Croasdale. formerly of^sic the Wilmington Every Evening, has taken charge of the editorial and business management. Those wishing to be fully posted on these reforms should subscribe for THE STANDARD.—Havre de Grace Republican.

PERSONAL.

On Thursday, January 22, Wm. H. Faulhaber, ex-president of the Manhattan Single Tax Club, was married to Miss Anne E. St. John, of this city. The members of the club did not know of the marriage in time, or they would all have been on hand to see William launched into the matrimonial sea. But their blessings go with him all the same; and Mrs. Faulhaber is congratulated on the fact that she has secured the upright, honest, manly friend and loving comrade that the Manhattan Club members know him to be.

* * *

S. D. Guion is still writing his Single Tax letters to the Brooklyn Eagl^sicə. We have before us two of them. In the first he makes a comparison between revenue reform and the Single Tax to the detriment of the former, and in the second he proposes a scheme for circumventing millionaires and monopolists.

* * *

J. J. Ryan, of Sharon, Conn., is doorkeeper to the Senate in the Connecticut Legislature. Mr. Ryan is well known as a Single Taxer, and was selected for the position out of some 150 applicants.

* * *

James Malcolm, of Chicago, has a letter in the Grand Island, Neb., Workman on “Landlordism.”

* * *

The Zanesville, Ohio, Saturday Night of a late date contains an address on “The Merits of the Land Value Tax,” delivered by Mr. W. H. Longhead, president of the Trades Council, before the Muskingum County Farmers’ Alliance. Mr. Longhead is an active Single Taxer.

* * *

Hon. Josiah Quincy, who, as a member of the Massachusetts Legislature, has been instrumental in securing the passage of the Australian balloting system in that State, delivered an address on real and sham ballot reform before the Commonwealth Club of this city, last Monday evening. The bulk of his address was devoted to giving facts and figures as to the working of the Massachusetts law, which has been in successful operation at two elections of State officers.

THE TIN PLATE CHEAT.

Boston Herald.

The specimens of American tin plate that are now being exhibited around the country would excite more admiration if they were not composed of imported Welsh iron plate, dipped in imported melted tin by imported Welsh workmen at an expense to the American people of ,about $15,000,000^sic a year. They very much resemble the Frenchman who hailed from Cork.

TRUE, LAZARILLO.

Boston Globe.

The fact that it took but 15 minutes to make a senator of Gov. Hill throws no light upon the problem of how long it will take to make a president of him.

SUCH A BEGINNING AS IT IS HAVING!

Springfield, Mass., Union.

The new tariff is beginning to have an effect on wages.

SINGLE TAX NEWS.

NEW YORY CITY^sic.

The long-promised lecture on “The Absolute Liberation of Personal Property from Taxation” was given by Mr. Julien T. Davies before the Manhattan Single Tax Club last Thursday evening. There was a large audience present who listened throughout with closeattention^sic. Mr. Davies’ main contention is that the system of taxing personal property in this country has resulted in a general evasion of the tax by the property owners. Personal property can be hidden from the assessor. The result is that while it is known that the value of the personal property—say in this city—is at least equal to the value of real estate, the burden of taxation falls upon that whichis^sic visible—real estate. Mr. Davies read figures from the last assessment table which showed that the proportionate value of personal property steadily decreased in the last ten years, while that of real estate had as steadily increased. He believed the personal property tax offered a premium to perjury; it was levied unequally, and was paid chiefly by the people of moderate means. Mr. Davies believed it should be abolished. He had not thought out a scheme for replacing the fund thus wiped out, but said he had no doubt that one could be devised that would be more equitable. When Mr. Davies concluded his address questions were invited by Chairman Doblin. In some of his answers the lecturer skated dangerously close to the Single Tax doctrine, though he professed to be to a great extent ignorant of the propositions involved in it. The lecture this week will be given this (Wednesday) evening in order to meet the convenience of Mr. Thomas G. Shearman, who has notified the Agitation Committee that he is ready to deliver his address on “Local Assessments before the Single Tax,” but that Wednesday evening is the only one he will have at his disposal. What Mr. Shearman will have to say on this occasian^sic will have great influence on the club’s future action regarding tax assessments.

NEW YORK STATE.

T. G. Drake, Long Island City.—The first public meeting of the Freedom Single Tax Club was held last Friday evening, and was in every way a success. Mr. Robert Laffan, the chairman of the club, opened the meeting by telling his audience that the club had been organized for the purpose of spreading the Single Tax idea. He was followed by your humble servant, Messrs. Hinton, G. W. A. King, Hodgekiss and Keisweeter. The members of the club are engaged in pushing the petition, and are handing them in to the secretary, who will forward them to the enrollment committee. We will hold our next meeting the fourth Friday of next month and would like to have the Single Tax men of this city present and enroll.

MASSACHUSETTS.

John Lavis, Dorchester.—Our Single Tax Club meets Tuesday, February 3, and all members are requested to be prompt, at 8 P. M., at Field’s building, Fields’ corner^sic, as arrangements will be then made for a reception to James A. Herne. The proposition of Mr. Atkinson on “Protection or Free Trade?” will also be up for discussion. We, who have promised to be present, mean to do some work this Spring, and we earnestly desire every member’s presence.

E. K. Page, Lake View, Worcester.—Twelve petitions. The January meeting of the Worcester Single Tax Club was the largest and most interesting held for a year. Mr. S. H. Howes, of Southboro, Mass., read a paper on the Single Tax from the farmers’ standpoint, showing in a clear and interesting way that a majority of the real working farmers have everything to gain by the adoption of the Single Tax. Mr. Howes, although well known to be an earnest Single Taxer, was elected assessor in his town last year, which shows, as he said, that the farmers are not all afraid of the Single Tax. In the discussion following the address, Mr. H. G. Otis, chairman of the Board of Assessors of Worcester, and Mr. C. E. Parker, an assessor of the adjoining town of Holden, who were present, spoke in opposition to the Single Tax, the forme. presenting^sic principally the “poor widow” argument and the latter the shifting of the increased land-value tax on to the tenant, all of which gave the advocates of the Single Tax a chance in their replies to make the meeting a lively one on their part. The plan of circulating half a million copies of “Protection or Free Trade?” is a good thing; it should be followed by a like edition of “Social Problems.”

Clarkson Paul, Lynn.—Eight petitions. The interest in the Single Tax is increasing. Men who would not listen to me awhile ago now come to me and say: “What is the Single Tax, anyway?” Two of the names I send you are from men who about a year ago declined to sign.

NEW JERSEY.

S. T., Paterson.—Mrs. Gorsuch opened our meeting of the 15th with a recitation, “A Thanksgiving Story,” and then Mr. W. J. Gorsuch delivered an address on “A High Tariff and Low Wages,” which was well received by the audience.

PENNSYLVANIA.

S. T., Philadelphia.—Our Single Tax society has issued a leaflet. In the first column is printed the Declaration of Independence, and in the third

p. 18, col. 2 the Single Tax platform. The central column is filled with a notice that the club will pay $500 for a system of taxation that will raise revenue sufficient for the support of Government without putting a fine on conscience, thrift or industry, the taxation of land values excepted.

“Uncle Tom,” Bryn Manor.—Four petitions. After a hard struggle, lasting over two years, I have at last succeeded in putting my better half on her mettle, and she is engaged, weather and household duties permitting, in soliciting signatures to the petition. As she is obliged to take her three children with her, you can imagine what a tremendous influence she has over the people whom she thus pounces upon, and I suppose some of them simply sign for the sake of getting rid of the crowd.

“Uncle Tom’s” Wife, Bryn Manor.—Five petitions. My first installment. No. 1 is my groceryman, a Republican; No. 2, our family physician; No. 3, the oilman, Republican. The remainder are the wives of workingmen. All of them had previously refused to sign for my husband. As we have three “unearned increments”—at least that is what their father calls them—of from one to four years of age, it looks more like a visitation than a visit when I go out soliciting signatures; but something has to be done. I expect to get more signers in a few days, and, the weather permitting, it is my intention to do all in my power to help the cause.

J. Barber, Bradford.—The meetings of our club thus far this Winter have been interesting, and, we think, successful, inasmuch as new faces continue to appear and a spirit of candid inquiry, instead of bigoted, pugnacious opposition, is manifested by the majority of those who visit us. The opposition of a year or two ago is disappearing. The city papers treat us courteously and solicit communications that will shed light on our principles. Last Sunday Mr. G. W. Patterson, of Custer City, delivered by far the ablest lecture of the course. It was enthusiastically received and a copy of it requested for publication. The subject was, “Revenue Under the Single Tax.” On the 11th instant we held our election of officers to serve till July next. A. F. Allen was chosen president; B. J. Berney and E. J. Boylston, vice-presidents; Marcus Moses, treasurer, and myself, secretary.

H. L. Buzzell, Meadville.—Four petitions. They are all theological students. Two are Prohibitionists, one is a Republican and the other a Democrat. Only one student has refused to sign, and he would not even talk about it.

MARYLAND.

S. T., Baltimore.—Our Single Taxers are rejoicing over their latest convert—Alfred S. Niles, a prominent member of the Baltimore bar, and an influential citizen. There is no doubt about his stand on the Single Tax, for he made himself clear in a speech which he delivered before the Taxpayers’ Association of this city on the evening of January 20. In that address he clearly set before his hearers the injustice of our present methods of taxation, and suggested the remedy. In order to bring about the change he suggested the following:

First let us alter the Bill of Rights, as already proposed, so that we may not be restricted to an exploded theory of taxation by our fundamental law. Then let us abolish taxes on the book accounts of merchants—that acknowledged glaring absurdity and crying shame—and abolish all traders’ license fees.

Then let us take manufacturers’ plant, once and for all, out of the reach of the assessor, and do the same thing with household goods and furniture. Then let us abolish all remaining taxes on personal property. When we get our new as essment^sic insist upon vacant lots being assessed at their market value. The final step of exempting improvements on land may then, I hope, be taken as easily and naturally as a ripe peach falls from the tree.

The freeing of manufacturing and commercial enterprise from its most galling fetters, would give Baltimore such a “boom” that even the owner of vacant lots would be glad to bear his increase of taxation in consideration of the increased demand for his land.

And I firmly believe that if this idea could once be adopted, if for ten successive years our revenues could be raised by a method which would put a premium and not a fine upon enterprise, and secure to every person the fruit of his labor, untouched by govermental^sic levies, we could not find an old fogie in all Baltimore who could remember the time when he was not in favor of the Single Tax idea.

INDIANA.

S. T., Evansville.—At its last meeting the Central Labor Union adopted a petition, to be presented to the Common Council, asking that it “exempt from taxation all improvements on real estate,” on the ground that such taxation was unjust, and placed a perpetual and burdensome penalty upon progress, and discouraged capital from seeking investment in Evansville.

ILLINOIS.

Warren Worth Bailey, Chicago, January 23.—James Malcolm presented a remarkable paper at our meeting last night on “Personal Property Taxation in Illinois.” In some respects it was the best thing the club has ever had the pleasure of hearing, and Mr. Malcolm was warmly congratulated at its conclusion. He gave an exhaustive study of taxation in this State, the assessors’ returns for 1890 on personal property in Cook County on one side and the five agricultural counties of Hancock, Brown, Greene, Jersey and Pike on the other, being taken as a basis of comparison. While Cook county had a population of 1,200,000 as against about 113,000 of the five counties, the assessor made the average inhabitant of the rural district 60 per cent. wealthier in personal property than the average city owner. The following, taken from the official records, are some of the examples of this discrimination against the country people. Cook county assessed but 547 engines and boilers valued at $178,226, whereas the five counties returned 347 valued at $31,607. Cook county assessors could find but $16,000 in fire and burglar proof safes, and the five counties seemed to contain $7,316 in that kind of property. The assessment of clocks and watches is one of the worst instances of the carelessness of Chicago assessors, there being $28,968 of these articles in the county, as compared with $31,314 in the rural district. $956,390 and $297,068 were the respective assessments in the two sections of bank and broker money. The aggregate population of Peoria, Spring field, Bloomington, Quincy, Aurora and Rockford is 164,811 or less than one-seventh of that of Chicago. If the assessed valuation of personal property were divided equally among the inhabitants of Chicago each would reach about $25, while a similar division made in the case of the other continued on p. 19 →

[continued on page 19]

OHIO.

George Senyard, Cleveland.—Twelve petitions. The most of the signers are wound up, and will never run down until the victory over wrong is won.

MINNESOTA.

C. J. Buell, Minneapolis.—Single Taxers are pretty thick around here, and getting thicker. Even the most conservative of Democratic politicians have ceased to be afraid of us, and are right glad to have the help of us radicals. Our friend P. J. Smally—for eight years a Single Taxer—was secretary of the Democratic State Central Committee, and is now Chief Clerk of the House. A committee of twenty-five representative Democrats from all parts of the State has been appointed to organize for the Presidential campaign of ’92, with special reference to the distribution of literature. On that committee there are several pronounced Single Taxers. Minneapolis has four members, two of whom, Titus Mareck and myself, are pretty fair Single Taxers, and the other two are not hostile.

The newly appointed Labor Commissioner for the State, J. P. M’Gaughey, is an active member of our league, a pronounced anti-sociatist^sic. His predecessor, John Lamb, is a Single Tax sociatist^sic, if such a thing is possible. STANDARD readers will remember a bright letter some weeks ago on the question of woman’s work for the Single Tax, signed Eva Gay. Well, Eva Gay is Eva McDonald, who was recently elected State Lecturer of the Farmers’ Alliance by a very large majority over General Baker, who came so near defeating Congressman Lind in the last election. Miss McDonald is a hustler, and never hesitates to talk Single Tax when it will do good. Since Mayor Winston joined our league a good many who have been indifferent have begun to inquire about the Single Tax, and they will keep on inquiring till they see the whole cat. Our old friend, Major Bassett, comes up to the league nearly every meeting. Once in a while he pitches into us like Edward Atkinson, and then hands a dollar to the treasurer.

E. Hermann, St. Paul, January 21.—It is getting interesting here. After business hours the Alliance representatives come together at the Capitol building and discuss social problems. This, I think, is the result of the work of the Labor Lyceum, which is just now attracting the attention of the leaders of that party. The remedies proposed by the Alliance men to improve the producer’s condition are innumerable, but they all agree that the railroads, telegraphs, waterways and light should be in the hands of the people. They also have great hopes for the two per cent. money loaning scheme on farm products and lands. I find the intelligent farmer a very careful and conservative man, and judging by the sentiments expressed at this gathering, which I attended last night, the money loaning scheme, after a full discussion, will fall to the ground. At present they are groping in the dark for something to give them release from their depressed condition; and not having a good leader they waste a great deal of time with useless talk. Mr. Donnelly, their spokesman and president of the Alliance, is a very able speaker and man of courage, but he does not seem to know how to lead them out of the wilderness. The Pioneer Press, a few days ago, stated that the Labor Lyceum talks all wind up with the Single Tax theories, which is so. The Dispatch of to-day has a heading, “Single Tax system a leading topic of discussion in local labor circles.”

MISSOURI.

Percy Pepoon, St. Louis.—Colonel T. J. Portis, general attorney of the Missouri Pacific railway system, addressed the last meeting of the Single Tax League at Bowman’s Hall, his subject being: “The Futility of Restrictive Legislation as a Means of Social Advancement.” While Colonel Portis does not call himself a Single Tax man, his address was a complete and powerful presentation of Single Tax principles, though it did not touch upon our specific propositions. In the near future Colonel Portis will lecture on the Single Tax and we hope he will then be prepared to advocate it fully. At the conclusion of Colonel Portis’ addresss^sic Judge Minor Meriwether, who has frequently spoke^sic and debated against the Single Tax, stated that he was prepared to accept the Single Tax as the means of raising necessary revenue. In other words he has become a Single Taxer, limited.

Sheridan Webster, St. Louis.—At the last meeting of our club the corresponding secretary was instructed to open communication with all Single Tax clubs in Missouri, as a means of mutual encouragement and stimulation to activity and efficiency in our common work. District Assembly No. 4, K. of L., has appointed a conference committee to meet with our committee on securing amendments to our present Australian ballot law, and their committee has endorsed the demands as adopted by the League January 13, 1890. The amendments we seek are practically the Australian law in all its simplicity. Our demands meet the approval of the Missouri Civil Service Reform Association and have been endorsed by the Prohibitionists of the city. We expect them incorporated into the law as soon as the proper pressure can be brought to bear on the Legislature.

KANSAS.

Wm. A. Garretson, Lincoln.—A. N. Whittington, county lecturer of the Farmers’ Alliance and representative in the Legislature, has caused to be printed in the Lincoln County Farmer, and the Beacon, a circular (over his signature) in which he recommends each sub-Alliance in Lincoln County to appropriate at least one dollar for the purchase of copies “Protection or Free Trade?” for circulation among the members. He says the Alliance brethren will find the book very interesting and instructive Winter reading. Mr. Whittington volunteers to become a distributing agent for all Alliance members who may send their orders to him.

J. E. Sutton, Olathe.—Fifteen petitions. The Single Tax is not much known in this little town yet, but I hope after the political excitement is continued on p. 20 →

[continued on next page]

COLORADO.

Chas. A. Siringo, Denver.—Things are certainly coming our way very fast. The world is moving so rapidly I sometime stop to catch my breath. It seems but yesterday since Henry George was called an Anarchist, and since he he began^sic advocating reforms—such as the Australian ballot law—Colorado and her leading papers are now crying for the new system of voting. And so it goes in all States that have not already adopted it.

SOUTH DAKOTA.

W. E. Brokaw, Baltic.—Monday afternoon, January 12, I talked to the County Alliance at Flandrau. Moody County^sic. Mr. J. R. Lowe, first vice-president of the State Alliance, was present. He said he had been reading the copy of “Progress and Poverty” which he bought of me at Mitchell, since his return from Ocala, Fla. He is an editor of considerable experience, and he said he never knew of anyone who seemed to be able to always put the right word in the right place—make such good use of the English language—as Henry George does. He ordered a copy of the new edition of “Protection or Free Trade?” as did ten others at that meeting. He spoke of the address of the president of the Colored Alliance, in which he came out for the Single Tax, and he said that Walter Muir, who recently wrote to the New York Journal endorsing the Single Tax, is a thorough Alliance man. Tuesday Mr. G. A. Perley took me to Egan, where I took the train for Baltic. I spoke in the schoolhouse there that night. The room was well filled. Nearly all were Norwegians. The chairman, Mr. J. J. Vreime, is a regular reader of THE STANDARD. One of those who listened to me owns most of the town site of Baltic, but to his honor I can say he is something of a Single Tax agitator. I took orders for several of George’s works, and a good-sized collection gave evidence of appreciation. Many questions were asked and the answers were well received. Wednesday nighs^sic I organized a Single Tax club at Baltic. There are about eight of them who believe in the justice of it. Wednesday forenoon I had a discussion in a store with a bright but stubborn young man. He would not admit anything, but the dozen or so lisieners^sic were pretty well convinced that I was right, and some of them ordered copies of “Protection or Free Trade?” Thursday night I spoke in Fleetwood schoolhouse to about two dozen persons. I began at 7:30 and it was after 10:30 when I got through answering questions, and then the chairman said he guessed no one was tired. For half an hour longer they kept up a heated discussion among themselves. Most of them never heard of the Single Tax before. My free literature is always eagerly taken. The Colton schoolhouse, about ten miles north of Hartford, was full Friday night to hear me. Some three or four who heard me the night before were there. I was entertained that night and taken to Hartford the next day ([17th?]) by J. E. Colton, a well-to-do wool grower, and ex-County Superintendent of Schools. He has “Progress and Poverty,” and I took his order for the rest of George’s works. Until recently he has been a strong Republican. At 2 P. M., Saturday, I spoke in the Hartford schoolhouse. C. A. Soderberg, formerly secretary of the old Territorial Alliance, and afterwards second vice-president of the South Dakota Alliance, was present and endorsed my statements fully. He gave me a letter of introduction to Sever Wilkinson, who was a member of the Legislature last year, and I rode to his place with another farmer. Sunday, H. R. Darrow, in whose district Mr. Wilkinson’s daughter teaches school, and with whom she boards, visited him and we decided that I should speak in the Crooks’ schoolhouse Monday night. Mr. Darrow is also a Republican, but inclined^sic to the Singlee Tax^sic from what read of it^sic. Monday morning Mr. Wilkinson took me to New Hope post-office (at the house of William Crooks), and had teachers in three school districts announce the meeting. In the evening we walked to the schoolhouse, about a mile, carrying my grips. After the meeting I walked a mile and a half to C. Christenson’s, with whom I rode to Baltic the 20th. Enclosed find the sixty-six petitions. More anon.

CALIFORNIA.

S. T., San Francisco.—The Single Tax society of this city has made arrangements with Ralph E. Hoyt, of Los Angeles, to deliver a series of lectures on Tax Reform, Free Trade, etc., in San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose, and several other places. The meetings will open about the first of February.

S. T., San Francisco.—On January 11, Judge James G. Magaire^sic addressed our club on General Booth’s “Darkest England.”

INDIAN TERRITORY.

Thomas Howie, Vinita.—Thirty petitions, which I secured at a county meeting of my Alliance, which I have joined for the express purpose of making Single Tax converts.

WASHINGTON.

W. A. Whinney, Douglas.—Six petitions. I can see a decided improvement in our ranks over that of two years ago.

CANADA.

S. T., Toronto.—On Tuesday evening of last week Father Huntington spoke on the Single Tax at the Auditorium before an immense audience. His address was an answer to recent criticisms of the Rev. Dr. Grant. After a few preliminary remarks Father Huntington plunged into his subject. He contrasted the social condition of the poor in England three hundred years ago with their actual state to-day, showing that in the old days of “Merrie England” there was less destitution and misery than now. No one would think now of including the poverty-stricken East End of London or the Black Country in the phrase “Merrie England.” The arguments of Rev. Principal Grant that the rich are not becoming richer nor the poor poorer were then attacked. Father Huntington admitted Professor Grant’s contention that wages had in many cases increased, but the conditions of life were altered, and the real question was not whether the laborer was getting p. 20, col. 2 more wages than centuries ago, but whether he was getting his just share of the wealth he aids in producing. So long, he declared, as men do not receive their proper share of the money which their labor creates so long will they be dissatisfied. Then for some time he poured a flood of criticism and ridicule upon the Malthusian doctrine, which, he said, was only a balm for the rich to sooth^sic their troubled consciences in regard to their real duty towards the poor. He proceeded to argue in favor of freedom of labor, and against protective tariffs. The same right to every one to have a share in the land was defended, and at length he went into an exposition of the Single Tax objects. These were to remove taxes from labor, and the products of labor, and to place all such taxes on land values or “rent,” in the meaning of that word as used by political economists. What a man made should be his, and nobody should be allowed to take it away from him without compensation. The land belonged to God and the value to the people of the community, who collectively created that value. Father Huntington was frequently applauded, and Rev. Dr. Hunter moved a vote of thanks to him at the close, which was seconded by Alderman Hallam, and carried amid applause. Dr. Hunter declared himself a convert to the doctrine. Alderman Hallam said that he was an old-time believer in it. Many of the prominent ministers of Toronto were on the platform.

William Small, Winnipeg, Manitoba.—Free Trade is gradually but surely gaining ground in this country. It is beginning to be discussed in all directions; and where two or three years ago you could only find an odd Single Tax limited man here and there, now you find them by the score, not limited, but unlimited enough to satisfy the most outrageous Single Tax crank that ever turned the world round. It is being discussed in our churches, in our debating societies, in the meetings of our labor organizations; in fact, it is in the air and will not down.

S. T., Summerside, Prince Edward’s Island.—A discussion of the theories of Henry George was up before the Ethical Culture Society, January 12. Mr. William Jenkin led with a lengthy paper.

WILL YOU GET PART OF THE FEBRUARY EDITION?

Plates are now being prepared for the first hundred thousand copies of the half million edition of “Protection or Free Trade?” The work will be pushed as rapidly as possible, and we hope to begin mailing the copies to pre-paid subscribers late in February.

Every mail brings excellent suggestions of new fields for distributing the edition. If the subscriptions warrant, all of these will be adopted. The Farmers’ Alliance, workmen’s organizations, country newspaper offices and the reading-rooms of cheap hotels will receive attention first. As many doubt the possibility of giving a book of over two hundred pages for ten cents, it seems necessary to reiterate that for every ten cents received before publication, a copy will be sent, postage paid, either to the subscriber himself, to any address he chooses to furnish or to some name on the lists already in hand of some millions of men it is desirable and important to reach. The book will be well printed on good paper and will be “unabridged.”

Subscriptions at ten cents a copy will be received until the entire edition is completed, which may be some months; but it is important that every one wishing to subscribe or to obtain subscriptions should do so at once.

Mr. Rogers’ suggestion is one that should be carried out in other cities than Buffalo. Mr. Williamson’s idea can be adopted elsewhere with profit, as also that of another esteemed correspondent, George C. Dwight, of South Dakota, who, not being able to subscribe as much as he wished, headed a subscription list himself and succeeded in getting a large number of orders.

Sarah Mifflin Gay.—Please send some blanks and I will do what I can to swell the edition to a million. For many months past, whenever I have read of a meeting of the Alliance, I have wished we could reach them, and have felt that “Protection or Free Trade?” should be in the hands of each of them. But anything as good as this cheap edition I never dreamed of. I wish it success with all my heart. It is inspiriting to read of the big orders.

J. A. Haggstrom, St. Paul, Neb.—Being a member of Farmers’ Alliance, I propose to sell or distribute all I can during meetings.

William Camm, Murrayville, Ill.—Enclosed find subscription for fifty copies. Even Protectionists subscribe, the price is so small. As a lecturer in the Alliance, I find more opportunities than ever before.

William Brown, Philadelphia, Pa.—It is the book that made me a Free Trader, consequently I think it is a good book to circulate. Send blanks and I’ll try for subscriptions in the shop.

Thomas Williamson.—I have arranged with a bookseller to sell as many copies of “Protection or Free Trade?” at twenty or twenty-five cents as possible, and then pay me cost (ten cents) for them.

G. M. Vescelius, New York.—Enclose order for fifty copies; will probably take more. Think more of this method of propoganda^sic at present than any other.

S. H. Howes, Southboro, Mass.—Send more blanks. Protectionists subscribe readily. It is a good move.

Frank W. Irwin, Secretary Chicago Single Tax Club.—Enclose subscription for five hundred copies.

A. R. Paul, North Adams Mass^sic.—I got subscriptions for fifty copies in one day in the shop where I am employed. Think I can sell a thousand.

Mrs. E. A. Deverall, Secretary Eastern District Single Tax Club, Brooklyn, N. Y.—Enclose an order from Eastern District Single Tax Club for five hundred copies. We feel assured that the distribution of this book will be productive of more lasting good than the same money expended in any other way^sic,

C. H. Merry, Yazoo City, Miss.—Send blanks, and I will enclose them in every letter I send out.

S. C. Rogers, Buffalo, N. Y.—There are always a great many men out of work here in the Winter, and I have thought that many of them might be induced to sell “Protection or Free Trade?”

Everyone who subscribes or obtains subscriptions for not less than a hundred copies becomes thereby, a member of the “Hand to Hand Club,” who will issue the edition. Mr. Logan Carlisle, son of Senator Carlisle, is president, and Mr. William Lloyd Garrison, vice-president. Every reader of THE STANDARD who belongs to the Farmers’ Alliance, Knights of Labor, or any similar organization, is asked to introduce a resolution at the first opportunity, urging the members to subscribe to this ten cent edition. Please advise me when such action is taken. Circulars, blanks, etc., will be gladly furnished in any quantity on application to W. J. Atkinson, secretary “Hand to Hand Club,” 42 University place, New York.

THE SINGLE TAX PLATFORM.

SINGLE TAX LEAGUE OF THE UNITED STATES.

[Advertisement] WANTED, AT ONCE.

An agent or dealer in every town or city who is willing to represent and hardle^sic our UNION MADF^sic CIGARS. A fair chance to such who will assist us. Address your letters to W. E. KRUM & CO.,Reading^sic, Pa.

[Advertisement] FREE SAMPLE Colorado Cough and Catarrh Root

FREE SAMPLE Colorado Cough and Catarrh Root. The great medical wonder. Send two-cent stamp. Address JEROME BLANCHARD, Highland, Denver, Col.

[Advertisement] Pears’ Soap

[Display advertisement, hand-lettered script and display type between two heavy rules:]

Good morning

Have you used

PEARS’ SOAP?

[Advertisement] Ely’s Cream Balm

[Display advertisement, white letters on black ground, with a phrenological-style head at right whose regions are lettered:]

Elys Cream Balm For

CATARRH

THE POSITIVE CURE.

[small print, badly filled in:] ELY BROTHERS[?], 56[?] Warren St., New York. Price 50[?] cts.

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

p. 22, col. 2

[Advertisement] The Berkshire Life Insurance Co. 

(ORGANIZED 1851^sic.

THE BERKSHIRE

Life Insurance Co.,

OF

PITTSFIELD, MASS.

Send your age, name and address and seceive^sic a SPECIAL STATEMENT showing the SUPERIOR ADVANTAGES and LIBERAL OPTIONS of the new TWENTY PAYMENT INVESTMENT and PROTECTION POLICY, together with the GUARANTEED CASH and PAID UP VALUES after the SECOND YEAR. This policy affords all the advantages of Life Insurance during the early or producing years of life, and at the same time makes sure a provision for advanced age. Being a POSITIVE CONTRACT, it is especially adapted to suit the needs of business men.

You should send for particulars of this investment to

GEORGE W. ENGLISH, Manager,

271 BROADWAY,

NEW YORK CITY.

p. 22, col. 3

[Advertisement] Henry George & Co., Publishers

HENRY GEORGE & CO.,

PUBLISHERS,

42 University Place, New York City.

THE STANDARD

A WEEKLY REVIEW OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS.

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

[Entered at the post office in New York as second-class matter.]

VOL. IX., No. 5. } WHOLE No. 214. }

NEW YORK, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1891.

{ ONE YEAR, $3.00. { FOUR MOS., $1.00.

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 suffering, 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^sic, W. A. NOYES, 800 Powers’ Block, Rochester, N. Y.

[Advertisement] THE WATERTOWN JOURNAL

[Advertisement] 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] 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.

[Advertisement] Holland’s Coffee and Dining Rooms

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

p. 24, col. 2

[Advertisement] 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

[Advertisement] 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: head and shoulders of a curly-haired little girl, beside the words “Children always Enjoy It.”]

Children always Enjoy It.

[Advertisement] “PROTECTION OR FREE TRADE?”

[Advertisement] Don’t kick (Geo. P. Rowell & Co.)

[Cartoon: a man in a bowler hat kicks a round, bristling object (a ball or bundle) high into the air; the hand-lettered display words read as follows.]

Don’t kick because your business is bad. but advertise If you^sic don’t know how to, write to us and we will tell you.

We will prepare your advertisement or give you advice and assistance to aid you in preparing it yourself. We will have the advertisement set in type and procure illustrations if any are needed. When a satisfactory advertisement has been produced we will furnish proofs and an electrotyped pattern to be used in duplicating the advertisement if the display or illustration make an electrotype desirable.

Address GEO. P. ROWELL & CO., Newspaper Advertising Bureau, 10 Spruce St., N. Y.