THE SINGLE TAX. 1 49 



efforts to hold on to their lands with devoted attach- 

 ment after they have ceased to give their owners the 

 necessaries of a tolerable existence (an attachment, how- 

 ever, which it would be a calamity to drive from the 

 human breast). 



Agriculturists could not shift their taxation burdens 

 upon other classes through the price of their productions, 

 simply because agriculture is not a monopoly ; whereas 

 all interests, under the single-tax regime, which are mo- 

 nopolies and touched by it, would have the same chance 

 to shift their tax upon agriculture and other helpless in- 

 dustries, as now. But how easy would it be for great 

 trusts, such as a salt trust, having control of the salt 

 deposits ; or the oil trust ; or the coal and iron, having 

 control of the coal and iron deposits, to force all con- 

 sumers of these commodities to pay their land tax. 

 They would simply charge to cost of production, and 

 the consumers would pay it in the prices paid. 



Customs walls aid these combinations in accomplish- 

 ing their purposes, but they are not necessary for this 

 end when combinations become international in their 

 character. The single-tax advocate contends that by 

 putting a tax upon the unworked mineral lands, these 

 lands would become available to new competitors ; but 

 how long before the latter would be brought into the 

 combination, or be crushed out by those with greater 

 capital ? The average farmer of America to-day is as 

 powerless to burden society in any shape, in his control 

 of the rent value of his land, as he is to make the con- 

 sumer pay his taxes. In fact, these conditions move on 

 parallel lines. 



Mr. George is one who is able to see that the farmer 

 cannot throw the burden of indirect taxation upon other 



