THE FAiniER A.ND THE SINGLE TAX. 329 



total economic rent is, but we have no such an approximation 

 to it as would justify any opinion, except in a very general 

 way, as to where taxation would fall under the single tax. 

 We can discuss the principle, and if just should accept it, and 

 if unjust reject it, no matter what the consequences. 



At the same time it is not unprofitable to consider how 

 in the light of such information as we have, the interests of 

 the farmers would probably be aiiected. To gather such facts 

 as would justify a decided conviction is too formidable an 

 undertaking for any one but an official commission. In the 

 absence of such facts, while the study, as stated, be super- 

 ficial, it will not be without its value.* 



In considering this subject farmers must understand that 

 it is not a question of changing from a just and satisfactory 

 method of taxation to one which may prove otherwise. The 

 present method of raising state and local revenue depends 

 mainly upon a uniform ad valorem tax upon property. If 

 property were fairly assessed there could be strong arguments 

 both for and against the method as a just and exj)edient mode 

 of raising revenue. It is, however, notorious that assessments 

 are very unfair, and that the rich, to a great extent, escape 

 their due share of the burden. This is accomplished partly 

 by custom, partly by incompetence of officials, partly by influ- 

 ence, partly by bribery, and partly by perjury. The injustice 

 of assessments and the impossibility of reform are alike con- 

 ceded by all investigators. Ad valorem taxes seem never 

 likely to be more fairly assessed than now. Tiiere is no 

 doubt, and nobody denies, that fiirmers are the greatest suffer- 

 ers from unjust assessments, for the reason that their property 

 is mostly visible, and its approximate value well known to 



*The single tax is advocated not, primarily, as a fiscal but a social reform. 

 Its advocates believe tbat its adoption would result in a just distribution of 

 comfort — in otber words, that it would abolish necessar}^ poverty. The best 

 exposition of the subject from this standpoint is " Progress and Poverty," by 

 the late Henry George, a most brilliant book, to which no adequate reply has 

 ever been made. I am not able to agree with Mr. George as to the probable 

 social results of the single tax, but wish every farmer might read that book. 

 In the text the subject is considered merely as a revenue measure. 



