THE FARMER AND THE SINGLE TAX. 337 



the property than any other assessment or estimate that I 

 have seen. It has the advantage of being a regular assess- 

 ment, and not a single special inquiry, and was made after 

 eleven years' experience, largely by the same officials, in the 

 valuation of property on that plan. The assessors were at 

 least ''sworn" to assess at true value if they could find it. 

 Railroads, which are treated by single taxers as "land," were 

 separately assessed, but as I do not believe that the bare land 

 used by the railroads — except street railroads— of the state 

 yielded any rental, after paying fair interest on honest cost, I 

 do not include them as taxable real estate. The street rail- 

 roads, also not assessed as real estate, doubtless had a value to 

 be reckoned as land rent, blit as I have no means of ascertain- 

 ing the aggregate, I can not include them. With the exception 

 of a few lines, the street railroads could not pay much rent, 

 and it would make no great difference. Still, whatever their 

 rent was should be included as taxable, from a single-tax 

 standpoint.* 



The state and local taxes in 1890, in California, aggregated 

 $18,754,850. The federal taxation of that year was $381,094,- 

 265. The population of California was 1.9 per cent of that of 

 the United States. Adding to the state and local taxes $7,240,- 

 791, which is 1.9 per cent of the federal taxation, there is 

 a total of $25,995,041 to be assessed, upon single-tax prin- 

 ciples, upon the real estate, not including improvements, of 

 the state. 



Unfortunately the California reports of 1890 do not segre- 

 gate the real estate from improvements, as they have since 

 done, and I am compelled to take the returns for 1891, which 

 are much higher, although the property assessed was the same. 

 The State Board of Equalization that year took great pains to 

 ascertain what w^as the "true value" of the property assessed, 

 according to their judgment, and raised the assessment in San 

 Francisco as returned to them, thirty per cent, and that of 

 Los Angeles County fifteen per cent. The equalized assess- 

 ment for 1890, of real estate and improvements, was $891,- 



• This omission of property is offset by the omission of poll and license taxes. 



22 



