October 26, 1906.] 



SCIENCE. 



521 



tion facilities, (3) combination of corporate 

 enterprises, (4) increase in land values, 

 (5) speculation in corporate securities, (6) 

 monopoly. All except the second and the 

 sixth are still open fields for the fortune 

 maker. 



Possibly something, not much, may be 

 expected as a remedy from seeking an 

 honorable family name, from public serv- 

 ice, but the remedy is too remote. 



Of the three methods proposed: (1) An 

 arbitrary limit to accumulation, (2) pro- 

 gressive income tax, and (3) progressive 

 inheritance tax, the first is arbitrary, the 

 second no less acceptable, and the third is 

 good for raising revenue but doubtful as 

 a means of repressing accumulations. 



A tax heavy enough to accomplish the 

 purpose would raise problems of fiscal ad- 

 ministration of a perplexing character, 

 both in the collection and use of the funds. 

 Economically, such a tax would repress in- 

 dustrial activity, financially it might cause 

 extravagance in governmental expenditure 

 and disturbance of the money market by 

 its collection. 



On the subject of agriculture the intro- 

 ductory talk of Professor L. H. Bailey, of 

 Cornell, on the 'Problems of Agriculture,' 

 and the paper by Professor G. N. Lauman, 

 on 'Rural Conditions and Problems in 

 Europe,' were timely and full of sugges- 

 tion in the service of American experience. 



Professor Bailey said: The farm is go- 

 ing t« be laid out by the rural architect 

 with regard to good taste. We shall be- 

 gin with the highways and take down 

 the advertising signs among the first. 

 Sanitation will play a larger part. Even 

 now many of our best dairy stables are 

 more truly sanitary than the majority of 

 homes in city or country. The rural 

 home must solve its servant problem (1) 

 by simplifying its food preparation, and 



(2) by reduction of labor with mechanical 

 appliances. 



Causes and Consequences of the Past Ten 



Years of Agricultural Prosperity in the 



United States: George K. Holmes, U. 



S. Department of Agriculture. 



The prosperity of farmers, which has 

 been preeminently in evidence during the 

 last half dozen years, must be and is log- 

 ically reflected in the higher capitalization 

 of their lands, and in better and additional 

 buildings and other improvements. It has 

 been ascertained by the U. S. Department 

 of Agriculture that the farm real estate of 

 the United States increased 38.5 per cent, 

 in value during the five years following 

 the census of 1900, or an amount that aver- 

 aged $100,000,000 a month and equaled 

 $6,000,000,000. 



There has been a cessation in recent 

 years of the longtime tendency to overpro- 

 duction; there is no more cheap cultivable 

 land of nation, state and railroad to be 

 robbed of its fertility for cheap production. 

 The agricultural population is becoming a 

 smaller fraction of total inhabitants, and 

 there is a nearer approach to equilibrium 

 between agricultural production and con- 

 sumption, helped by enormous exports of 

 cotton, grain and meat. In the meantime, 

 immigration, which had long poured its 

 hordes upon the farms, has changed in 

 character and been diverted to the cities, to 

 consume instead of multiply the products 

 of the farm. Besides, the consumption per 

 capita of some things seems to have in- 

 creased — of wheat, meat and its products, 

 vegetables, fruit, poultry and eggs. 



These are among the chief causes that 

 are making agricultural consumption tend 

 to push agricultural production, with the 

 result that prices have risen and farming 

 operations have become more profitable. 



The greatest economic gain that the 



