FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 197 
prospect, combined with the prevailing low price of timber and the 
relatively heavy taxes, now make much of it definitely submarginal. 
Lower taxes would undoubtedly lift much land out of this category, 
and in many instances lower taxes would prevail if the land were not 
overassessed. 
There are those who believe that the poorest land would better be 
in public ownership and who therefore incline to regard with compla- 
cency the reversion of such land through tax delinquency. They 
may even go to the extent of deprecating the effort to assess the 
poorest land at its true value, suggesting rather that no land be as- 
sessed below a certain minimum value, with the expectation that lands 
which cannot bear the taxes on such minimum value will be forced 
into delinquency and eventually revert to the State or county. This 
program involves obviously confiscation of private property through 
overassessment. Whatever may be the opinion as to the relative 
public advantages of private or public ownership of the less produc- 
tive land, there would appear to be no justification for deliberate 
confiscation of private property by means of an illegal assessment. 
Tax delinquency which advances to the point where titles are 
surrendered on a large scale is prima facie evidence of serious economic 
or political maladjustments, and there can be no adequate solution 
of the problem apart from important—perhaps drastic—changes in 
the organization and financing of local government. 
