1426 
Iht RURAL. NEW-YORKER 
December 10, 1921 
'FRIEND” SPRAYERS 
GASPORT.N.Y. 
Catalog Vree 
$135.00 FOR BEST NUTS 
BEECHNUTS. BLACK WALNUTS BUTTERNUTS. CHESTNUTS. 
ENGLISH WALNUTS. HAZELNUTS. HICKORYNUTS. JAPAN 
WALNUTS, PECANS. Full information from WILLARD G. 
BIXBY. Treat. Northern Nut Growers Assn., Baldwin, Nassau Co.. N. T 
HOMELITE 
The Portable Electric Light and Power Plant 
NOT THE LOWEST PRICE BUT THE CHEAPEST AND BEST 
ELECTRIC POWER 
for 
Iron, Vacuum Cleaner, Pump 
or any machine up to |/2 H. P. 
Special Foundation is required. 
Separate Gasoline Tank or Piping necessary. 
Cooling Water—Homelite is air cooled. 
Ignition Trouble—Simms High Tension Magneto is used. 
Manufactured by 
THE SIMMS MAGNETO CO., East Orange, N. J. 
Distributed by 
Smith-Meeker Eng. Co., 123 Liberty St., N. Y. 
Write for circular with description and price 
Weight: 100 Pounds 
EECTRIC LIGHT 
for 
Home, Barn, Store and Camp 
BATAVIA TIRES-Direct to you 
THE 
" The tires that can stand winter ruts and weather ” 
GREATEST TIRES EVER BUILT—BARRING NONE 
Our specialty—Oversize 30x3 \ CORDS 
Correct size for: Ford, Maxwell, Chevrolet, Dort, Overland—*20-’21 
Guarantee on all cords—12,000 miles 
RED SEAL FABRICS. Guarantee—5,000 miles 
Shipping Charges collect on Cords 
prepaid on Fabrics 
PRICE 
SIZE 
Style 
Bead 
FABRIC 
CORD 
28 x 3 
Clin 
$ 7.50 
30 x 3 
«4 
— 
8.00 
30 x 3'/ 2 
44 
— 
9.50 
15.00 
32 x 3 Vi 
44 
ss 
12.50 
34 x 3'/ 2 
44 
ss 
13.50 
31 x 4 
44 
— 
14 50 
32 x 4 
_ 
ss 
15.50 
29.00 
33 x 4 
Clin 
ss 
16.50 
30.00 
34 x 4 
— 
ss 
17.50 
31.00 
35 x 4 
ss 
18.50 
36 x 4 
Clin 
ss 
20 00 
32 x 4 Vi 
— 
ss 
23.00 
33 x 4 Vi 
ss 
25.00 
34 x 4 Vi 
— 
ss 
27.50 
35 x 4 Vi 
■- 
ss 
28.50 
36 x 4 Vi 
— 
ss 
29.00 
37 x 4Vi 
QD 
— — 
29.50 
35 x 5 
QD 
ss 
30.00 
45.00 
37 x 5 
QD 
ss 
34.50 
THE BATAVIA RUBBER COMPANY 
9-21 ROBERTSON STREET 
Tire makers for 
15 years 
BATAVIA, N. Y. 
Reference : 
First Natl. Bank 
Batavia, N. Y. 
A Primer of Economics 
By John J. Dillon 
Part LIV 
SYSTEMS OF TAXATION 
A Limited Land Tax.—In this country 
the Federal government does not directly 
tax land and improvements. Its revenue 
is derived from a tax on imports, in¬ 
comes, including profits and surtaxes, in¬ 
heritance taxes, excise taxes, and tax on 
liquors, tobacco and other commodities 
classified as luxuries. The greater part, 
if not all of these taxes, are paid finally 
by the consumer, and some of them, par¬ 
ticularly the profits and surtaxes, work as 
a discouragement to industry. As a sub¬ 
stitute for some of these national taxes, 
conservative and practical students of 
land taxation advocate a percentage tax 
on land values. This suggestion is based 
on the principle of economic rent, but 
technically it would be a tax on land val¬ 
ues and not on rent. This, however, is a 
distinction without a practical differ¬ 
ence. The suggestion is for a tax of 1 per 
cent on land values, and this of course 
would be paid by the landlord, though 
originally all economic rent is paid by the 
community, but it would fall far short of 
the single tax or full economic rent. Two 
bills have been proposed in Congress for 
this purpose. These bills are known as 
the Ralston-Nnland bills and the Keller 
bill, respectively. Roth of these meas¬ 
ures propose a tax of 1 per cent on land 
values for national revenue, after deduct¬ 
ing the value of all improvements, and 
after making an exemption of .$10,000 on 
each holding of land values, exclusive of 
all improvements. The exempted im¬ 
provements on farms include buildings, 
fences, wells, orchards, vineyards, clear¬ 
ing, draining, preparing the ground for 
cultivation, and other improvements of 
every kind. Land holdings are also ex¬ 
empt from the tax when the income from 
them is less than $3,000 annually. The 
1920 census gives the average value of 
the land alone in each farm as $8,514. 
When all the above deductions and the 
exemption of $10,000 on each holding is 
made, few farmers would be subject to 
tax under the bill. The author of one of 
the bills estimates that 99 per cent of 
farmers would escape any tax under it, 
but that the large and valuable holdings 
in cities, mines, timber, oil, coal, timber 
lands and water fronts and powers would 
pay in excess of $2,000,000,000 Federal 
tax and relieve agriculture and other in¬ 
dustries of this portion of the tax bur¬ 
den. 
The 1920 census gives the value of 
farm lands in the States as $54,900,000,- 
000. This is exclusive of buildings, but 
if we were to reduce this by the value of 
the fences, drainage, water supply, fruit 
trees and soil improvement, the figure 
would probably fall below fifty billions. 
The total value of all land is not pro¬ 
vided in the census, but estimates, in¬ 
cluding idle resources now wholly or par¬ 
tially exempt, place it. close to $300,000,- 
000.000. This includes city lots, water 
fronts, harbors, water powers, fishing 
grounds, railroads and other rights of way, 
franchises, timber lands, coal, iron and 
mineral mines, and large tracts held by 
railroads, syndicates and individual own¬ 
ers. The amount of these large holdings is 
much greater and more concentrated in a 
few hands than citizens generally realize. 
The United States Steel Corporation 
alone is credited with land value at the 
present, time of substantially a billion 
dollars. According to the reports of the 
Commissioner of Corporations, substan¬ 
tially one-half of the timber land of the 
United States is owned by 195 holders. 
Representative Lambert of Wisconsin es¬ 
timates from government reports that in 
the State of Louisiana 270 holders own 
5.315,000 acres, equal in territory to the 
entire improved farm acreage of the 
State. In upper Michigan, 136 owners 
hold 6,495,000 acres, or one-half the area 
of the entire improved farm acreage of 
the upper peninsula. In Florida, 290 
owners hold 18.949,000 acres, or 10 times 
the improved farm acreage of that State. 
In Arkansas, 265 holders owu 3,318,000 
acres, or nearly one-half as much as the 
214,678 farmers of that State. In Col¬ 
orado, 14 holders own 3,355,000 acres, 
nearly one-half as much as the 46,000 
farmers of Colorado. In New Mexico 
one company owns 4,500,000 acres. In 
Texas one non-resident owns 3,000,000 
acres. Within the past 11 years more 
than 14.000,000 acres of public lands have 
been certified on account of railroad 
grants. These examples could be extend¬ 
ed indefinitely. The cases cited are suffi¬ 
cient to show that large holdings of all 
kinds of land are held unproductively for 
speculation. It can be held idle for 
future advance in prices because the pres¬ 
ent tax is negligible. If it were taxed it 
would be put to use, and would be obliged 
to bear its share of the general burden. 
It is an unfortunate circumstance that no 
statistics are furnished to show definitely 
the extent and value of land and site 
values exclusive of agricultural lands, the 
estimated value of which erroneously in¬ 
cludes many improvements. The opposi¬ 
tion to a tax on land which would include 
these properties is set up on behalf of the 
farmer. It is conducted largely for the 
benefit of individuals and corporations 
who control valuable resources through 
their ownership of selected land sites, 
rights of way, mines, water powers, and 
other natural resources of great present 
and potential wealth. 
There is one feature of the subject 
that has escaped writers on the subject, 
but which cannot have entirely escaped 
the present owners of farm lands. In the 
last 29 years farm lands have, according 
to the census figures, doubled twice. The 
increase in 1910 was 108 per cent. In 
1920 it is given as 92 per cent. The low¬ 
ering of land values through the effect of 
a land tax would make it proportionately 
easier for newcomers to get possession of 
farms, but their gain would be an 
equally capitalized loss to the present 
owners, though it would undoubtedly af¬ 
fect owners of idle land more than the 
owner of the average sized cultivated 
farm. It would also deny present owners 
the advantage of any possible future in¬ 
crease in land values. The opening of 
idle lands to cultivation if this resulted 
would also have the effect of greater pro¬ 
duction, and might be expected to have a 
tendency to cause lower prices for farm 
products. To some extent, however, this 
should be overcome in the increased popu¬ 
lation, iu the increased capital value of 
improvements and other property, in the 
general benefits resulting from steady em¬ 
ployment, and in the larger production of 
wealth. 
One more consideration merits atten¬ 
tion. Land values in large cities increase 
with leaps and bounds. In New York 
City there have been three marked specu¬ 
lative advances within a period of 40 
years. With each advance rents are in¬ 
creased both for houses and for offices, 
stores aud factories. This means in¬ 
creased house rent for the family, and 
increased cost of food and clothing and 
amusements and doctors’ bills. This cost 
is constantly increasing, and the higher 
the cost of other things the less the city 
family has left to pay for the food that 
comes from the farm. Hence, any policy 
that would reduce rents in the city would 
increase the consumption of farm food 
products and advance the price of them, 
to the benefit of the farm. 
Insuring Package on Rural Route 
I live on the rural route, and wish to 
insure a package. Must I fill out any 
sort of a blank first myself, and would it 
be all right for me to leave a slip of paper 
in the mail box with the package, telling 
the mail carrier to insure it, also telling 
what the package contains? It will he 
wool (yarn). Am I not supposed to tell 
value of it also? L. p. Q. 
Delanson, N. Y. 
If you would leave a memorandum, giv¬ 
ing the contents of the package and also 
the value, the mail carrier would leave 
you a receipt and see that your package 
was properly insured. Of course, you. 
would have to leave him either stamps or 
money, the same as if you had the pack¬ 
age insured or registered at the post 
office. 
