The Lunarian Professor and His Remarkable Revelations Concerning the Earth, the Moon and Mars / Together with An Account of the Cruise of the Sally Ann

by James B. Alexander

“The close of the 19th century, was remarkable as being a turning point in American affairs and the beginning of a new era. Previous to that time the United States had been a nation very much to itself. It had kept aloof from the politics of the rest of the world and had no policy in regard to it except to prohibit European nations from meddling in affairs of the western hemisphere or acquiring any further possessions in it. But before the century was out public opinion was accustoming itself to the idea that the foremost nation of the earth ought to take a more active and influential part in the general affairs of the world. The first thing designed to give weight to the influence of the country was the development of a powerful navy. It is power that inspires the consideration and respect of others. It was a favorite idea with many of the leaders of political thought that arbitration might become the last resort in the settlement of international disputes instead of the ancient plan, by which the contestants temporarily laid aside such civilization as they might have acquired, reduced themselves back to barbarism in murdering each other, destroying property, plundering commerce, and often spending more money several times over than the matter in dispute was worth. But even these statesmen saw that a plan favoring peace would come with much more force and authority from a nation having power to enforce it by war, and so all were glad to see the great navy built.

“As the public lands became transferred to private ownership and prices steadily went up, attention was turned to the sparsely settled territories of neighboring countries, and the elements of a great party in favor of their annexation were developed in the ranks of all the parties, at the same time the theories of the land tax advocates received additional attention, especially from mechanics and the manufacturing classes. They reasoned that the increase in the value of land ought to belong to the state instead of to the people who had bought the land, and if the state had that increase, the interest on it would support the government and taxes could be abolished. The enormous amounts raised by taxation came at last from labor, they said, part of it in the way of tariffs on goods imported and consumed by workers and part by direct taxation on the products of labor and even on the means and appliances—tools shops and factories—by which wealth was produced. This mode of taxation they said was, as far as it went, a ban placed upon industry and a penalty upon the creation of wealth. They proposed therefore to take all the taxes off from the products of labor and seize the rents of land or so much of them as might be required for the support of the government, in that way getting the interest on the increase in the value of the land that had taken place since it passed into private hands and which they denominated “unearned increment.” This agitation began in your day—you must remember it.”

The expression “in your day” had at first a singular effect on me. I had quite unconsciously but thoroughly entered into the spirit of the Professor’s method and had gone forward with him to the year 2,000 and followed closely his discussion of things that happened 100 years ago—from that standpoint. The sudden realization that my day had gone by, was startling—“Yes,” I said to myself, “that is so, ‘my day’ has gone by, my existence has been continued over a space during which I have not lived. Memory has nothing to say of it. It is as if I had slept it away. Well if one is asleep, one day to him, is as 1,000 years—aye, eternity!

“What can hurt him who is asleep? Nothing, unless it wakes him up.”

All this flashed through my brain in an instant and then my attention suddenly returned to what the Professor had been saying. “Remember it? Yes I remember it well. In my day there was a society in Minneapolis called, I think the Single Tax League, devoted to this agitation. Their ideas were those of Henry George, as set forth by him in his able book called: ‘Progress and Poverty.’”

“Yes, well, to the labors of this persistent and aggressive society are to be attributed in a great measure, the radical change in ideas of political economy that soon came about. After much discussion, petitioning of the legislature, agitation in the newspapers, the organisation of auxiliary societies, the presentation of the subject in labor associations etc., the working classes in the cities and even the landless laborers on farms were persuaded that their interests lay in the abolition of all taxes, except those on land. It was not long before these classes constituted a majority by reason of the rapid growth of the cities. As soon as they found themselves in power, they proceeded to get the constitution of the state amended to enable the legislature to release all classes from taxation except those who possessed land. In your day, about half the taxes had been raised from land and the other half from the buildings and improvements on the land and from personal property. It was estimated that relieving the latter half, would simply double the tax on land and so make it about four per cent on its valuation. It was argued that the farmer would experience no change at all, because the additional tax put upon his land would no more than equal that taken off his houses, barns, stock and tools. The only persons who would lose by the single tax would be the speculators, who held unimproved land and were waiting for the labor and improvements of their neighbors to raise its value, so they could sell out and get an increase in value which they had done nothing to earn. As these people were looked upon as a sort of parasites, they were not regarded as having any rights in the matter that need to be respected. All that was necessary in their case was simply to out-vote them. The benefits of the new system it was expected would fall upon the industrial classes especially and directly, but would be shared by all. Manufacturing industries relieved of the repression of taxation, would bound forward like a spring suddenly released. Nothing would any longer artificially limit the production of wealth and the great stimulation it would receive would result in making even articles of luxury so common as to place them within the reach of everyone.

“The land speculating class, while admitting that the rest of the people would be benefitted by the single tax, claimed that it would be done at their expense and unjustly. They had bought the land and paid for it and the state had got the money. With this money, and the interest on it, the state had built the university, the state capitol, the penitentiary, the charitable institutions and innumerable school houses. In other words, they had given the state the interest on their money and taken in lieu of it the anticipated increase in the value of the land. Moreover, they had paid taxes on the land as they would have done on the money, if they had retained it. And so they maintained that the increment in the value of the land was not unearned. It was simply the interest on their money which would have brought a like profit if it had been invested in mining manufacturing, banking or steamboating. They admitted that in some cases this profit had been greater than that derived from other sorts of investments, but in many cases it was far less. They said the single tax meant a confiscation of the land and the resumption of it by the state that had once sold it; because it would very soon, if not from the first, take the entire amount of the rent which would make the fee of the land worthless to the owner. It would no longer be possible to mortgage it or to sell it and the owner would lose his investment and be reduced to a mere tenant, who could hold it only as long as he paid the rent to the state the same as any other tenant, and if it were unimproved, the owner would have no inducement to pay the rent and would simply abandon it. In view of that, they said, that the state should at least pay back the purchase money it had received with interest at the rates prevalent during the time that she had possessed it, or failing that, she should postpone so radical a change or make it gradual by annually increasing the assessment upon land and diminishing it upon other property, and thus consume at least thirty years in making the transfer complete.

“The impatience of the tax reformers would not allow any such postponement as this. They said they did not propose to wait a whole generation to have this wrong made right.

“They said the state never had any right to sell the land in the first place. The people’s ownership therein was inalienable and any pretended sale was void the same as the sale of the property of a minor for taxes, or the sale of a stolen horse. The real owner had a right to take his property wherever he could find it, without compensation to the pretended owner who happened to be in possession as a party to a fraudulent sale. So they held that the people could take possession of their land if they saw fit, but they agreed that it would be better policy, to leave the claimants in possession and merely take all the rents except a small percentage to be left in the hands of the claimants as compensation to them for collecting and paying over said rents to the state. These rents moreover were to be called taxes instead of rents.