DR. GILES ON THE SINGLE TAX.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 11060, 11 May 1899, Page 7

DR. GILES ON THE SINGLE TAX.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Some little time ago in a letter upon tho single-tax question, Mr. Fowlds charged Clio of your correspondents with not knowing the ABC of tho subject, whereupon Mr. Vails pointed to this utterance as illustrating " the usual arrogance" (I boliovo that was his expression) of singlo-taxers. In his letter published in the Herald of this morning has ho not been temporarily oblivious of tlio lofty standard of controversial courtesy previously set up by himself ? However this may be, I am sure his forthcoming pamphlet will be read with interest, and I hope it will throw some light 011 the subject. What I wish to say now is that Mr. Vailo will do well, before bringing his heavy guns to hear 011 any position, to consider whether that position is roally occupied by his opponents, or at least whether it is essential to thorn. My reason for offering this suggestion is thai Mr. Vails scorns to regard the single-taxers' doetrino — involving two propositions which I have never understood to bo part of it. The first is that tho valuations should bo yearly, and tho second is that tho ground rent should be six per cent, of the capital (unimproved) value.

A yearly valuation with contingent alteration of ground rent seems to mo so exlravacant and mischievous a proposal that I can hardly understand any sensible man advocatins it. Do sinprletaxers really contemplate this? Again, I was under tile impression that 4 per cent, of the capital value was considered about the proper rate, i.e., in the coming years when the scheme is in full operation. I have never heard it put so high as six.

If in these two points Mr. Vailo lias misunderstood, and consequently misrepresented his opponents, it would somewhat mitigate perhaps the practical difficulties in the way of working the scheme which he points out. I have _ 110 wish to ignore those difficulties, hut if it were once agreed that the private monopoly of the right to use land is a wrong, Some way would bo found of settling details; wit it is of little use to discuss the latter with those who have not become convinced of the truth of the underlying principle. . ™ course the great difficulty is the vested interest of purchasers, and this, as it seems to me, ran onlv be got over either by compensation, or by so gradual an imposition if lie tax as to render it very little burdensome,

If I remember riehtly, J. S. Mill suggested a decennial valuation as a method of acquiring for the State the unearned increment, without too much disturbing the security of the occupier.—l am, etc., ~ J. Giles. Urston, Manku, May 8, 1899.