A CONTRADICTION.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 3330, 12 January 1898, Page 4

A CONTRADICTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — My attention was only this evening called to the following paragraph which appeared in your issue of Friday morning last;—“Thus an enthus ; astio Single-Taxer at a meeting of his society last night; ‘ There are only two classes of loafers in this world—the landowner and the gold bug.’ ” Now permit me, Mr Editor, to contradict this statement, for it was not a Single-Taxer who said this, hut a Socialist, and the statement that it was a Single-Taxer is unpardonable, inasmuch as the Socialist in question distinctly told the meeting that he was a Socialist. Moreover, he did not say “ landowner and gold-bug.” What he did say was “ landowner and Shylock.” As a Socialist he was quite consistent in using this expression, as the Socialists claim “ fifty remedies.” We, on the other hand, only claim one, namely, the Single Tax. Therefore, your paragraph was wrong, for Single-Taxers have nothing whatever to say against wealth, although they have a good deal to say against poverty. On the contrary, they know that wealth is a very good thing indeed, and their one desire is to remove every restriction on its production. Money is, or should bo, a mere medium of exchange and counter of wealth, but we, in our unwisdom. Lave added to those legitimate and useful qualities the attribute of wealth, which attribute under tbo Single Tax would vanish. The paragraph lam taking exception to contradicts all our practice and teaching, for we SingleTaxers are opposed to every form of taxing wealth which now exists. We are opposed to the Income Tax, the Property Tax and all taxes on improvements and merchandise. We would relieve the poor man of the taxes lie now pays on his cottage and the rich man of the taxes on his mansion and seven-storied warehouse, and the capitalist of all taxes on his bank buildings, his profits, &0., as we consider all such taxes immoral in the extreme, inasmuch as they take from a man that which is justly his against all the world; whereas a tax on land values takes for the use of the community that and that only which belongs to the community, because it has been created by the community, and leaves to the individual that which is his; and so it comes to pass that you never find SingleTaxers railing against capital and wealth, and riches and millionaires. The only thing we Single-Taxers fight is land monopoly, and this we do by advocating the taking for public uses (that is for revenue) those values (rent of land) created by the presence of the community and the construction at the expense of the community of wharves, roads and bridges, in lieu of all other taxation whatsoever. — am, &0., James Grove. Wellington, January 8, 1898.