''>. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) /. ///A M// "' A^ fe <- P™^'^ to a man that ....^e_«.a3frauded when he .s compelled to render or surrender V ...-.f 7?.<=P, without receiving an equivalent service in return I •■'■ k. ■?•'!'* ■"?* ''!!'" '^^^ '" assuming this as one of the ;.. Wrpnnc,ples of ethics, that honesty demands that service "•■•C „ S-]^' tecprocal-service for service, product for product •••S " benefit ? Suppose we deny this doctrine, and' alert ....th^p,e part of humanity has the right to claim service with- ou^^ndenng service, do we not at once proclaim the doctrine ot sMl-CTy, fraud and theft ? Ailr^ ,* "1"? '°"'; ™''' " '"'°P' P™""^*^^ » house, cures a tXZ T " •''■'""P''^' '"™"'^ " machine.organi.es an industry or charms our souls with the beauties of son. or tiTjL T '':r"'^'f "' « "Sht to charge his fellowmrn, a r ght to , ell. Iho r,ght to „,ake a charge rests on a service rendered or a product furnished. Can anyone, on any other condumn justly claim the right to demand product or service fromhisfellowman? Unquestionably he can not Can any man, any combination of men, any government, fur- cirvt f '-"/Pf-t of industry. Do land speculators carry tniactones for the production of town lots ? Did the landlords of Ireland furnish that i.sland to their tenants ' These questions at once call the attention to the essential dis- tinction between land, which no man furnishes, and the pro- ducts ot labor, which men do furnish. € It ca »ny on made tl ,♦0 the c of the € the teac earth w once sw U God ^inen thf "of one I ance on ."these " < to exclu we at ( spirit oi Father,' If the then th( ivrhich I right of law, woi " owner generati ;enerati *, Theff laborer, he rejoic his prod does he 1 ducts, service f right to '^.■ ches game, anc^ nng and selling, game and buys in reality it is each confers a he enriches, to raise a crop ' demand any tempt to take Jct or service, lize that I was fc feel that hp idoubtedly he to a man that or surrender return. / s one of the that services i for product, ae, and assert service with- the doctrine ouse, cures a , organizes an s of songr or fellowman, a on a service n any other Jct or service jrnment, fur- d speculators s? Did the eir tenants ? issential dis- nd the pro- I " The Land Shall Not he Sold Forever." 3 Who are thk Owners of the Earth ? I It cannot be the exclusive possession of one generation, or of (iny one portion of any generation. " In the beginning God inade the heavens and the earth," and " the earth hath He given to the children of men." The only doctrine as to the ownership of the earth consistent with the teachings of Christianity, with the teaching that all are equally the children of God, is that the earth was made equally for all. ♦ The denial of this doctrine at once smites at the foundation of the doctrine of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. Proclaim to any body of men that God created this earth to be the exclusive possession of one portion of humanity, and that the rest are here on suffer- ance only, tenants at will of the " owners " of the earth, that these " owners " have the right, the unquestionable moral right, to exclude the " non-owners " from the gift of the Creator, and we at once proclaim a doctrine diametrically opposed to the spirit of Christianity, and which reduces the expression, " Our _ Father," to a meaningless platitude. If the land belongs just as much to the child as to the parent, then the latter certainly can have no moral right to sell that which belongs to another. For one generation to sell out the right of the next generation, is evidently in morals what, in law, would be deemed ultra vires. One generation is not the " owner " of the earth ; it belongs to all generations— to the last generation just as much as to the first, to every one of every generation as much as it belongs to any one of any generation. The Two Uses of Land, The farmer uses the land as an agent of production. He is a laborer, a producer. In the growing abundance of his product he rejoices, and is always seeking, by every expedient, to render his production more abundant. Only after he has produced does he claim the right to clothing, hardware, and other pro^ ducts. His selling is the exchange of product for product, or service for service. He offers abundance for abundance. His right to sell the product of his industry cannot, for one moment, "" I— ^ - ^^'^ vaiue tiiat he oiiers m the market, the " The Land Shall Not be Sold Forever" charge that he claims the right to make, is simply the payment, or the reward, he demands for his industry. He has made a: sacrifice, has rendered a service, has conferred a benefit, and now he claims a product, a benefit, in return. And has not his industry given him an unimpeachable title to that reward ? In the same way the carpenter, the builder, and the clothier all rejoice in the abundance of their products, and they claim a share of the abundance only after they have contributed their quota of service to the production of that abundance. But when we investigate the claim of the land speculator or collector of ground rent to reward, then we find a marked con- trast. His claim is exactly opposite in character to that of the farmer, the builder, and the clothier. He rejoices in scarcity, for as scarcity of land increases, as population becomes more and more congested, as people are compelled more and more to economize space, so grows more and more his fortune. While busy industry seeks the factory, the farm, or the shop, that it may add to the abundance of its production, and while it brings forth wealth in lavish richness, the speculator adds not one iota to the world's wealth, but lays on industry a heav}- hand, and compels it to surrender an extortionate tribute. The farmer uses land for production ; the speculator uses land for extortion. The Creator furnishes the raw material ; industry comes with its magic touch, and converts that raw material into the finished article. Industry comes to the ore, to the soil, to the clay, thence spring the machinery, the food, the building. The con- tact of industry with the soil is one of beneficence, bringing forth sustenance for the maintenance of men. The contact of speculation with the soil is one of maleficence. Let industry have access to the original sources of wealth, and it enriches ; let speculation come, and it impoverishes. The hand that begot the abundance goes away with scarcity, for it is despoiled ; the hand that begets nothing goes away o^'erflowing, empowered by law to despoil. God's law would reward each according to his work, man's law reverses this order. It curses ten-hours-a- day with a poor home, poor surroundings, poor education, and allows no-hours-a-day to "reap where it has not sown, and gather where it has not strawed." Is this honest i If it is honest, then we must abandon all proper ideas of religion. " Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil, that put darkness for light and light for dark- ness, that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter ! " For cen Bver," has 3f investif] It were a ] the heriti )wner3hip It is rii\ for twent; land in th ^of twenty that city came ther of land, 1 additiona' the peopli more of ' industry ness on tl paid this their obi Sisyphus, century dollar, to obligatioi science, 3 land law indebted; them to tinuaily possible mechanic it ever b( deemablt through One n hey ar necessar sarily pi ' But, i hich ] round e payment, las made a •enefit, and has not his ward ? he clothier ley claim a buted their leculator or arked con- that of the in scarcity, omes more id more to ne. While hop, that it id while it ir adds not ;ry a heav}- ibute. The es land for comes with the finished ;o the clay, . The con- ce, bringinpf } contact of et industry it enriches ; I that begot ipoiled ; the empowered iccording to ;en-hours-a- ication, and sown, and ibandon all ,11 evil good it for dark- ft " The Lani Shall Not he Sold Forever." 5 The Everlasting Tribute. For centuries the command. " The land shall not be sold for- 5ver," has been regarded as a dead letter, hardly even worthy pf investigation. We have treated the gitt ot God as though it were a product of toil. Under forms of law wo have taken Ihe heritage of humanity, and given it to be the exclusive )wner3hip of one portion of the people. It is reported that the site of New York city was once sold for twenty-five dollars, and it is also reported that one piece ot Jandinthat city has since been sold at the rate of upwards ^of twenty millibn dollars per acre. The value of the site ot tliat citv has been estimated at $2,000,000,000. When settlers came there first, they had to pay but little for the occupation of land, but with every increase of population, with every additional railroad line or steamship line centring in that city, the people have had to pay more; they have had to surrender more ot- the product of their industry. For centuries the industry of the country has paid for the privilege of doing busi- ness on the land of New York. Year after year have the toilers paid this tribute, and in spite of this long-continued payment their obligation is now greater than ever. It is the toil ot Sisyphus The task is no nearer completion than it was a century ago. Where at one time industry had to surrender a dollar to-day it surrenders a thousand. Fifty years hence the obli-Tation will be still greater. In the whole range of economic science no fact is better established than this : Our present land laws inevitably force one part of society into everlasting indebtedness to another part of society. These laws subject them to never-ending tribute, to an obligation that is con- tinually (Trowing, to a debt so great, so increasing, that by no possible effort of industry, by no possible improvement m mechanical devices, co-operative agencies, or profit-sharing, can it ever be cancelled. It is a debt increasing, everlasting and irre- deemable. The only escape from this er.dless tribute can come through a change in our laws. Sale of Land versus Sale of Goods. On€ man raises food, another makes clothing. They exchange- They are mutually enriched, mutually benefited. No one is lecessarily defrauded, no one necessarily injured, no one neces- sarily plunged in debt. But, suppose I am the owner of a valuable town lot, from ,^hich' I have been drawing rental simply for the land— a rround rent. I propose to sell it to my neighbor, ^r. Smith. 6 " Ths Land Sliatl Not he Sold Forever." What do we exchange in thin case ^ Is it land I am selling, or land plus something else ? I am possessed of a power called a ground rent, to appropriate from some third parties their production, and I propose to transfer to Mr. Smith that power. For a certain consideration, I propose to transfer to him the power to subject third parties to an everlasting tribute. May not these third parties very properly question the justice of this transaction so far as they are concerned ? The trade in goods bears all the marks of honesty and harmony, because it brings mutual benefit ; the trade in land bears all the marks of injustice — an everlasting spoliation. The Unique Character of the Mosaic Laws. Travellinj; through a wilderness, at the head of a band of escaped slaves, coming from a country in which despotism reached its highest pitch, in which superstition sunk to the most grovelling depths, Moses wrote the decalogue. All the philosophy of the ages fails to point out a flaw in the correct- ness of the principles therein proclaimed, or to detect a trace of superstitious idolatry in their statement. The bulk of their message relates to duty, and so imperatively do they command the acquiescence of the moral judgments, that we never think of questioning their correctness. But no more remarkable than the decalogue is the economic system of Moses. Its methods may be impossible of application in this generation, but its principles are fundamental, appli- cable to all ages, and modern statesmanship will have to sit at the feet of an ectmomic philosopher, who wrote ages before the author of the "Wealth of Nations," or of "Progress and Poverty." The system of Moses recognized clearly the distinction betwecxi the gifts of the Creator, the original endowment given for the equal enjoyment of everyone in every generation, and the products of industry produced by each for his exclusive pos- session, to consume, bestow, or sell, as his best judgment dictated. By that system, to each one was secured free access to the orifjinal source of wealth, so that no man was under the necessity of going with his hat in his hand looking for a job. There was thus secured to every man freedom to produce. The land speculator tries to forestall the industrious man, not that he may furnish him a home, a crop, a quantity of clothing, but that he may extort, that he may get a lien on the products of industry, that he may obtain produce without producing. The Mosaic econoinj' prevented this so far, at any rate, as the rural districts were concerned. It thus secured to every man the freedom to enjoy the product of his industry, free from the Exactions fjlators. > If thei sideratior exigencie sense. ^ has a ri{ judgment tility, til never fin condition pickets ; Egypt fo Accord there pr( ' munities each per land. It ing at tl attach so any way guidance The in " Origin ness of 1 tains tha free con anors. To the unparall its absei other C01 wealth I degradec end — th( Plato he still " Utopia the hone in the hi the righ else can child of distincti ii- - I ti!u pruu warn "The Land Shall Not he Sold Forevrr." am selling, 3wer called irties their ihat power, to him the bute. May } justice of le trade in ^ because it tie marks of iAWS. I a band of despotism lunk to the le. All the .he correct- itect a trace ulk of their i^ command never think )e economic application 3ntal, appli- ive to sit at i before the id Poverty." ion betweex^i ven for the n, and the elusive pos- judgment free access J under the ig for a job. oduce. •US man, not of clothing, he products producing, rate, as the • every man ee from the 'lexactions of a non-producing clas.s of landlords and land specu- lators. , , , , If there is one thing that the state should under no con- sideration interfere with, unless under the mo>t extraordinary exigencies, it is the exercise by the individual of his common sense. When a man seeks oil, coal, food, clothing, smely he has a right to say where he shall obtain these as his best judgment dictates, and laws imposed to drive people from fer- tility, that make it a crime to resort to abundance, should never find a place on the statute-book of a nation. And this condition the Mosaic economy strictly observed. No line of pickets surrounded Palestine to prevent the Jew going to Egypt for corn, or to Phd^nicia for cedar. According to the teachings of Manver, Main and Lavelleye, there prevailed throughout the world a system of viHage com- munities in which the land belonged to the community, and each person in this community enjoyed an equal right to the land. It has been asserted that this was the system prevail- ing at the time of Moses, and that, therefore, we are not to attach .so much importance to the Mosaic economy as being in any way unique, or that much is to be learned from it for our guidance. The investigations of Coulanges, published in a book entitled " Origin of Property in Land," throws doubt on the correct- ness of the theory of village communities. Coulanges main- tains that the so-called communal system was not a sy.stem of free communities, with ownership of land, but a system of manors, with a baronial landlord and his servile tenants. To the Mosaic system we are indebted for a picture perhaps unparalleled in history for its purely democratic character, its absence of those vicious extremes only too manifest in other countries, an aristocracy revelling in excessive, unmerited wealth at one end, and its natural complement, a mass of degraded toilers, steeped in unmerited poverty at the other end — the baron and the villain, the millionaire and the tramp. Plato drew on his imagination for his " Republic," in which he still deemed slavery an essential factor. More saw his I' Utopia " only in his " mind's eye." To Mo^es alone is reserved Sthe honor of founding a nation on laws that stand unparalleled in the history of the world for their complete recognition of the rights of the citizen, and the principles of justice. Where else can we find the clear recognition of the right of every child of God to the gift of God — the land ? Where else the distinction between the gifts of God, the natural wealth, and the products oi lauor, the labor-produeed weaiuh ? tt nsre eise 8 "Tke Land Sh. >! Not he. Sold F,>rever" do we see the proper limitation imposed that prevented the huI, of that which wa.s given by the Creator for division and not for .sale? What other nation has ever enjoyed laws thni secured to the citizen his ri^ht to produce, his rifrht to exchanKf that produce whenever his best judgment dictated, and hi i rirrht to enjoy the produce of his industry, free from the exactions" r)i landlords and land speculators :* Some day we will also discover that no one generation has any right to.plunge another generation into debt, that our great national debts are great national blunders, if not crimes, "tIk- year of Jubilee placed a limit beyond which indebtedness could mot extend, ^j^ie parent could not leave to his child a legacy of burdensome obligations. In that .?ountry could not be witnessed as we can in this country, the monstrosit} of one child born under a crushing debt to another child. There are evil symptoms everywhere thai call on us to give our best energies to the investigation of the.sc problems. When some men acquire .so many millions that they can buy up legislatures, dictate policies, organize private police, reduce popu- lar government to a sham; when millions of men see that honest toil brings but a pittance ; when the best energies of the manhood of the majority must be devoted simply to satisfying' the animal wants; when strikes, boycotts, lock-outs, black-list" are daily occurrences; when a mere handful of men control all t}ie fuel output of a continent, to preach to men the brother- hood of man becomes the saddest of burlesques. " The Go.spel will cure all this," say a ho.st of respondents. Yes, my brother, the Gospel will do it, when we learn correctly how to interpret and how to apply the Gospel. But to rattle over some platitudes, and to use the Gospel as a chatm, will never do it ; never, till the end of doom. The gospel of happy feeling and other worldline.ss has had its day. We now want the gospel of ju.stice, "to every man his due." "Weare still "tithing the anis;j and cummin," and neglecting the weightiei matters of the law, devoting a world of energy to mere details of organiza- tion, and .scarcely a modicum of energy to studying the ethics of society. ,