LAND NATIONALISATION.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1281, 6 July 1886, Page 2

LAND NATIONALISATION.

TO THB BDITOE, Sib, —In answer to my question you say, “ Speaking very broadly land-is the source of all wealth ” You appear to think the other factors in production — labor, brains, &c.—somehow alter the fact, and render it necessary to say “ speaking broadly," I fail to see how the number of factors can alter the fact. , Source in this case means the “ first cause," and the term land, in speaking of nationalisation of it, means all natural materials ” See “ Progress and Poverty," book 1., chap. n. The proposition might, therefore, be put: “ Natural materials are the first cause of all wealth.’’ The only other factor necessary to the production of wealth is “ labour." The first chapter of the first book of Mill’s “ Political Economy ’’ commences as follows : “ The requisites of production are two : Labor and appropriate natural objects.” All wealth then, as we have found, being produced from Itnd by labor, what would you tax ? If you put it on labor it must be borne by the land, just as the Irishman’s donkey had to carry both him and his bag, although he fond’y hoped i to “ aise the poor baist” by taking the bag upon his own back. If land, then, bears all the present taxation indirectly, who would suffer if, instead of fifty different taxes, we had one, a Land Tax 1 I maintain that no one who makes a proper use of l ,he land would be the loser. Nay, they

wou’d be much better off ; for you must admit the cost of collection would be considerably reduced. I rejoice to know that “ any just and

feasible schema for the nationalisation of the land” will receive your “ cordial support and sympathy ” I am sure, sir, that hundreds, if not thousands, in this country will join me in congratulating you on your conversion to the glorious truth: M That the land of a country ought to belong to the people of that country. ” —I am, &c., Basical.