,r. _-i ( ' OF^F'I CIAL REPORT. ^ ONFERENCE » TO PROMOTE OF LAND VALUES, GLASGOW, 2 0th OCTOBER, 1899. PRICE THREEPENCE. (Blasaow : MURRAY & DONNELLY, Printers, 74 Argyle Street, 1899 . •-iw' Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/officialreportof00conf_0 CONFERENG-EakV TO PROMOTE I ^ THE TAXATION OF LANliyAWES HELD IN THE Trades’ House, 85 Qlassford Street, Glasgow,. FRIDAY, 20th OCTOBER, 1899. Ex-Bailie PETER BURT, J.P. (Glasgow), President, IN THE CHAIR. ©fficiaf Hlcport of 3*roccc6mgs. JOHN PAUL, Hon. Secretary, 13 DUNDAS STREET, GLASGOW. PRICE THREEPENCE. Olaegow : MURRAY & DONNELLY, Printers, 74 Argyle Street, 1899 . Invitation Circular Convening Conference. CONFERENCE TO PROMOTE fTflc 3'a2^ation of £an6 '^afUcs, TO BE HELD IN THE TRADES’ HOUSE, 85 Glassford St , Glasgow, Oyi Friday, 20th - October , 1899, at 10.30 am. Ex-Bailie PETER BURT, J.P., Glasgow, in the Chair. COMMITTTSS OF ARItAN^G-FIVCFNTS (appointed at the Conference held at Bradford, on 4th January, 1898) : — Lewis H. Berens, Waratah Lodge, I J. W. S. Callie, 18 Hackins Hey, Ilkley. I , Liverpool. Fred Verinder, 376 Strand, London, | Joseph Hyder, 432 Strand, London, W.C. I W.C. John Paul, 13 Dundas Street, Glasgow. The Corporation of Glasgow has officially decided to take part in promoting the Conference, and has appointed two of its Members to be present. LORD CARRINGTON and the following Members of Parliament have given their names as approving of this Conference being held : — Alfred Billson, M.P. Sir J. T. Brunner, Bart, M.P. Thomas Burt, M.P. Thomas Bayley, M.P. John Colville, M.P. F. A. Channing, M.P. SirChas. Cameron, Bart., M.P. W. Owen Clough, M. P. Robert Cameron, M.P. Dr. G. B. Clark, M.P. Michael Davitt, M.P. Sir William Dunn, M.P. Dr. Charles Douglas, M.P. J. H. Dalziel, M. P. Arthur Dew^ar, M.P. James Duckworth, M.P. Sydney Evershed, M.P. Charles Fenwick. M.P. Herbert Gladstone, M.P. Walter Hazell, M.P. T.C.H.Hedderwick, M.P. C. Seale Hayne, M.P. George Harwood, M.P. Sir J. G. S. Kinloch, Bart., M.P. Batty Langley, M.P. Sir John Leng, M. P. J. W. Logan, M.P. E. J. C. Morton, M.P. Richard M‘Ghee, M.P. John M‘Leod, M.P. J. Fletcher iMoulton, M.P. F. Maddison, M.P. Mark Oldroyd, M.P. A. D. Provand, M.P. Sir Geo. A. Pilkington, M.P. Duncan V. Pirie, M.P. George W. Palmer, M.P. Harold J. Reckibt, M.P. Edmund Robertson, M.P. W. S. Robson, M.P. Thomas Shaw, M P. C. P. Scott, M.P. Capt. John Sinclair, M.P. Albert Spicer, M.P. W. C. Steadman, M.P. Arthur W. Soames, M.P. Philip Stanhope, M.P. Alexander Ure, M.P. Sam Woods, M.P. J. H. Wilson, M.P. Sir W. Wedderburn, M.P. J. Carvell Williams, M.P. J. Wilson, M.P. (Govan.) Courtenay Warner, M.P. J. H. Yoxall, M.P. Okrcks : 18 Dundas Stkket, (iLAsoow, September, 1800. Dear Sir, At the Conference on the Taxation of Land Values, held at Bradford, on 4th January, 1898, a Committee was appointed to arrange for a Conference to he held the following year. The Committee have now decided to convene this Conference, which will be held in the Trades’ House, 85 Glassford Street, Glasgow, on Friday, 20th October, 1899, at 10.80 a.m., to be followed by a Public Meeting in the evening, to be held in the Glasgow City Hall, Albion Street and Candleriggs, at 8 p.m. You are cordially invited to send one or two delegates ; and a reply, on or before 12th October, is requested, to enable the Committee to make final and complete arrangements. Yours very truly, JOHN PAUL, Hon. Secy. Note. — Delegates’ Admission Tickets will be forwarded on receipt of names and addresses. The following Kesolntions are proposed by the Committee : — (1) That this Conference is of oj)inion : That as the values of land are not due to individual exertion, but spring from common need and activity, and are enhanced by public expenditure, the present system which exempts these values from taxation, and im- poses the burden on industry and the earnings of industry, is unjust, and constitutes a hindrance to social progress. (2) That to secure a just and equitable system of taxation, it is necessary: (a) That a separate valuation should be made of land, apart from improve.’nents ; and {h) That a direct tax should be placed on the values of land thus assessed. .(S) This Conference heartily approves of the Bill promoted by the Corporation of Glasgow, to obtain for Burghs in Scotland the power to Tax Land Values, but considers that the principle of that Bill is equally applicable to all parts of the country, and therefore urges all other Local Rating Authorities (not in- cluded in the scope of the Bill) to petition Parlia- ment for similar powers. vevo-^ 4 DELEGATE’S ADMISSION TICKET. CONFERENCE TO promotp: the TAXATION OF LAND VALUES, TO BE HELD IN THE TRADES’ HOUSE, 85 GLASSFORD STREET, GLASGOW, On Friday, 20th October, 1899, at 10.30 a.m. DELEGATE’S TICKET. (not TRANSFERABLE.) M Representing Chairman, - Ex-Bailie PETER BURT, J.P., Glasgow. JOHN PAUL, Hon. Secy., 13 Dundas Street, Glasgow. INVITATION TO MUNICIPAL CONVERSAZIONE. The Lord Provost and Corporation of the City of Glasgow request the pleasure of the Company of at a Conversazione in the City Chambers on Thursday, 19th October, 1899, at Half-past Seven o’Clock, to the Members of Conference on Land Values. City Chamberlain’s Office, Reply to City Chamberlain. Gl.\sgo\v, October, 1899. CONTENTS: Invitation Circular convening Conference, - Delegate’s Admission and Invitation Tickets, - * Glasgow Municipal Buildings — a striking example, - Glasgow Municipal Reception and Conversazione, - Report of Secretary, ------ President’s Address, - First Resolution, Second Resolution, ------ Third Resolution, ------ Delegates appointed, ------ Glasgow Corporation Bill for Taxation of Land Values, Schedule showing how the change could be given effect to, - 2 4 6 7 10 13 17 24 31 37 45 48 II 'o S = (0 I If .2 ° -9 i: 5-^- ^ 2 3-S ^ gS ^ 6 ^ I 2 H p^ ! i:: ( 4°4 I Pi Ssi m m z'^-v M w +:; ►H oS per >. ^ I ^ C <|l 3 >: .- QJ 9 (iHunicijpill ^Icccption ani:i Coiiliergiixioh?;’ TO THE DELEGATES ATTENDING THE CON FERENCE TO PROMOTE THE TAXATION OF LAND VALUES. The Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council of Glasgow entertained the Delegates to the Conference in the Municipal Buildings, on the evening of Thursday, 19th October. Most of the Delegates were 'accompanied by ladies. The members of the Glasgow Parish Council and School Board and other representative public men were also invited. Altogether close upon 1800 ladies and gentlemen were invited by “ The Lord Provost and Corporation of the City of Glasgow, requesting the pleasure of their company at a Conversazione in the City Chambers, on Thursday, 19th October, 1899, at half-past seven o’clock, to the Members of the Conference on Land Values.” It was a brilliant gathering, one of the finest in every respect ever held in Glasgow’s world-famed Municipal Buildings, Each lady and gentleman on entering was presented with a beautiful illuminated programme — To the Members of the Conference on Land Values. Promenade through Saloons and Corridors till 8.50. Corporation Band in Upper Corridor, 7.15 till 8.50. Cole’s Orchestra in Banqueting Hall, 7.15 till 8.50. Assemble in Banqueting Hall at 8.50. Concert by Glasgow Select Choir, 9.20 till 10.30. Speakers : For the Corporation — The Lord Provost and Bailie Jas. Dick. For the Members of the Conference — Ex-Bailie Burt, Chairman of the Conference, and Councillor Lamb, of Bootle. Refreshment Buffets throughout evening on Upper Floor. The Lord Provost and Magistrates received the guests in the Satin-wood Saloon. At 8.50 the company assembled in the Banqueting Hall, the Lord Provost presiding. On the platform were also Bailies Dick, Sinclair, R. Anderson, W. F. Anderson, Fife, Battersby, Maclay, and Hunter, Councillor Ferguson, ex Bailie Burt, Councillor Lamb (Bootle), The Mayor of Longton, Mr. G. B. Waddell, and Mr. John Paul, secretary. 8 The Lord Provost, in his own name and in that of the other members of the Corporation, welcomed the ladies and gentlemen to Glasgow V/ncn it was made clear to the Corporation that so many ladies and gentlemen were coming from great distances to the city to attend the Coriference on Land Values, they saw that the delegates were earnest ‘in theii cause. But he would not speak of that cause, as it would be well and ably considered next day. He had been told that there were 560 delegates, and it was an honour to Glasgow that so many The Hon. Sir DAVID RICHMOND, Lord Provost of Glasgow, 1896-1899. had come to see the Municipal Buildings. He hoped the result of the Conference would be the increase of a friendly feeling between them no matter how they differed upon an important subject. He wished the delegates had met earlier, in order that they might have had the opportunity of seeing the beauties of the West of Scotland. He even yet hoped in this Indian summer weather they would be able to visit places of interest in and beyond Glasgow, (Applause.) 9 Bailie Dick confirmed all that had been said by his Lordship, with whom he desired that the reputation of the Corporation would be sus- tained with regard to hospitality. d'he Lord Provost — I have now to call upon a gentlemen who was at one time a member of the Corporation -ex-Bailie Burt. I am sorry to say “ ex ” is affixed to his name now, for while he was with us he did good work, and I wish he could have remained. (Applause.) Ex-Bailie Burt, who was loudly cheered, said — -.On behalf of the delegates I thank the Corporation for their hospitality. The delegates consisted of 69 from Town Councils, 3 from County Councils, 16 from Urban Districts, 87 from Parish Councils, 9 bom Poor Law Unions, 6 from Townships, and 7 from Vestries — in all 216. There were also delegates from Co-operative Societies, Ward Committeess, Trades Councils, Trades’ Unions, Political Associations and Societies. The total number of delegates was 558, Glasgow Corporation was well- known for its hospitality and its wise administration. Speaking from seven years’ experience he knew that the members of the Council desired to do their best for Glasgow. The gathering was an indication of the spirit of the Corporation. He did not say all the members were with them on the subject of Land Values, but the majority were on their side. In their efforts to promote the interests of the community they believed they had the support of the Town Council. He moved a vote of thanks to the Corporation for their hospitality. (Applause.) Councillor Lamb of Bootle said it was a great honour to that town that he should have been asked to second the motion. When he came into these halls and rooms he was overcome by their magnificence.. That they should have been invited to them augured well for the Conference of the next day. He hoped delegates from Glasgow would visit Bootle or some other part of Lancashire, for he could assure them that they would be well received, though he could not promise they would be invited to such marble halls. (Applause.) The Lord Provost briefly acknowledged the compliment. On the call of ex-Bailie Burt a hearty cheer was given for Lady Richmond. The Lord Provost said her Ladyship was ill in bed, other- wise she would have been delighted to have been present. GLASGOW CONFERENCE TO PROMOTE THE S'a^ation of £an6 ‘^afUcs, HELD IN THE TRADES’ HOUSE, 85 GLASSFORD STREET, GLASGOW, ON FRIDAY, 20th OCTOBER, 1899, AT 10.30 A.M. Ex=Bailie Burt, J. P., Glasgow, President. OFFICIAL REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS. Promptly at 10.30 the President took the Chair. The large hall in the Trades’ House, which accommodates some 700, was crowded to excess with d'degates and visitors. Mr. John Paul, Hon. Secretary of the Conference, submitted a report showing that 558 delegates had been appointed to attend the Conference. 48 Town Councils appointed 88 delegates, 2 County Councils, 3 delegates; 47 Parish Councils, 87 delegates; 3 Poor-Law Unions, 9 delegates ; 4 Townships, 6 delegates ; 3 Vestrys, 7 delegates ; 9 Urban District Councils, 16 delegates; and 186 Political and Social Reform Associations, 341 delegates. The Town Councils of Tynemouth, North Berrick, Harrow^gate, Newport (Mon), Furtrose, Dewsbury; the Urban District Councils of Lees, Woking, Castleford, Sutton, Withington, Swindon, Aston-in-Maker- field. Mountain Ash, Briarfield, Bickenham, Rhondda ; the Poor Law Unions of Bury, Hastings, Pwrtsea Island ; the Vestries of Lambeth, Fulham ; the Parish Councils of Forfar, Benholm, Kirriemuir, Montrose and the School Boards of London and Northop, sent regrets that they could not send delegates, but sympathised (most of them very warmly) with the object of the Conference, The Vestry of the Parish of Fulham adopted the three resolutions proposed by the Committee, and affixed the Common Seal of the Vestry to them. The Brierfield Urban District Council passed a resolution expressing its sympathy with the object of the Conference, and regretting that, being a small Council, it was unable to ap[)oint representatives. The Mountain Ash Urban District Council passed a strongly worded resolution expressing the urgency of taxing wayleaves, royalties, dead rents, ground rents, and ground values. The Fleetwood Urban District Council, while regretting it could not send delegates, wrote ( ffering “ to affix the Common Seal of the Council to any further memorial on the subject, as the members were unanimously of opinion that land values should be taxed.” 11 The Renton Urban District Council, who were appointed^ adopted the three resolutions by the Committee. The Rawenstall Corporation on the day of the Conference sent a telegram in the following terms: — “Although Rawenstall Corpora- tion does not send representatives, it is strongly in favour of Taxation of Land Value. — Town Clerk, Rawenstall.” The Portsmouth Town Council also wired: — “The Finance Committee of the Portsmouth Town Council approves the principle of Taxation of Land Values. — Town Clerk, Portsmouth.” The Ca.difT Trade and Labour Council, the Stockport and District Trades’ and Labour Council, the Oldham Trades’ Council, the West Bromwich Trades’ Council, the Nottingham and District Trades’^ Council, the Lincoln Trades’ and Labour Council, the Battersea Trades’^ and Labour Council, the Stranningley and District Trades’ and Labour Council, the Worcester Trades’ Council, the Haslington Trades’ Council, the York and District Trades’ and Labour Council, the Darwen and District Trades’ Council, the Belfast Trades’ Council, the Dundee and District Trades’ and Labour Council, sent letters of approval, some of these passing resolutions in favour of the object of the Conference. Scores of letters of sympathy were also sent in from Trades’ Unions, Co-operative Societies, Liberal Associations, Land and Social Reform- Societies, who were not in a position to send delegates because of their being at a more or less greater distance from Glasgow. The German League of Land Reformers, Berlin, wrote : — “ We here, in public meeting of the 14th October, express our full approval of the aim and purpose for which so many prominent citizens of the United Kingdom have gathered in Glasgow, and wish every success to- the deliberations of that noble assembly.” The Metropolitan Radical Federation, London, wired: — “Congratulate Glasgow on initiative respecting Taxation of Land Values. Wish the Conference every success.” APOLOGIES FROM MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. Owing to the unexpected summoning of Parliament, the members who had promised to attend the Conference found it impossible to be present. Apologies were received from the following Members of Parlia- ment : — Alfred Billson, Sir J. T. Bremner, Bart., Thomas Burt, Thomas Bayley, John Colville, F. A. Channing, Sir Charles Cameron, Bart., Robert Cameron, Sir Charles Dilke, Charles M. Douglas, Arthur Dewar, James Duckworth, Sydney Evershed, Walter Hazell, T. C. H. Hedderwick, C. Seal Hayne, George Harwood, Sir J. G. S. Kinloch, Bart., Batty Langley, George M‘Crae, John Morley, Mark Oldroyd, A. D. Provand, Sir George A. Pilkington, Duncan V. Pirie, Briggs Priestley, Harold J. Reckett, W. S. Robson, U. K. Shuttleworth, Thomas Shaw, Captain John Sinclair, W. C. Steadman, Arthur W. Soames, Philip Stanhope, Alexander Ure, J. Carvell Williams, John Wilson (Govan), Sir William Wedderburn, Courtenay Warner, and J. H. Yoxhall. Letter from Lord Rosebery— “I am desired by Lord Rosebery to thank you for your letter, and to say that he wishes your Conference all success in thrashing out the complicated matter it has taken in hand. — P. T. Gilmour.” From Lord Carrington. — “ My Dear Sir, — I much regret that it is absolutely impossible for me to accept your invitation to attend the Conference. It is a good thing that you are calling public attention to this most important subject, and I wish your meeting every success. — Carrington.” The Right Hon. John Morley, M.P., wrote “ I much regret the pressure of other unavoidable matters to which I am committed will prevent me from taking part in the important discussion.” Mr. Thomas Shaw, M.P., wrote “ I trust the result of the Conference will be to awaken the public mind to the importance of the subject, and to the need for its thoughtful and carefui consideration in all its branches. I am convinced that when it has received this thought- ful and careful consideration, it will prove to be far less alarming than is generally supposed.” Mr. Arthur Dewar, M.P., wrote : — “ As you know, I take a special interest in the subject. In the recent contest in South Edin burgh, I placed the Taxation of Land Values in the very front of my programme, and kept it th-.re; and I think that the result of the election justified my doing so, I think that the present system of land monopoly, with its attendant land speculation, lies at the root of the social ques- tion. I am glad to know that you are likely to have such a large and rtpre.sentative gathering ; it demonstrates that the country is now con vinced that this is one of the most important and urgent reforms of the immediate future.” Mr F. A. Charming, M P., wrote : — “ I congratulate you on the succv ss you are getting in organising the Conference, and in pressing on this urgently needed reform.” Mr. Harold Reckitt, M.P., wrote : — “ I am entirely in favour of this reform, believing it to be just to the general community, and that it will be the basis of a settlement of the problems of land tenure in town and country.” Mr. T. C. H. Hedderwick, M.P., wrote: — “During the session of the Select Committee on -the Aged Deserving Poor, I moved that the Committee shou d recommend that the funds required by the State to meet the cost of any scheme of State Pensions should be drawn in part from the Taxation of Land Values.” Mr. D. V. Pirie, M.P., wrote : — “ A better centre for a Conference on such a subject than Glasgow could not be found, and I feel convinced that the people of Scotland will be in the forefront in demanding a measure so pre-eminently based on justice and necessity.” Mr. Charles M. Douglas, M.P., who was asked to move the first resolution, wrote : — “Will you convey to your Committee my sense of the honour they have done me, and my regret at having to make an unsatisfactory reply. I am very much disappointed that I am unable to be present. It is very unfortunate that this Autumn Session should fall at the time of the Conference. It would have given me the greatest pleasure to move the resolution.” Mr. George M‘Crae, M.P., wrote: — “I trust you will have a great gathering. I feel sure the Conference wiil do great service in spreading information. The great thing is to impress upon the people that the principle of the Taxation of Land Values is economically sound.” Sir Thomas G-ibson Carmichael, M.P., wrote 1 hope your Conference will be of great use. The (juestion is one which must be taken up soon, even if on no other ground than the need for finding a new source of taxation.” The Mayor of Bootle wired: — “Much regret that illness prevents me attending Conference to-morrow. Have great sympathy with objects of Conference, and wish it all success. Ex-Congressman Tom L. Johnston, United States, cabled : — ‘ God speed. Advancement in Scotland means progress throughout the world.” Mr. Henry George, Jr., cabled : — Forward, Scotland : you lead the world.” Mr. Edmund K. Muspratt, J.P., l 'resident, Financial Reform Association, wrote : — “ I am glad the question of the 'Taxation of Land Values is arousing 'so much interest throughout the country, and especially to see how it is being taken up by the various municipal bodies. We shall be glad if your Conferenc^i will decide to hoM the next meeting in LiverpDol, when we shall do our best to make it a ■success.” PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS. The President, who was received with loud applause, said he felt it a great honour to preside at such an 'important meeting. He hoped that the delegates would excuse the Committee < J Arrangements if the room appeared to be rather limited, hut when the hall was fixed lupon first they had no idea that the response would be so great. He felt that the Committee had every reason to congratulate them- selves upon the success of the Conference so far as numbers were •concerned— (applause) — and he desired in the name of the Committee to accord to the delegates a very hearty welcome. He was sure they would all say after the Conference was over that it had been good for them to be there. (Applause.) He would like aLo to express apprecia- tion and thanks to the Corporation of Glasgow for the reception held the previous evening. (Applause.) He felt that the Corporation of Glasgow had risen to the occasion. They had realised the importance of the Conference, and he thought they had shown that by what they had done They were, he thought, specially indebted to Councillor Ferguson for the active part he had taken in this movement in the Town Council of Glasgow. (Applause.) On the question of the subject of the Conference itself he would like to say a few words. The question of the Taxation of Land Values, as that Conference dennonstrated, had taken a very serious hold upon the people of this country, who had given the subject any consideration at all. He felt they were on the eve of a new departure in relation to land value taxation. The question was in the air. At the meeting of the British Association recently. Professor Smart, who was Professor of Political Economy at Glasgow University, had stated that he thought they had to recognise that taxation was payment for services rendered. That was a principle that those in favour of the Taxation of Land Values had contended for all along. (Applause.) 14 What they wanted the people of this country to pecog*nise was that taxation was a contribution for public expenses, and should be expended in such a way that the public would receive full value for what they gave. The moment the country recognised that principle in taxation the illusions that had so clouded men’s minds on this question in the past would be r^ispelled. Hitherto very many of PETER BURT, President them had been looking upon taxation as a contribution that they were compelled to pay very much againnst their will, but they were bound to realise that they were getting very much for it. (Hear, hear.) What they had to do was to see that the expenditure was for the benefit of the people, and that the contributions towards that expenditure should be in proportion to the advantage received. (Applause.) The old idea that underlay the collection of taxation was that the amount should be fixed according to the ability to pay. The new doctrine they wanted to 15 preach was that a man should be taxed according to the advantage the expenditure conferred uj)on him (Ai)plause.) On the question of the advantages of taxation they were at one with Professor Smart, but he thought that no one who had taken any interest in the development of great communities would fail to recognise that, whatever advantages taxation might confer upon the individual, the evidences of it were in the increased value of the land. Take the City of Glasg*ow for instance. They had there, they believed, at least one of the best governed com- munities in this country. (Hear, hear ) What did they find ? That just as their 'Pown Council laboured and devised and developed schemes for the amelioration and welfare of the people, so did the value of the land in the neighbourhood increase by leaps and bounds. He did not require to give anyone who had taken any interest in the question an illus’ration of that They saw it around them on every hand. At the ['resent moment they felt that where communities laboured and expended money, and their administrators used their energies in develop- ing and encouraging enterprise, people arose who reaped where they had not sown, and gathered where they had not scattered. In this Taxation of Land Values they saw spring up before them a vista of great possibilities for communities. The greater the community the greater was its land value. The more enterprising and energetic their communities were, and the more energetic and enterprising their governors and adminis trators were, the more did the values of land go on increasing. They wanted to find, so far as that value was concerned, that it was going into the right channel. But there was a moral aspect to the question as well as a financial aspect. Great municipal and local authorities, and even small l'"cal authorities, found that for their further development a first necessity was the possession of land, but they were faced by the land- owners’ barrier — ‘‘ You cannot pass here until you agree to our terms,” and ransom prices were demanded. They found people eribbed, cabined, and confined in great communities, through the enormous p ices demanded for land that had been developed by industry. They felt, therefore, that the imposition of a tax on land values would open up avenues for the prosperity of the country. They had only yet begun to dream of its possibilities. He felt that what the Free Trade question was to our foreign trade, this question was going to be to our home trade. They talked about the development of the resources of the colonies, but what about the enormous miles of territory they had to open in this country. There might be great conquests made by our soldiers and sailors, but there were great conquests to be made by our legislators and administrators; and he felt that on this question they were there that day laying the foundation stone of a building that would be raised as a monument to the social progress and development of this country. He thought that each man there, no matter what his views might be, each woman there, no matter what her views might be on this question, had come determined to find out the truth, and he was certain that at that Conference they would arrive at the truth. Where that truth was let 10 them follow it, no matter where it led them. Whatever they were going to do that day let them do it in the right direction. Let them feel that they had made their minds up earnestly, anxiously, and thoughtfully. Alter they had formulated their position, he did not say there might not be ditHculties in the way. There might be interests to- be considered but let them first consider justice and they could be charitable afterwards. He deprecated altogether the idea that the people who were in possession ought to be considered first. Let theni JOHN PAUL, Secretary. consider the great toiling masses ot the community who were suffering under its difficulties. Let them feel that they were able to do something for that class, and he had no doubt that the generosity of the people to this country would devise some means, and the charity of this country some method of solving this question in a way that would be satisfactor)-" to all. (Applause.) 17 Councillor Q. Lamb, Mayor- Elect of Bootle, moved the first resolution, whicli was as follows: — “'That this Conference is of opinion, that as the values of land are not due to individual exertion, but spring from common need and activity, and are enhanced by public expenditure, the present system, which exempts these values from taxation and imposes the burden on industry and the earnings of industry, is unjust and constitutes a hindrance to social progress.” As showing municipal progress in Pmgland and Wales, Mr. Lamb pointed out that in 1879 the debt of municipalities was 137 millions .sterling ; in 1897 it wa?, 245 millions. In 1894 the amount raised by rates for local purposes was 32 millions, and in 1897 the rates collected had reached the total of 37 A millions. Tr e increase in the rates had been 24 per cent., but the increase in the assessable value only 5 per cent. In 1894 the total expenditure of municipal authorities in England and Wales reached 73 millions; in 1897 the total was 78^ millions. Having given the figures for England and Wales, as showing the extent of the large expenditure of municipal authorities, he w'ould like to give them the concrete example of Bootle, as showing the advancement in the same direction and always with ihe same result. Land Values were enormously increased with the spending of rates. From 1879 onwards the progress of Bootle had been rapid, and the town had raised .£330,000 strictly for public improvements. The ratepayers had to contribute during the same period no less a sum than £163,000 for sinking fund purposes alone, exclusive of interest As showing the result of that expenditure, together with certain natural advantages which Bootle possessed, Mr. Lamb mentioned that Bootle was credited by the Stock Exchange with having a rateable value of £9 per head of the population, the highest in England or Wales. As an instance of the close relation between the expenditure of local authorities and the revenues derived from land, in 1879 the amount raised by means of rates in Bootle was, approximately, £9000, and the ground rents paid were estimated at £10,000 per annum. In 1898 the rates amounted to •94,000, and the ground rents were believed to be £100,000. So we have the clear evidence of how the spending of rates increases the value of the land. Now, they had studied this question very closely in Bootle. They had felt the pinch because thev had, practically, o’dy one landowner. He held, nearly, the ^^hole of the land As. showing how he used his power, it might be mentioned that only a short time ago a large and enterprising firm wanted a c< riain quantity of land, and for it they were asked to pay a high price. Very close to the plot, only a few yards away, land belonging to another owner was obtained at about one-third the price. It is believed that the firm did not know, when applying for the second piece of lan^l, thit it was outside the boundaries of Bootle, and the difference in price being so great they accepted it. Beirg outside the town of Bootle they could not claim, for instance, the srrvires af the borough fire brigade, though their business was of such a nature that with the spread of fire, there would be serious consequences. It was on account of incidents such as the one he had described that Bootle felt the pinch so severely. They could not get out of the landlord’s clutches. Therefore this question 18 had been very much to the fore in Bootle, and as far back as 1892 ne Town Council unanimously passed a resolution to the same effect as the one he was now submitting, and copies of the resolution were sent to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Local Govern- ment Board. It had been re-affirmed a few \ ears later. The interests of Bootle had driven this question very much ahead. Mr. W, P. Byles, ex-M.P. for Shipley, Representative of the Bradford Branch of the Land Restoration League, seconded. He appreciated very much the honour of addressing so august and huge an assembly, ari honour due to the accident that he had the privilege of presiding over the small conference in Bradford at the beginning of last year, which might be said to have been the fore- runner of that important meeting. He thought if any landlord was present in the palatial municipal buildings on the previous evening he would have appreciated in a manner salutary to his soul the magnitude, the force, and the energy of the movement in which those present were engaged. (Applause.) Upon the resolution which it was his duty to second it seemed to him unnecessary to enter into argument. Surely there was no one present who was not convinced that the Values of Land were not due to individual exertion, but sprang from common need and activity. There was no city, he said, which exemplified better than Glasgow the enhancement of Land Values by public ex- penditure. The effect of the present system of taxation was to give to a handful of men the power of living without either toiling or spinning. (Applause.) All they did was to array themselves like Solomon in all his glory. (Laughter and applause.) The Conference was deprived of the presence of Members of Parliament for reasons which were well known — to vote the sum of ten millions for a purpose to which it would be improper for him ‘to refer — (hear, hear,) — and to which he would not refer further than to say that he hoped this country would never regret it. Ten millions was the sum asked for. But ten times, or fifty times, or perhaps a hundred times that sum was being found not once, but every year. It was not, however, because he wanted to divert the gross Land Values from private hands to public resources that he came there. He did want that diversion, but to work for that alone would be a sordid campaign. He took part in the movement for a loftier purpose. As long as the rental of the country was in the hands of a few you would have lords and serfs, industrial strife, overcrowding, and all the ghastly social inequalities which now distressed any one who looked out on the state of our country. It was because he believed that the solution of those great social problems lay in the direction in which they were going, in trying to bring all the revenues which were now derived from land out of the individual pocket and into the public pocket that he took part in the movement. (Applause.) Councillor Owen Balmforth, Huddersfield Town Council, supported the resolution, which he said had been approved by the local Corporation and the Board of Guardians. Huddersfield was one of the few towns in this country which was practically owned by one landlord. Therefore they had a huge monopoly in land, and all the evils which appertained to monopolies in 19 general existed in their town. 'I'hey had only been 30 years incorporated as a town, hut during that time their rates had increased from 2s. in the £ to 6s., and they ou are projecting.” The sewer was constructed, and the agricultural land previously worth possibly ;^2oo per acre, was now a site for building residences, and was sold, he should suppose, at ;^20oo per acre. Everywhere, he said, on the margin of our great cities they had got land that was worth a considerable sum, but which was held because it would be worth more. (Hear, hear.) He supposed that what they wanted to do was to remedy that. (Hear, hear.) They wanted the residenters, the ratepayers, the men who found the money for public improvements to have the advantage of them. He came there to express in general terms the approbation of the city of Man- chester of the resolution which v/as now before them. (Applause.) Bailie Wright, Perth, said the resolution did not go far enough. He proposed to add to it as follows— “ It is desirable that local authorities and munici- palities should be empowered to take the land adjoining their areas for municipal extension at not more than double its agricultural value — (“Oh, oh”) — so that the increased value of the land maybe secured by the local authorities, etc., to enable them to carry out improvements which the necessities and exigencies of population demand.” The Chairman ruled this incompetent, as there was already an amendment before the house. Bailie Wright said that he had no objection either to the deletion of the words which the amendment proposed to delete, or even the adoption of the resolution as it was ; but he did n it think it went far enough. The question for him was— “ who pays the taxation ? ” It was not the landlord : he might pay a certain proportion. Although they proposed to tax Ground Values — and Ground Values were always increasing within a certain radius, especially those which were most progressive — it was not the landlord who wo dd pay the taxes they proposed to impose upon these Ground Values — it was the parly who took the ground and made it more productive. Supposing they could feu ground at ^'20 per acre, and an Act ot Parliament placed upon it 25 per cent, of taxation, the landlord would simply say — “ You will have to give me ^^25 instead of ;^2o.” (“Oh, oh,” and laughter.) They 21 might laugli, but this was the universal experience. He tliought muni- cipalities should get the land themselves and feu it at the increased value, taxation of Ground Values would make it more difficult to get. Councillor J. Shaw Maxwell, Glasgow, of the National Executive of the Independent Labour Party, said he did not rise with any special hostility to the resolution which they were discussing. He thought it was in many respects a most admirable resolution, and reflected credit upon the men who drafted it. Neither had he in the remotest degree any feeling or spirit of antagonism to the most admirable speeches which were made in proposing this resolution, or to the Chairman’s admirable speech in opening the Conference. But he did not think it was really necessary in a Conference such as this, where they would naturally expect that the men who were most intimate with economy, as far as it affected this question, should not need to go back to the A B C of the movement. They had heard a good deal, especially from the last speaker from Manchester, with which many of them were intimate not less than twenty or twenty-five years ago. He therefore believed it would be useful as far as possible that they should avoid wasting time on these points. It was essential that land reformers should close their ranks on this question. It was impossible that they could see eye to eye in respect to' every detail, but it was absolutely possible, it was desirable, it was essential and necessary that they should confine themselves to the affirmation of the broad principles of the movement. (Hear, hear ) He might happen to be somewhat more advanced than many of the gentlemen in the room upon general questions, but no one who knew him would doubt for a moment the intensity of his devotion to the principles they were met to advance. Therefore, if there was anything likely to introduce the apple of discord in their meeting, and which they could easily dispense with, let them do it. The words to which reference had been made by his friend, Mr. Burgess, he believed to be absolutely true, although he failed to see why, having made the statement that the present system imposed the burden on industry, they should have the further tautological statement, “and the earnings of industry.” He hoped that, while they were doing everything they could to give a strong impetus to public opinion on this question they would avoid attacking further theories, which might bring discord and disintegration within their ranks, He was quite satisfied the motion lost none of its force, its power, or its potency by the with- drawal of the words. In fact, he thought it would be strengthened It was mainly because he was anxious that they should see eye to eye, and march shoulder to shoulder, like an irresistible army, that he favoured the amendment which nad been put. (Applause.) A Delegate from Battersea asked whether the words in any waX meant a single tax ? The Chairman said it was not for him to answer that question. Each delegate must draw his own conclusions from the discussion. Mr. Burgess’ amendment was then put to the meeting, receiving only some 15 votes. 22 Alderman T. P. Griffiths, Mayor-Elect of Southport, jpported the resolution as it stood. He came from a town built entirely ipon sand — (laughter) — which a hundred years ago had no agricultural value. That town now contained 50,000 inhabitants, and had a rateable value of about £350,000. Last year he took up a lease of land, the original ground value of which was 5s., and for which he was now paying £120 ii year. What had produced this value ? Industry. The industry of the population had made the entire value, and the principle they affirmed was that the people who make the value shall have some advantage from what they had made. (Applause, and hear, hear.) Landowners, he thought, had nothing to fear from the movement. The people of this ■country were a just people, and Parliament would not do an act of injustice, but it was quite time that the people who had been exempt for all time should now put their hands in their pockets. Provost Anderson, Stornoway, said he had great pleasure in supporting the resolution. They were unanimous in Stornoway as to the Taxation of Land Values, not on the ground that they were heavily burdened with feu duties, for they had a good landlord though he lived far off, and although the neighbourhood had been in the past the scene of a good deal of agitation in connection with the Crofter movement, they would be glad to know that that important movement had been settled in a very satisfactory way. They would permit him in this con- nection to refer to a very important statement made in his hearing by a very important statesman of the day, a man who was largely before the eye of the public in connection with this great war — he referred to Mr. Chamberlain. (Applause and hisses.) They had no politics there. It had been said that they were there as politicians — that they were there as Liberals. He denied that (Cheers.) This was a social question. If the Liberals were taking this matter in hand all the more shame to the other side for not helping them (Applause.) Returning to Mr. Chamberlain, he had heard him say that the landlords would tax the very air of heaven if they could get the chance. (Laughter.) He hoped that when Mr. Chamberlain had settled tbe question of South Africa — (applause) — he would take up the land values question and deal with it. (Laughter and applause.) In Stornoway they got land for artisans houses at ^4 per acre, and for superior houses at from ^8 to ^16. They sympathised with the movement because they knew what was being done by the landlords in the neighbourhood of great towns. The Provost proceeded to deal with the question as it affected Glasgow, which he went on to eulogise at some length as the first city in the Empire in its municipal enttzrprises. Mr. James Sexton (Liverp iol) — Mr. Chairman, might I ask what we have done to deserve all this. (Great laughter.) Provost Anderson, who took the intenuptioti in the best of humour, •concluded his remaiks by stating that it was the duty of all local authorities, small and large, to come to the help ot their less favoured brethren, and they had therefore gladly come from the far North to help forward this great movement. (Applause.) Councillor Thomas Burke, Liverpool, said that though he rc{)resented a private organisation, he had a narrow squeaU of representing the Liverpool ( 'orfioration Me was the first menilii r elected to that body upon the lines of the Taxation of Land Values, and though 1 iverpool was the most Conservative town in England, his resolution the other day was defeated by only six votes ; and as bearing out what Provost Anderson had said, that this was not a party question, he might mention that the great bulk of the great Conservative party supported his motion. (Applause ) He was also a Poor Law Guardian, and after five years^ experience as such he had no hesitation in saying that every single man or woman who was either in the hospital or workhouse receiving relief would not be there but for the existence of slums. They might say that it was the duty of the Corporation to sweep away the slums. But, as in the case of Bootle, the Earl of Derby stood in the way, for the result was, that if they swept away the slums they left the ground vacant for him to get about ten times more for it. Only last week Lord Derby demanded ^5000 per acre for his land that the Corporation had made valuable by sweeping away slums. In these slums the death-rate was 75^ whereas the general death rate was little over 3o. (A voice “ Murder.’') In Liverpool only a few days ago there was sold at the rate of <£1,000,300 per acre, land which within his recollection — and he was not a very old man — was not worth one-twentieth of that sum The other day the Imperial authorities in order to meet the demands of the commercial classes in Liverpool wanted to build a new post office. The City Council some ten years ago sold land in Victoria Street to the Govern ment for the purposes of a temporary post office at £12 los. per yard. Immediately opposite there was an old pit which had never been used for anything except as a receptacle for the rubbish of the district, but when the Government wanted to build a new post office the owners of the pit demanded £56 per square yard, and because the commerce of Liverpool demanded a new post office the Government had to pay the sum demanded. These ground landlords were not contributing one farthing of taxation. The man who said this was a party question did not understand what social reform meant In the constituency which Mr. Lamb represented there were some of the finest docks in the world, for Liverpool also claimed to be the second city in the Empire. (Laughter ) Before these docks were constructed there were an enormous number of sandhills in the district. They were of no use for any purpose. Nobody lived there but rabbits. (Laughter.) The shipowners having large vessels crossing the Atlantic needed large docks, and when it was proposed to construct them the Earl of Derby at once stepped in and demanded £40,000 for the rabbit warren. (Laughter.) With what result ? As every Liverpool man knew the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board had to increase the dues on the shipping that came into the port, and — he recommended this to Mr. Burgess — wages of the dock labourers, the line of least resistance, went down iramediatelyy wffiereas had they had the Taxation of Land Values in full force, wages wouM be much higher in Liverpool, and the general body of ratepayers w'^uld have had to pay so much less in the shape of rates, because in Liverpool they paid their rates not directly but through the landlords. 24 Though Conservative in the ordinary Imperial sense, Liverpool on the Taxation of Land Values was almost as sound as Glasgow. (Applause.) Mr. William Neilson, Lanark County Council, said he was there -with an open mind to get enlightenment. He had heard some state- ments that had been very appropriate to the subject which they were ■considering, but he still wished to get further enlightenment, and to protect himself at that stage. He did not see his way to agree to the resolution — (“ Oh, oh ”) — and he wished to enter his dissent. (Some laughter.) The Chairman said he would simply put the resolution to the meeting, and take a vote for or against it. Mr. Alexander Haddow, Mile-End Ward, Glasgow, rose to move a rider to the resolution. The Chairman said that as it contained new matter it should be submitted later as a separate motion. The original resolution was then put to the meeting, and carried, •only three dissenting. Councillor Thomas Whitfield, Devonport, moved the second resolution as follows : — “ That to secure an equitable system of taxation, it is necessary (a) that a separate valuation should be made of land, apart from im- provements ; and (d) that a direct tax should be placed on the values of land thus assessed.” It had been well said that this was not a political question, but a social question. Twelve months ago he had had the pleasure of appearing at ttie Con^’erence held at the Westminster Palace Hotel to represent the Devonport Town Council, and when he returned his Corporation were a'?ked as though they had been so many serfs whether he had been instructed to represent them, and whether they adopted the views he had expressed. He was happy to say that on the present occasion his corporation was also represented by his friend Councillor Gill, the most orthodox ' onservative in the constituency. (Applause.) He represented a dockyard borough. When the land in that burgh was bought in the i8th century it cost ;£’i 2.000, and now it was yielding a sum beyond their computation. VVhile the land had been held up, the ■overcrowding and scenes of squalor and dilapidation were such that they had from time to time claimed Parliamentary attention, and it was on record that two years ago Devonport within its area was the most over- crowded town in the country. Government had decided within the last two years to spend five millions in dock extensions there, and the result was that land that had been let at the agricultural value of ^5 per acre while the people had been herding in squalid homes had been sold for ;^2ioo an acre. 'Fheyas a Corporation were not permitted to acquire sites for municipal purposes unless they definitely said that they would purchase before they knew the price. (“Oh, oh.”) At t' is moment they had had to pass into a neighbouring constituency in order to acquire a site for an electric station. If that did not show how mon- strous was the system of landlordism in this country he did not know what better illustration to give. (Applause.) He was there to give these facts to the meeting, in order that they might have sympathy and support in any measures that they might take t • bring about the beneficent reform; but it was not only in that respect that Devonport was handicapped. There were two gates built in last century, at one of ^hich every vehicle had to pay toll, and at the other every human being had to pay. One of these bridges, which was called the “ Halfpenny Gate,” erected last century at a comparatively small price, was offered to the Corporation for ^185,000. but while the discussion was in progress the offer was withdrawn, on the ground that the increase of population had been so enormous within the last few' months that the proprietors felt they ought not to part with the bridge on these terms. The increase was due to public improvements carried out by the Government, and it was iniquitous that any private owner should be allowed to reap the whole advantage of >eforms of that kind. (Ap- plause.) Mr. Whitfield urged the members of the Conference to put their shoulders to the w'heel irrespective of pa’ty. and without internal dissentions, to carry out what was undoubtedly the greatest reform of the day. Colonel H. S. Murray, Galashiels, seconded the resolution. Mr. Burgess had objected to the earnings of industry being exempted, but the instance he gave was one of the earnings of monopoly, not of industry. He argued that the Taxation of Land Values was the very first one which would do away with the power of capital to levy tribute upon the labour of the w'orking classes. They wished to make the labourer inde- pendent of the capitalist by opening up the resources of the land, and they said the best means of doing so was to apply a direct tax on land values. He had heard politicians define the end of Government as being that of securing to each man the result of his own labour. The taxation which was imposed at present was exactly in the opposite direction, because it insisted in levying taxation on the earnings of industry. In order to give effect to the statement in the resolution they must separate the value of the land from the value of the buildings ■or improvements upon it. They held, as land reformers, that the value of the improvements themselves was always getting less and they were alw^ays deteriorating, while the value of the land was always increasing. That showed the absolute distinction between the two sources of revenue. The reason that the land was always increasing in value was the activity of the people living upon it. Therefore, they said if this increase of value is going on through the industry and by the activity of the people as a whole, the money should be taken to pay the expenses of the people as a whole. (Applause.) They wished to tax the land in the vicinity of large centres of population, not only to raise a revenue to meet public wants, but in order to destroy the monopoly in land which prevented the building of houses. (Applause ) If this question were solved on these lines they would not see huge numbers congre- gated in a small space, w'hile at the same time huge tracts of country were uninhabited. Taxation of Land Values would result in a more equal distribution of population over the face of the country. That Conference, he thought, would do much to promote education on the question. It was possible they were not all at one, but they were all agreed upon making a beginning in the Taxation of Land Values, and when they had made a beginning they would be in a better position to judge of their next step. 26 Councillor E. Hancock, Leicester Town Council, said that he and his colleagues were in favour of the resolution, provided that the word “taxes” also included rates. (Hear, hear.) Leicester Town Council had sent them not to discuss imperial taxation, but local rating. (Hear, hear.) They in Leicester were differently placed from some of the gentlemen who had spoken. Their land was not owned by one great proprietor. As a rule it was all freehold, and owned by the people who built houses upon it. But all round the town there was a large area of land which was rapidly increasing in value, and which was being held by the landlords until they could get very high prices. What they in Leicester wanted to do was to have the power to rate that land according to the present value of it. They would therefore like the power which, he was sorry to say the Local Government Board refused them, to buy the land as well as to rate it. If they had got that Leicester would have been hundreds of thousands of pounds richer to-day. In conclusion, he said he felt it his duty to say a word which might be unpopular. There had been several references to individuals. He deprecated that. He took it that there was not a man in the room who, if he owned a meadow worth ^£500 in the market to-dav would sell it for ^250 because his father had bought it for ;!^ioo. Let them attack a bad system, but not individuals. Mr. Joseph Hyder, Land Nationalisation Society, moved the following addition to the resolution : — “ And (tr) in order to prevent under-assessment, that the rating authority should have the power to acquire the land at the landlord’s own valuation in cases where it may consider that that valuation is unfairly low.” The object he had in view was to make the resolution effective, to realise the end they all had in mind. As it now stood, the resolution was not effective, because, while it provided for a fair tax on land values, it did not provide for a fair assessment of the land. It was not enough merely to pass a law saying that land shouM be taxed. There was a law to that effect now, and had been on the statute-book for the last 200 years, but owing to the failure in the assessment arrangements that law for the assessment of 4s. per £ was practically a dead letter. He wanted to make it a practical reality. If the land owners were forced to give up land at the valuation which he placed upon it for assessment purposes, it would ensure that he did not place his property in the assessment register at an absolutely low figure. On the other hand the fact that he had to pay taxation on the sum he him- self named and prevent him putting an exorbitant figure on his property. For example, a land owner in Wiltshire had said a bit of his land known as Stonehenge was worth <£125,000. He had never paid a farthing except on the agricultural value, which was much less — say £25,000. He had not paid rates on any part of the £100 000. Were he compelled to give the land up at the value he placed on it for assessment purposes that value would be considerably less than was now being demanded from the British Government. (Hear, hear.) He heard only that day from a member of the Conference, representing Galashiels, a local instance. A bit of land was wanted for public improvement, and the local authorities offered £500, a very liberal price — for local authorities were in the habit of offering very liberal prices, and did not generally 27 €rr on the side of robbing landlords — but the owner demanded <£5000, or ten times the value. Would they not be able to secure a fair realisation of the land if they were able to take the landlord at his word, and either on the one hand tax the land at the value he assessed, or if he valued it too low acquire it from him at his own price? Mr. H. Aldridge, Land Nationalisation Society, seconded. He contended that in order to make the taxation plan effective they really must give the community power to buy on the basis of assessment valuation. The New Zealand Government had actually adopted this suggestion, and found it by practical experience the best plan. The question of the acquisition of land for public purposes was an integral part of the programme of his society : and when the Conference next met it ought, in his opinion, to seek powers for compulsorily acquiring such land. Mr. Fred. Verinder, English Land Restoration League, appealed to the Conference not to pass this amendment, not that he had any doubt as to its value as a suggestion, not that he thought it unworthy of discussion, but because it introduced by a side wind a new subject which he submitted was not and could not be, before a Conference constituted as this one was. He had been delegated there to vote for the resolutions as they stood. He had no instructions with reference to land purchase ; and, whatever his private views might be, he could not, on behalf of that body, vote on the subject. There must be many ether delegates whose instructions related only to the subjects raised by the resolutions officially issued. The details of how the valuation was to be made might be left to their legislators, but they wanted to impress upon those who were going to make the laws in next session or later the fact that they wished land valued separately from the improvements upon it. (Applause.) It was decided at this point to put the question. A show of hands was taken, with the result that Mr Hyder’s proposed addition was rejected by a large majority, the addition only receiving some six votes. The members of Conference then adjourned for luncheon. Councillor Wm. Owen, Burslem, continued the discussion. He said he represented a Town Council which confessedly did not understand the question of the Taxation of Land Values in all its bearings. Unless the Conference took a moderate, practical, clear, and decisive course, it would stultify itself. Members of representative bodies know that many of the members were Conservative in their tendencies - he did not mean politically — but they had to do with the spending of public money and the administration of it. If they told the town councils of the country and representative bodies generally that they would have more money to spend in the interests of their constituencies if land paid its due share of taxation many of these men who had not studied the question from the reformers’ standpoint would take it up from the local standpoint. (Applause.) Considering that these local councils touched onr lives even more closely than the Imperial Parlia- ment, it was important to carry conviction to the minds of the members of these local bodies of all kinds, so that they might join in the great movement. He was surprised at Mr. Burgess wanting to eliminate the 28 words as to the taxing of industry. The cheaper the land was the better for industry, the better the chance for the labourer to have good wages, the better chance for the development of trade He wanted to see the time come when the phrase ‘Tree as land” would be used in the same sense that “free as air” was used now. Land would never be free until the clutch of the selfish individual was removed in the interests of the community. He looked upon this as a health question. Glasgow had taught towns of Great Britain how to transport their people at cheap fares, but if Glasgow had been built where the rule was to tax land, the population would not have been so crowded together, and there would not have been so much need of flats and such like erections. Still, Glasgov*? was not so bad as some towns. The slums were caused by the dearness of the land. Let the landlord do his share in making local improvements, and then when land was cheaper there would be no need to have narrow streets, closes, and habitations. Modern sanitary science taught that the more open spaces they had, the better for the health of the people, but if the landlord was to keep his grip on the land round the towns then slums would continue. From that standpoint alone the resolution was worthy of being carried. (Applause.)- Many of the Town Councils of England would support Glasgow when the matter was put clearly before them, and every ward would be canvassed for political action, political action meaning in this matter the social advancement of the people and the improvement of the conditions under which they lived. (Applause.) Councillor B. Woodhead, Huddersfield Town Council, thought the special point of the resolution was being rather lost,, sight of. He had a hope that the Conference would take them a step further than the Conference which was held in Westminster Palace Hotel, and give some hint as to how they might carry out the principles enunciated in the first resolution. There was an incident in the history of Scotland which led to one of her men of old to be long known as “Archibald Beil-the-Cat.” The question for the Conference was not as to who would bell the cat — the cat being the landlord — but how the bell was to be attached to his neck. (Hear, hear.) Reverting to the London Conference — he had a conversation with a friend who was an owner of land in L.ondon, and who, when he heard the object of the conference laughed loud and long. He said — “ Go on with your conference, speak as much as you like, and when you have done it you won't touch a single landlord. I have some land, I get very good rents by having flats on them, but I have a clause in the lease with the tenant to the effect that whatever burden of taxation be placed upon the property, even though it be nominally placed on the landlord, shall be paid by the tenant.” (Laughter.) In Huddersfield the landlord had a clause in his lease which ran very much in the same direction, and the practical question to which he should like the Con- ference to direct its attention was — how were they to ensure that after legislation had been passed, that the burden should not be still paid, as it was at the present time, by the tenant, and that in fact as well as in name, the land should bear the impost. (Hear, hear.) He suggested that speakers might serve the objects of the gathering better by giving, 20 hints and suggestions rather than by overburdehin^Vf'^-' "progranm.e with a number of formal amendments. He hoped the restilt of the CongreJsS might not only be to form a pious opinion, but to bfin'g ro'-vvird' prac- tical suggestions as to the means of carrying out their dd^i-e's ?t-,was natural that ardent liberals should speak as if this were exclusively a Liberal question It was nothing of the sort. It was a social question. (Hear, hear.) The last man who bade him (jod speed as he left Huddersfield for Glasgow was a Conservative alderman who said — “ We are as anxious for this as you are.” (Applause.) Councillor T. H. Gill, Devonport County Council, remarked that their common object was fairplay towards the landlords as well as fairplay towards the tenants. (Hear, hear.) At the risk of bringing coals to Newcastle he reminded the delegates that a hundred years ago the Corporation of Glasgow parted with the land on which the Municipal Buildings were built for the price of 2S. 8d. a foot ; eight or nine years ago when the land was bought back, it cost them per foot, or 75,000. Was that capital sum taxed as it ought to have been ? He was a Member of the County Council and Chairman of the local Mercantile Association, and both wished the Conference “ God speed. In Devonport they lived in the hollow of one man’s hand. That gentle- man — upon whom he made no atttack personally — was popularly supposed to derive^ ^^40,000, to earn which he did nothing. Why should that income not pay its share of taxation ? He concluded by remarking that he was a full-blooded Conservative, and he was not ashamed of it, but he hoped, at the same time, that the Taxation of Land Values would not be made a political question. (Applause.) Councillor Lathbury, Burton-on-Trent, declared that, like the last speaker, he also was a Conservative, and he had been unanimously elected by the Burton-on-Trent Town Council^ which was largely composed of Liberals, to come to represent them there and to support the resolutions on the programme. He hoped the Conference would stick religiously to that programme, for then he could give it his entire support Burton-on-Trent was in the hollow of one man’s hand. A few years ago he drew from it about £10,000 a year ; it was now betwixt £60,000 and £70,000. That had been made by the industry of the people, and their Town Council thought that that income ought to be taxed and bear its quota of the rates of the burgh. (Applause.) Councillor Terrett, West Ham, said he could claim to represent the most democratic Town Council in England, the only Council that had a majority of labour members. He was instructed to support all the resolutions, but he was also definitely instructed to make the Committee’s position clear. They were not in favour of taxing land values with a view simply to relieving the builder or the capitalist — (hear, hear) — or to wiping off the income tax. Their position was really that which was defined by the delegate from the Corporation of Leicester. They wanted to see the land values taxed in order that they might form an income if possible, not to the national taxation but rather to the local rates. That was the West Ham Council’s position, because they were embarked on the biggest scheme 30 whicli-had yet^be^n’a'ttumpted in the way of housing the working classes. They had already passed the plans for the building of over 620 work- ‘ meu's cottages* and dwe lings, and they were now going to Parliament for' com puhcJry ^powers to lake over no acres of land and to build thereon between 3000 and 4000 workmen’s buildings. The Council’s position was thus rather serious. They were about to become very large ground landlords themselves — (laughter) — and they should decidedly and strenuously object to being taxed heavily upon their ground rents for the purpose of reducing the income tax of big manufacturers from one end to the other. The Confeience would see that the West Ham Council were very strong on the application of this tax for the benefit of particular localities. They were also of the opinion that no reform in taxation could settle the land question. He knew perfectly well - and he spoke not only as a member of West Ham Council but as an East London workman who was living in a tenement rack-rented by one of East London’s sweating landlords — no taxation reform would solve the problem of East London overcrowding. He asked them to clearly bear that in mind. While they were in favour of the Taxation of Land Values as a first step they must go on till they got hold of the land itself and placed it in public hands. (Applause.) They were firmly convinced this would be absolutely necessary. The Taxation of Land Values would render land cheaper when public bodies went to purchase it, but however cheaply they bought land that did not prevent the builder who built the house from charging exorbitant rents to the tenants. (“ Question. ’) In West Ham the land that was bought cheapest had in many ca^-es the most highly rented houses. There was no getting beyond that fact. Mr. Wm. Reid, Scottish Single Tax League, urged that an income tax could not get men employed who were unemployed ; it could not get the slum dweller better conditions than he had to-day ; but the Taxation of Land Values could do all these. {Applause.) The Taxation of Land Values could force the land owner to let go his grip, to put his land into use in order that he might reap the rent with which to pay the tax. And it was all nonsense to tell us the cheapening of land could not solve this problem. If the cheapening of land could not solve this problem, nothing else could solve it save transmigration to another world. (Laughter.) There was either enough land for all, or there was not. If there was not enough land for all, the problem could not be solved ; but if there was enough land, the solution of the problem lay in giving access to land, in putting the control of land into the hands of the people, and no more logical remedy had been proposed to-day than the ^faxation of Land Values. (Applause.) Mr. Alexander Haddow, Glasgow, Mile-End Ward Committee, stated that he agreed with the Taxation of Land Values as a step towards a better goal. As a wage-earner himse f, he held that the question ought to be as dear to agricultural and industrial labourers as it could possibly be to the land theorist. What they wanted to do with the land question they must also do witii the machine question in the country. If it was right to take sixpence or tv o shillings in the jQ, it was right to take the whole thing; and he urged that that ] rocess of annexation should be carried out as speedily as possible 31 Councillor Chas. Whiteley, Sheffield, remarked that the great evil they were labouring under was mono[)oly, and were the land thrown open for manufactories and dwellings the j^eople would find that it would be much cheaper. He cited as an instance of the abuse of that monopoly, the experience of the managers of a non-conformist chapel in Sheffield. The lease was nearly falling out, and when the Duke of Norfolk, the ground landlord, was approached for a renewal, he insisted as a condition that the managers should pay £100 per annum. If the land and the buildings had been separately assessed, and the Duke had known that at the expiry of the lease he would have to pay the tax on the land, whether he was deriving an income from it or not, he would not have been prepared to demand such extortionate terms. Recently the Cor poration of Sheffield purchased the markets for ^£^ 20 , 000 . They knew nothing about the value of the land, but they were told that it amounted to ;^4oo,ooo. The annual value at three per cent, was thus 2,000. Yet the income from the whole of Sheffield eighty years ago was only ,000 As a result of the increment of value, they had in Sheffield a slum propery wdiich was a disgrace to the Corporation, and when they were trying to deal with it they found they had 100,000 to pay for 24.000 square yards. The only hope for this country was to break down this gigantic monopoly, and he believed the only way it could be done was by separately taxing the land. (Applause.) He explained that he represented the Trades Council of Sheffield. The Corporation of Sheffield said it had not been invited to the Conference, and, therefore, when the Lord Provost of Edinburgh stated that the Corporation of Sheffield had declined to send a representative to the Conference he was entirely mistaken. A few years ago he had the honour of introducing the question at the Town Council, when he was defeated by 20 to 12. Quite recently he re-introduced it, when it was carried by a majority of one, which showed how public feeling was shaping in Sheffield as well as all over the country. (Applause ) The resolution, on being put to the meeting, w^as carried unani- mously. Councillor John Ferguson, Glasgow, then moved the third resolution as follows : — “This Conference heartily approves of the bill promoted by the Corporation of Glasgow, to obtain for burghs in Scoland the power to tax Land Values, but considers that the principle of the bill is equally applicable to all parts of the country, and, therefore, urges all other local rating authorities (not included in the scope of the bill) to petition Parliament for similar powers.” He observed that this bill was the result of six years’ effort in the Council. It was not a solution, but a practical beginning to this question. The bill proposed, in the first place, to differentiate between houses and land. In order to get the value of land the proprietor would be obliged annually to supply the assessor with the ground or land value. After that a rate not exceeding 2s. in the ^ would be fixed, and the yield of that rate was to be appropriated to the reduction of the rates of the city. A question had been sent to him as to how that am.ount wo aid be divided amongst the various beneficiaries, and his answer to that was 32 that it would be divided according to the amount of benefit they re- ceived. Whether the superior (the original owner), or whether the person who had feued from him, or had been lessee or occupier — all the proprietors who were beneficiaries would pay in proportion to the amount of benefit received. (Applause.) They all approved of the bill, even the most extreme Socialist present, but some wanted to go further. In God’s name let them carry this first, and then see what could be 05 •r-t 00 c5 •g ^ 1 1 0) j- a “ < I ® ^ p i o ^ o P.'S 'd 43 ^ ® SJ5 S ^ ai ji ^ S '3J Cu O -x: ’0.2 .2X3 ’S-2 P< CD s T3 QO ►3 "2 0.2 ^.-2 O S 43 3 o a rO O ® g3 "S X ^ «« d) t-< "go M H a 05 ^ -IH> 43 COM Mao ^0+5) c3 2 O O l 2 -P oJ=^eM a 05 "P ^ o ^ 401 Ph 2 c« 3 2 330 •I -on: aciawvxa 'z 'o^; 'a’laiMvx’fr z 'ON 'aajwvxa