I. TO A GERMAN DISCIPLE OF

GEORGE.*

IN reply to your letter I send you the inclosed

with special pleasure. I have been acquainted with Henry George since the appearance of his "Social Problems." I read them, and was struck by the correctness of his main idea, and by the unique clearness and power of his argument, which is unlike anything in scientific literature, and especially by the Christian spirit, which also stands alone in the literature of science, which pervades the book. After reading it I turned to his previous work, "Progress and Poverty," and with a heightened appreciation of its author's activity. You ask my opinion of Henry George's work, and of his single-tax system. My opinion is the following:

Humanity advances continually toward the enlightenment of its consciousness, and to the institution of modes of life corresponding to this consciousness which is in process of enlightenment. Hence in every period of life and humanity there is, on the one hand, a progressive enlightenment of consciousness, and on the other a realization in life of what is enlightened by the consciousness. At the close of the last century and the beginning of this a progressive enlightenment of consciousness occurred in Christianized humanity with respect to the working classes, who were previously in various phases of slavery; and a progressive realization of new forms of life the abolition of slavery and the substitution of free hired labor.

At the present day a progressive enlightenment of human consciousness is taking place with reference to the use of land, and soon, it seems to me, a progressive realization in life of this consciousness must follow. And in this progressive enlightenment of consciousness with reference to the use of land, and in the realization of this consciousness, which constitutes one

These letters were especially communicated by Count Tolstoi to Mr. Fletcher, editor of The New Age, London.

of the chief problems of our time, the fore-man, the leader of the movement, was and is Henry George. In this lies his immense and predominant importance. He contributed by his excellent books both to the enlightenment of the consciousness of mankind with reference to this question, and to the placing of it upon a practical footing.

But with the abolition of the revolting right of ownership in land the same thing is being repeated which took place, as we can still remember, when slavery was abolished. The govern ments and ruling classes, knowing that the advantages and authority of their position among men are bound up in the land question, while pretending that they are preoccupied with the welfare of the people, organizing workingmen's banks, inspection of labor, income taxes, and even an eight-hour day, studiously ignore the land question, and even, with the aid of an obliging and easily corrupted science, assert that the expropriation of land is useless, harmful, impossible.

The same thing is happening now as in the days of the slave trade. Mankind, at the beginning of the present and at the end of the last century, had long felt that slavery was an awful, soul-nauseating anachronism; but sham religion and sham science proved that there was nothing wrong in it, that it was indispensable, or, at least, that its abolition would be premature. To-day something similar is taking place with reference to property in land. In the same way sham religion and sham science are proving that there is nothing wrong in landed property, and no need to abolish it.

Religion blesses such possession, and the science of political economy proves that it must exist for the greatest welfare of mankind. It is Henry George's merit that he not only exploded all the sophism whereby religion and science justify landed property, and pressed the question to the furthest proof, which forced all who had not stopped their ears to acknowledge the unlaw

fulness of ownerships in land, but also that he was the first to indicate a possibility of solution for the question. He was the first to give a simple, straightforward answer to the usual excuses made by the enemies of all progress.

The method of Henry George destroys this excuse by so putting the question that by tomorrow committees might be appointed to examine and deliberate on his scheme and its transformation into law. In Russia, for instance, the inquiry as to the means for the ransom of land, or its gratuitous confiscation for nationalization, might be begun to-morrow, and solved, with certain restrictions, as thirty-three years ago the question of liberating the peasants was solved. To humanity the indispensableness of this reform is demonstrated, and its feasibleness is proved (emendations, alterations, in the singletax system may be required, but the fundamental idea is a possibility); and therefore humanity cannot but do that which their reason demands.

II. TO A SIBERIAN PEASANT. The scheme of Henry George is as follows. The advantage and profit from the use of land is not everywhere the same; since the more fertile, convenient portions, adjoining populous districts, will always attract many who wish to possess them; and so much the more as these portions are better and more suitable they ought to be appraised according to their advantages the better, dearer; the worse, cheaper; the worst, cheapest of all.

Whereas the land which attracts but few should not be appraised at all, but left conceded without payment to those who are willing to cultivate it by their own manual labor. According to such a valuation, convenient plow land in the government of Toula, for example, would be valued at about five or six rubles the dessyatin [about two and three-quarter acres]; marketgarden land near villages at ten rubles; the same, but liable to spring floods, fifteen rubles; and so on. In towns the valuation would be from 100 to 500 rubles the dessyatin; and in Moscow and Petersburg, in go-ahead places, and about the harbors of navigable rivers, several thousands or tens of thousands of rubles the dessyatin.

When all the land in the country has been thus appraised Henry George proposes to pass a law declaring that all the land, from such a year and date, shall belong no longer to any separate individual, but to the whole country, to the whole nation; and that thereafter every one who possesses land must gradually pay to the state that is, to the whole nation-the price at which it has been appraised.

This payment must be expended on all the public needs of the state, so that it will take the place of every kind of monetary imposition, both interior and exterior-the custom-house.

According to this scheme, it would follow that a landowner who was at present in possession of 2,000 dessyatins would continue to own them, but would have to pay for them into the treasury, here in Toula, between twelve and fifteen thousand rubles a year, because hereabouts the best land for agricultural and building purposes would be included; and no large landowner would be able to bear the strain of such a payment, and would be obliged to give up the land. Whereas our Toula peasant would have to pay about two rubles less for each dessyatin of the same ground than he does at present, will always have available land around him which he can hire for five or six rubles, and in addition, will not only have no other taxes to pay, but would receive all Russian and foreign articles which he needs without imposts. In towns the owners of houses and manufactories can continue to possess their property, but will have to pay for the land they occupy, according to its valuation, into the common treasury.

The advantage of such a system will be: 1. That no one will be deprived of the possi bility of using land.

2. That idle men, possessing land, and forcing others to work for them, in return for the use of the land, will cease to exist.

3. That the land will be in the hands of those who work it and not of those who do not.

4. That the people, being able to work on the land, will cease to enslave themselves as laborers in factories and manufactories, and as servants in towns, and will disperse themselves about the country.

5. That there will be no longer any overseers and tax collectors in factories, stores, and customhouses, but only collectors of payment for the land, which it is impossible to steal, and from which taxes may be most easily collected.

6 (and chiefly). That those who do not labor will be freed from the sin of profiting by the labors of others (in doing which they are often not to blame, being from childhood educated in idleness, and not knowing how to work); and from the still greater sin of every kind of falsehood and excuse to shift the blame from themselves; and that those who do labor will be delivered from the temptation and sin of envy, condemnation of others, and exasperation against those who do not work; and thus will disappear one of the causes of dissension between man and

man.

LEO TOLSTOI.

MR. BRYCE ON THE POLICY OF ANNEXATION.

MR.

R. JAMES BRYCE contributes to the Forum an article on "The Policy of Annexation for America." The author of "The American Commonwealth," especially in the last edition of that work, has made his readers fairly familiar with his point of view in relation to the territorial expansion of the United States. He does not believe that America can improve her condition by adding to her territory, and her present position among the nations, in his opinion, renders the creation of a great navy unnecessary. If, however, Cuba and Hawaii should be annexed, the United States would have to maintain powerful fleets, one in the Pacific and another in the Gulf of Mexico, to defend these islands in case of attack from other nations.

Mr. Bryce admits that the United States is abundantly able to build and maintain a navy adequate for this purpose, but he questions whether it is worth her while to do so. Such a navy, he says, would be a very costly luxury. We have no occasion for a navy equal to those of the great European nations.

ENGLAND'S EXPERIENCE.

Mr. Bryce's argument in the Forum article is largely based on the supposed unfitness of the populations of Cuba and Hawaii to receive and be governed under American institutions. On this point he cites the experience of Great Britain in dealing with similar elements in certain of her dependencies:

"Britain has had painful experience of these difficulties in her own colonies; yet in her mɔnarchical system and her colonial service she possesses machinery much more flexible and more adaptable to these conditions than the far more cons.stently democratic system of the United States has ever possessed or seems capable of constructing. In other words, the problems which the United States would have to solve in Cuba or in Hawaii, were either of them to be annexed, would be, for the United States, perfectly new and extremely perplexing problems. He must be a sanguine man who thinks that a democratic government, intended to be worked by educated men of the best European stock, whose ancestors have enjoyed freedom and been accustomed to self-government for centuries, can, without danger to its new subjects and injury to itself, either set up among an inferior and dissimilar population

its own democratic institutions or so far depart from all its own traditions as to attempt to govern that population and its own citizens abroad by despotic methods."

COLONIZING IN THE TROPICS.

In those British colonies which proved to be fit to receive the overflow of England's own population, especially those lying in the temperate zone, Mr. Bryce admits, of course, that prosperous democratic states have been established; but this, he says, is because their inhabitants are of British stock. Britain's tropical possessions he puts in an entirely different category. India and the great regions of tropical Africa lately acquired by Great Britain Mr. Bryce regards as sources of disquietude rather than of profit.

"The example Britain has set, in taking East Central Africa, for instance- -a region into which she was drawn by a train of circumstances she could hardly control-is one not to be recommended for imitation. It cannot be denied that the impulse or fancy for coloring new territories British on the map has had something to do with these recent extensions of British authority. But the impulse has been in some cases an unfortunate one; and this needless assumption of responsibilities, with no prospect of a corresponding return, will be doubly unfortunate if it helps to lead the United States into any similar courses." Mr. Bryce sums up and enforces his argument in the concluding paragraphs of his article:

What have the United States to gain by territorial extension? No parts of the earth's surface remain in which colonies like the British self-governing colonies can be planted. Tropical dominions would cost more than they are worth ; and they are cccupied by races unfit to receive American institutions. Possessing on her own continent an enormous territory of unequaled natural resources, and capable of easily supporting more than twice its present population, the United States needs no transmarine domains in which to expand. One sometimes hears it said that her mission is to spread democratic principles. Polynesians and Asiatics, Creole Spaniards and mulattoes, are not fit to receive those principles. Neither are negroes fit, as the history of Hayti and of most of the South American socalled republics' proves.'

"The United States has already a great and splendid mission in building up between the oceans a free, happy, and prosperous nation of

two hundred millions of people. And one of the noblest parts of her mission in the world has been to show to the older peoples and states an example of abstention from the quarrels and wars and conquests that make up so large and so lamentable a part of the annals of Europe. Her remote position and her immense power have, as I have said, delivered her from that burden of military and naval armaments which presses with crushing weight upon the peoples of Europe. It would be, for her, a descent from what may be called the pedestal of wise and pacific detachment on which she now stands, were she to yield to that earth-hunger which has been raging among the European states, and to imitate the aggressive methods which some of them have pursued. The policy of creating great armaments and of annexing territories beyond the sea would be, if a stranger may venture to say so, an un-American policy and a complete departure from the maxims -approved by iong experience of the illustrious founders of the republic."

IN

A FAVORABLE VIEW OF HAWAII.

N the North American Review Mr. Arthur C. James, who has recently visited the Hawaiian Islands, sets forth what he conceives to be certain advantages of annexation.

Mr. James states that before his visit to Hawaii he was strongly opposed to annexation, but that he returned to this country an ardent annexationist. He has become convinced that the Hawaiian Islands would bring to the United States great commercial and industrial advantages. They are situated in the most fertile part of the world, and are capable of producing all the sugar and coffee that this country can consume, besides large quantities of rice and tropical fruits. They have three excellent harbors, and would control the cable communication of the Pacific.

Even more significant than the commercial importance of Hawaii is her strategic position in relation to the protection of the Pacific coast of the United States, and this Mr. James regards as another reason why we should desire annexation. To the objection that annexation would be a radical departure from our traditional policy Mr. James replies by citing the cases of Alaska, Louisiana, New Mexico, Texas, California, and other States, whose value at the time of their annexation was less apparent than is Hawaii's value to-day. Even now Alaska is farther away and less accessible than Honolulu.

To the question, "Have the natives been consulted?" Mr. James replies:

66

No, but were the American Indians con

sulted in the early days here, or the natives of Alaska in later times? The natives have proved themselves to be incapable of governing and unfitted for the condition of civilization, as is shown by their rapid decline in numbers and their inability to adapt themselves to changed conditions; and the importance of their supposed opinions on annexation has been greatly exaggerated. Numbering 500,000 in the time of Captain Cook, they are now reduced to about 30,000, and occupy much the same relation to the white population as our Indians do here. Indolent and easy-going, they are perfectly content with any form of government which allows them to sun themselves, bedecked with flowers. This view is borne out by the failure of the recent mass-meeting in Honolulu, organized solely for the purpose of proving that the native Hawaiians are actively opposed to annexation. It is natural that the white man should become the governing power; and in the exercise of this power it is equally natural that he should wish to turn over his territory to a strong civilized nation for protection and advancement, since, if they rely solely on their ability to defend themselves, it is impossible for the islands to maintain their independence for any length of time."

The question is, to what country shall Hawaii be annexed-to Japan, to England, or to the United States ? Annexation to one or the other is inevitable.

ANGLO-SAXON DOMINANCE.

That the mixed character of the Hawaiian population is a real drawback Mr. James admits, but the difficulties, he holds, are not insuperable.

"The Chinese are not yet dangerous. Their numbers are large; but they are a peaceable people, without cohesion, and would give no more trouble than the same race does in our Western States, where the battle has been fought and the question is now practically settled. If annexed, they would be readily amenable to our laws. The Japanese element is by far the most serious difficulty. Since the war with China these people have become exceedingly arrogant and self-assertive, and the spirit of national aggrandizement extends from the Mikado to the lowest coolie. From the standpoint of the Japanese, this spirit may be most commendable, but it will have to be firmly met by the United States when our own interests are at stake. The Portuguese are a harmless element. I can see no reason why we should not expect people of the AngloSaxon or German race to become dominant, not only in power, but also in numbers, as soon as the question of government is finally settled. Cer

tainly, few Anglo-Saxons or Germans would care to become the subjects of a dusky queen under a constitution like the one which caused the revolution of 1893."

The question of statehood Mr. James considers no more imminent than that of Alaska's statehood. Annexation in itself would violate no precedent and would set none, so far as other territories are concerned, but each case would be decided on its merits, as the former cases have been.

HAWAIIAN EDUCATION.

IT appears from the report of Prof. F. B. Dress

lar, published in the January number of the Educational Review, that the school system of Hawaii is well organized and fairly comparable with that of any of our States.

"The educational interests of all the islands are in the hands of a minister of public instruction and six commissioners. These together form an executive department, known as the Depart ment of Public Instruction. The minister of foreign affairs is ex-officio minister of public instruction, and is charged with the chief administrative work of the department. The commissioners are appointed by the president of the republic, and serve for a term of three years, the term of two expiring each year. Two of these commissioners may be women; but no person in holy orders, or a minister of religion, shall be eligible as a commissioner.' The commissioners serve without

pay.'

The work of supervision and inspection of the schools is delegated by the department to an inspector-general of schools, whose term of service is at the discretion of the department. It is his duty to visit all the schools in the various islands as often as possible, and to inform school officers and teachers of their duty.' If the department so direct, the inspector-general may have the power to appoint teachers, remove teachers, examine and license teachers, and modify the course of study prescribed. He shall make a careful report of all his official acts, together with a statement of the needs and conditions of the schools."

The law provides that all instruction, whether in public or private schools, shall be in the English language, except in cases where another language is to be taught in addition to the English language.' Under this condition the department may authorize such instruction, either by general rules or special orders for individual instances. No school shall be recognized by the department which does not conform to these regulations."

There is a compulsory education law which is said to be well enforced. Professor Dresslar speaks enthusiastically of the efficiency and professional spirit of the present able inspectorgeneral, Prof. Henry S. Townsend, and of the teachers under his charge.

"EMPIRE CAN WAIT"-SPEAKER REED'S VIEWS OF ANNEXATION.

SPEAK

PEAKER REED, in the course of a recent conversation with the editor of the Illustrated American on the policy of adding more territory to the United States, made use of an expression that bids fair to become a rallying cry for the opponents of Hawaiian annexation. "Empire can wait," he said. This now famous remark of the Speaker is made the topic of an article prepared by him at the request of the editor of the American, and published in the first December number of that periodical.

In studying the successive rise and fall of empires in history, Mr. Reed is impressed with the fact that in each case the source of the empire's destruction has been within itself; and to his mind this source has been the failure of each section of a great country to keep abreast of the other sections, to think the same thoughts, and to promote always the common interest." Applying this test to our own nation, Mr. Reed remarks:

66

That there are vast differences between the ideas and wants of our separate regions is not so well known as it ought to be, or perhaps so fully taken into account.

"In each one of the States themselves there are communities which stand out against their surroundings and refuse to be assimilated, and to become one in thought with the others. The geographical differences are real and powerful. Once in our history the danger which comes of internal disagreement has been realized, and the destructive War of the Rebellion will always be a warning of possible danger, though its result is a protection also.

These differences are really differences in civilization. It does not matter which section is more advanced, or which is less advanced. The only fact of importance is the difference. Similarity is the great want of nations. All the people must be in touch with each other. Modern appliances are all on our side. Lightning, even more than steam, has annihilated space, and brought together the uttermost parts of the earth. Both together are the soul of business, and business unites with ties which are deeper than senti

ment.

Judging from the teachings of history, the great aim of a nation should be to use all the ap