landlord). The efforts of some Conservative orators for the last
twenty-five years to prove the contrary are erroneous in the
reasoning; or I should say, much of the "reasoning" does not hang
together at all. Without formally refuting these efforts, I repeat
that they are fully refuted in the result.

It is therefore that I have insisted above that, in order to carry
out the proposed ransom of the land, a new Property Rate, separate
from and in addition to all other taxes, is necessary. Though the
manner of levying a National Property Rate which I have proposed
lends itself very nicely to getting in such an extra tax, it is not
at all on that ground that I have suggested the new manner of levy.
The object of the new manner of levy and the sycophants is to get
every piece of land in the country into the hands of that man who can
make most of it; including herein as an important item the cheap and
easy acquisition of land required for Government, public and
commercial (railway, etc.) enterprises.

In any great reform of our whole system of taxation a disturbance of
existing interests must take place. Though I would not disturb
existing interests for the sake of mere equalisation or official
beauty of work, I would not let the fear of disturbing private
interests stand in the way of any real or important reform. The
introduction of Universal Free Trade and the abolition of all duties
would be accompanied by a disturbance; but, as far as I can see, no
one would lose, while many would gain enormously.

On the same ground of equality of new taxation I should propose to
replace the amount now levied in duties mainly by an income tax. That
is a perfectly level tax; the idea that temporary incomes ought to