THE  SINGLE  TAX

1 57

values  as  peculiarly  fitted  to  bear  justly  the  burden  of
taxation.
b  Second  in  order  is  the  fundamental  fact  that  a
tax  upon  ground  rent  cannot  be  shifted  upon  the
tenant  in  increased  rent.  The  argument  in  the  case
may  run  thus:  Ground  rent,  "what  land  is  worth  for
use,”  is  determined  not  by  taxation,  but  by  demand.
Ground  rent  is  the  gross  income,  what  the  user  pays
for  the  use  of  land 1 ;  a  tax  is  a  charge  upon  this  income,
similar  in  its  nature  to  the  incumbrance  of  mortgage
interest.  It  is  a  matter  of  every-day  knowledge  that
even  though  land  be  mortgaged  nearly  to  its  full  value,
no  owner  would  think  to  rid  himself  of  the  mortgage
interest  that  he  has  to  pay  through  raising  his  tenant’s
rent  by  a  corresponding  amount.  Mortgage  interest
is  a  lien  upon  land  held  by  an  individual;  similarly,
a  tax  may  be  conceived  most  clearly  as  a  lien  upon
land  held  by  the  state.  Both  affect  the  relations
between  owner  and  mortgagor,  and  between  owner
and  state  respectively;  neither  has  any  bearing  upon
the  relations  between  owner  and  tenant.  "Tax”
is  simply  the  name  of  that  part  of  the  gross  ground  rent
which  is  taken  by  the  State  in  taxation,  the  other
part  going  to  the  owner;  the  ratio  these  two  parts  bear
to  one  another  has  no  effect  upon  the  gross  rent  figure,
which  is  always  the  sum  of  these  two  parts,  viz.,  the
net  rent  plus  the  tax.  The  greater  the  tax  the  smaller
the  net  rent  to  the  owner,  and  vice  versa.  Ground
rent  is,  as  a  rule,  “all  that  the  traffic  will  bear”;  that
is,  the  owner  gets  all  he  can  for  use  of  his  land,
whether  the  tax  be  light  or  heavy.  Putting  more
tax  upon  land  will  not  make  it  worth  any  more
for  use.  If  the  market  value  of  a  lot  of  land  for