SOCIALISM IN ENGLAND, 30/ 
than their heads. They discountenance the work of the Charity 
Organization Society, and virtually justify “indiscriminate 
charity,” by assimilating it to the sun which is made to shine 
alike upon the evil and the good. Again, the Church Reformer, 
the organ of the Guild of St. Matthew, says : “ We learnt our 
Socialism, not from Das Kapital, but from the New Testament • 
Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus, and not Karl Marx or 
Friedrich Engels, were its teachers.” Nevertheless, both the 
Church Reformer and the Christian Socialist, another paper 
representing the left wing, read into the Bible the scientific 
theories of Karl Marx and Henry George. 
One of the members of the Guild, however, the Rev. Pro 
fessor Symes, of University College, Nottingham, is a Political 
Economist of repute. In a paper entitled “ Socialism by Taxa 
tion,” read before a clerical audience at Charing Cross Hotel, 
m January last. Professor Symes very frankly put the question 
of a more equitable distribution of wealth under the simple 
formula of “ faking from the rich and giving to the poor.” 
This is morally justified as follows :—“A man has a natural right 
to the produce of his own labours, but when he needs the 
co-operation of others, they have a corresponding right to offer 
their own terms.” This is precisely what landlords, capitalists 
and employers of labour say, but the Professor means to put 
the words into the mouth of the nation. The nation has a 
right to say to the manufacturer. You may live amongst us 
and enjoy all the advantages of our civilization, but if you make 
a large fortune we shall take a considerable portion of it to be 
expended for “ the victims of our complex life.” If you do not 
like our terms, there are plenty of unoccupied spots in the 
world where you can practice individualism to your heart’s 
content. Such is, in brief, the moral justification of taxing the 
rich for the benefit of the poor. From the economic point of 
view, it is necessary to distinguish taxes which fall on rent, 
interest, and earnings respectively. Taxes on rent are eco 
nomically unobjectionable. They are mere transfers of wealth. 
I hey do not of themselves render the land less productive, nor 
will they cause a rise in rent, unless, indeed, where the land has 
een previously under-rented (a not unimportant exception for