THE SINGLE TAX AND THE FARMER 123 
command? What better indication can there be 
of his proportionate share of these public advan 
tages than the site value which they contribute 
to his land? 
The farmer is, so to speak, to a great extent his own 
commonwealth, his own municipality, and very sen 
sibly municipalises most of his own public utilities 
instead of farming them out. The usual items of 
common town expenditure are for water, light, fire 
department, police, sewerage, pavements, sidewalks, 
roads, schools, and the poor. As to water, light, fire 
department, police, and sewerage, the farmer furnishes 
himself at his own expense, and this is a sufficient 
practical reason for exempting him from the burden 
of contributing for village services of the same sort 
provided at common expense. This leaves in general 
three things for which the farmer ought to be taxed, 
viz., the roads, the schools, and the poor. These 
three things represent needs which the farmer has in 
common with the community in which he lives, and 
it is submitted that in justice to him, and greatly to 
his advantage, they should be provided for by a com 
mon tax, levied in proportion to land values, either by 
the State or by a minor political division, as efficiency 
and economy may dictate. 
A tax laid upon land values is by far the most “pro 
portionate and reasonable ” because every man, woman, 
and child contributes to this value. The farmer to 
day, whose land values are so small — almost 
insignificant — but whose labour values — his build 
ings and improvements, such as drains, fences, trees, 
crops, reclamation and fertilisation of land, and his 
personal property, which is of course a labour value —