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