VALUE  OF  LAND  AN  UNTAXED  VALUE  51

plished  gradually  and  almost  imperceptibly  in  one
generation.  The  execution  of  this  particular  plan  would
involve  an  increase  in  the  rate  year  by  year  sufficient
to  take  in  taxation  annually  an  additional  1  per  cent
only  of  the  gross  ground  rent  for  thirty  years,  or  one
generation.  An  average  0}  about  20  per  cent  of  gross
ground  rent  is  now  taken  in  taxation,  as  for  instance
in  Boston.  If  an  additional  1  per  cent  should  be  taken
each  year  for  thirty  years,  it  would  amount  finally
to  30  per  cent,  which,  added  to  the  20  per  cent  already
taken,  would  make  50  per  cent,  or  one-half,  which  is
about  the  average  proportion  that  present  taxes  bear  to
ground  rent.
By  this  plan,  at  the  end  of  thirty  years  the  burden
°f  $15  (1J  per  cent)  per  thousand  on  present  valuation,
now  borne  by  the  occupier,  will  have  been  placed  on
the  land  holder,  and  this  transfer  of  burden  would,  even
rf  land  did  not  meantime  increase  in  value,  reduce  the
selling  value  of  his  land,  every  11,000  to  I700.  Meantime, ­
  few  land  owners  would  suspect  the  change,  much
less  be  prejudiced  by  it.
But  if  a  thirty-year  bond  is  at  a  premium,  and
Worth  one  hundred  and  fifteen  dollars  to-day,  and
Will  be  worth  only  one  hundred  dollars  or  par  at
maturity,  does  the  whole  burden  of  the  vanishing
fifteen  dollars  premium  fall  upon  the  "present
owners”?  The  new  million  dollar  office  building  will
Probably  be  worth  little  or  nothing  in  three  generations,
hut  this  whole  burden  of  ninety  years  natural  decay  is
n °t  visited  upon  “present  owners.”  The  immediate
reduction  of  1  per  cent  (or  one  point  on  the  stock
hoard)  in  value  of  land  would  not  greatly  depress  selling
v alue,  while  increased  taxes  and  consequent  deprecia ­