Review of the Book

Why Rents and Rates are High
by Arthur W. Madsen

Charles Joseph Smith

[Review of a pamphlet published in London and distributed in the U.S.
by the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, 11 Park Place, New York City.
Reprinted from Land and Freedom, January-February 1939]

In this book are given 600 examples of the appalling tribute paid to land monopoly whenever the people engage in a slum clearance or other civic project, or even in a national defence programme. While the illustrations pertain primarily to Great Britain, the penetrating comment by Mr. Madsen in each case furnishes excellent material for land value taxationists all over the world. The work is an arsenal of information, and it is to be hoped the object lessons contained therein will secure a wide circulation. If business men, particularly in England where landholding abuses are among the worst in the world, are not moved by this powerful indictment, then it would seem that they deserve to be exploited. And American business men may well profit from this revelation of British slavery, for in our country the handwriting is even now on the wall.

The following examples, condensed from the book, will serve to illustrate the seriousness of the land problem as well as the merciless logic of Mr. Madsen's conclusions.

1. Certain families, who were moved from slums in which half of them were living in one-room tenements, into good houses where overcrowding was not permitted, suffered an increased death rate of 46 per cent. The medical officer of health found that the increased rents for the better houses were paid by the former slum dwellers at the expense of their food requirements. Result ill health and death. Municipal housing schemes will not alone solve the slum problem; it is poverty that drives people into slums.

2. For purposes of a "demonstration farm" (probably akin to a resettlement project in our United States) the officials of Aylesbury proposed to buy certain land, at the customary handsome price in such cases. Someone pointed out that the land was not ideal for farming. But to the chairman of the committee, that was "a very strong recommendation" for acquiring it, because he "wanted to teach people how to grow on difficult land and he thought they would have their work cut out." So the owners get $40,000 for the admittedly inferior land, the price of proving to would-be cultivators that "back to the land" offers no alternative to wage slavery.

3. Certain land, registered as "agricultural," was needed for a children's playground. As "agricultural" land, it paid no taxes, pursuant to the English law, the theory being that it has "no value," for rating purposes. But this fiction disappears when it comes time to sell. The owners received $4,500 from the authorities. Having thus deepened the poverty of the children who will use the playground, no doubt the condition will be meliorated (how much?) by rations of free milk to the underfed children.

4. So that a certain beauty spot might be saved from building development, a preservation scheme provided for the usual land purchase. The owner of the required site was St. Thomas's Hospital, a wealthy institution of the Sailor's Snug Harbor or Trinity Church order, never having paid a penny's tax on its "agricultural" lands. It was pointed out that "the needs of St. Thomas's Hospital make it unthinkable that it can sell its lands at a price generous to the public but cruel to the sick." The widow and orphan argument, of which this is a variation, is an old, old, dodge.

5. One hundred and thirty acres of land, owned by and contiguous to the Dunlop Rubber Company factory, were desired by Birmingham for housing. The Dunlop Company sold the land to the Council for a subsidized housing project at $1,500 an acre, the price they had paid for it, explaining that "the provisions of houses near the factory would benefit the company, since many Dunlop operatives have to travel considerable distances to work" an admission that, as things are, the workers being saved that expense will, in the competition for jobs, accept less in wages. However, the houses were not built. The Council decided to abandon the scheme and sell the land to an aircraft factory. But due to the strings attached to the whole transaction, the Dunlop Company now received, in addition, from the aircraft concern about $400,000, being the difference between the value of the land for industrial purposes and housing purposes. Even a Conservative newspaper said the business "leaves a nasty taste in the mouth," meaning that someone has exploited England's expenditure on aircraft armament.

The sale of half the city of Cardiff in Wales is also strikingly, if not tragically covered. It must be read in the original to be thoroughly appreciated. The book concludes with a useful pro and con argument on land value taxation, covering sixteen major issues, with excellent comment. No "go-getting" Georgeist should be without "Why Rents and Rates are High."