The Attitude of College Economics Departments Towards the Single Tax

Walter Fairchild

[Reprinted from Land and Freedom, March-April 1929]

EDITORIAL NOTE We are glad to print the [following] account of the favorable reception accorded by the colleges visited by Mr. Fairchild in his generous and self-imposed task of securing a revival of interest among professors and students in the 'teachings of Henry George. Whether Mr. Fairchild has been especially fortunate we cannot say. But even Mr. Goeller, who met with some set-backs early in his experience recounts in his later tour of educational institutions in Pennsylvania much that should encourage us. EDITOR LAND AND FREEDOM

AN impression is current among Single Taxers, that professors of economics in our universities and colleges are generally opposed to teaching the principles of land value taxation, particularly as expounded by Henry George in his writings. This impression is contrary to the personal experience of the writer, who became acquainted, in his student days, with the Single Tax principle through the study of "Progress and Poverty" in the economics course at the University of Cincinnati. At that time, "Progress and Poverty" was used as a textbook by Professor Philip Van Ness Myers, Head of the Economics Department, and it was studied intensively by his classes for a period of six weeks. At the close of the course, essays on the subject were invited.

Recently, at the suggestion of the Executive Committee of the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, the writer made a tour of the Middle West, and visited fourteen colleges and universities, located in eight different states and in eleven different towns. The schools visited included three or four privately endowed colleges, and a number of State Universities, representing a fair cross section of the educational system of the Middle West.

The particular matter presented to the heads of the Economics Departments, was the use of the book Significant Paragraphs from Progress and Poverty by Henry George, compiled by Professor Harry Gunnison Brown of the University of Missouri. In every instance, the professors interviewed were familiar with the book and expressed themselves as keenly interested not only in the book but in the subject as well. In a majority of cases, the professors expressed themselves as favorable to the underlying principles. In only one or two instances, was an unfavorable attitude expressed.

Particularly impressive was the high respect in which all the professors held the writings of Henry George. Many of them brought out their own copy of Progress and Poverty retained from university days. In several classes, "Progress and Poverty" is used, partially as a textbook, and partially for reference reading.

Every school visited had in its Reference Library Progress and Poverty either abridged or unabridged, or Significant Paragraphs from Progress and Poverty. Several Schools have purchased Significant Paragraphs in quantities for sale to the students in the economic classes. One large State university, remarkable for its modern business atmosphere, has purchased upwards of 350 copies of Significant Paragraphs at the regular rates, from the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, for use in classes. In another school, 120 copies of the book have been placed in the Revolving Library of the Economics Department. A copy is placed in the hands of each student in the economics classes; the book is used as a text-book, and the writing of an Essay upon the subject of "Land Value Taxation" is required of each student as a class theme. At the end of the semester the book is returned to the Revolving Library, and thus placed at the disposal of the next group of students.

The general attitude of the teachers of economics in the schools is to avoid any appearance of propaganda, and to present the matter as a study of principles. The arguments for and against the proposition are discussed, but it is apparently the desire of the teachers to present our proposition in its purity, and to encourage the students to make their own analysis. This in is line with the modern tendency in education which is to teach the student how to think rather than what to think.

In a number of classes, the writer found the works of C.B. Fillebrown in use. At one university Fillebrown's A.B.C. of Taxation was used as a textbook. Two or three professors stated that they formerly distributed to their students, during the class periods devoted to the subject of land value taxation, Fillebrown pamphlets, Catechism of Natural Taxation, Land The Property Concept, The Rent Concept, Taxation and Housing.

The use of these pamphlets has been discontinued because they are unavailable, being out of print.

Generally speaking, it may be said that the Economics Departments of the colleges and universities will receive and present to their students printed matter which dispassionately states the principles of our proposition. Sometimes literature is prepared containing text which would be acceptable, but the use of which is made impossible in class work because extraneous or argumentive state ments of a propaganda nature are included.

The use of the unabridged text of Progress and Poverty is difficult in elementary classes in economics because of the length of the work, and the shortness of the period that can be allotted for the study of the subject. For this reason the little volume "Significant Paragaphs from Progress and Poverty by Professor Brown, has been welcomed.