.

Mr. Speaker, the National Labor Relations Act is being acclaimed by labor as one of its greatest achievements in the long and weary struggle for its rights. The weeks and months that its life was hanging in the balance labor was filled with anxiety and despair. The actions of the courts were awaited with bated breath, and when at last, on the 12th day of April, 1937, the Supreme Court of the United States pronounced the act a living thing there was great rejoicing in the ranks of the workers. And this not without reason, for the principles for which labor fought and struggled throughout the years were at last sanctified as the law of the land. The right of self-organization and collective bargaining have been regarded by the champions of labor among their most important and effective weapons.

That labor should be unduly enthusiastic about the outcome of the legal battle over the Wagner Act and anticipate greater benefits than can possibly be realized must be expected. For the rank and file of labor have not only been schooled in the efficacy of self-organization and collective bargaining by their leaders but the Supreme Court entertains and declares the same view. In the light of me teachings of the leaders of labor and the decisions of the Supreme Court, it is but natural that practically everybody is entertaining the thought that, with the Wagner Act and related legislation securely on the statute books, labor is about to enjoy its just rewards.

Without minimizing in the slightest degree the importance and value of the legislation embodied in the National Labor Relations Act, it may be well to remind ourselves that, notwithstanding the legal recognition of the much-coveted principles underlying the Wagner Act, the war for the full rights of labor has not yet been won, and that many bitter battles remain to be fought. Candor impels the necessity to remind labor that the enjoyment of the full fruits of labor can come to pass only when the basic element of production will be available to all on equal terms and the rights of the people to their God-given inheritance restored. Equality before the law and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are delusions so long as labor must pay tribute to the privileged few for the opportunity to labor and produce.

In the celebrated case of the National Labor Relations Board against the Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, recently decided, Chief Justice Hughes, who delivered the majority opinion of the Court, said:

The right of employees to self-organization and to select representatives of their own choosing for collective bargaining or other mutual protection without restraint or coercion by their employer is a fundamental right. Employees have as clear a right to organize and select their representatives for lawful purposes as the respondent has to organize its business and select its own officers and agents. Discrimination and coercion to prevent the free exercise of the right of employees to self-organization and representation is a proper subject for condemnation by competent legislative authority. Long ago we stated the reason for labor organizations. We said that they were organized out of the necessities of the situation; that a single employee was helpless in dealing with an employer; that he was dependent ordinarily on his daily wage for the maintenance of himself and family; that if the employer refused to pay him the wages that he thought fair, he was nevertheless unable to leave the employ and resist arbitrary and unfair treatment; that union was essential to give laborers opportunity to deal on an equality with their employer.

From these words it may be fairly inferred that a laborer, as a member of a labor organization, is on a basis of equality with his employer and therefore in a position, through the power of collective bargaining, to demand his full rights. But before accepting this conclusion and ringing down the curtain on the problem of labor, let us examine the facts. And in considering this problem, let it first be observed, in order that laborers, either individually or collectively, may deal on an equality with their employer it is necessary that such laborers enjoy freedom of contract. It goes without saying that, unless the right to bargain on the part of the contracting parties is free from pressure or duress from any source whatsoever, there cannot be equality between the parties. It has been said:

Freedom of contract begins where equality of bargaining begins.

In other words, there is no freedom of contract where the bargaining power of the contracting parties is unequal.

Freedom of contract is a deceptive phrase. Americans are boastful of their so-called freedom and accept as a matter of course that the inalienable rights with which man is endowed are theirs to enjoy. Upon examination, however, this is a bold and unjustifiable assumption. America has not yet achieved that station of economic and political development where it can be truthfully asserted that the wage workers are free and independent. True freedom is impossible in an economic order when even the most obscure worker is denied the opportunity to use his labor for the satisfaction of his wants.

Do laborers, even with the right of self-organization and collective bargaining, enjoy the economic freedom necessary to use their labor to satisfy their wants or to deal with their employers on a basis of equality?

The basic factor in production is land, and the word "land", as here used, includes the whole external world accessible to man, with all its forces and powers. Freedom of contract is impossible where equal access to land is denied. Today land is not accessible to labor on equal terms, hence labor's bargaining power or ability to use its labor for the satisfaction of its own wants is not on a par with those who enjoy special advantages over the basic element of production. Before labor will be on a basis of equality the basic factor in production, to wit, land, must be freed from the grip of monopoly.

In a state of nature there is no unemployment. The tramp, the beggar, the man without a job are concomitants of civilization. Hence the phenomenon of unemployment is due to man-made institutions, and the reason we are stumbling along without discerning the chief cause of unemployment is our failure to comprehend the relation of industry to land. When hard times overtake us, when we are in the grip of a depression, and the highways are resounding with the tramp of the army of the unemployed, we waste time and energy in a wild attempt to ascertain the number of unemployed instead of ascertaining, if possible, the reason why able-bodied men are out of work; why they are unable to find opportunities to use their powers for the satisfaction of their wants; why their services are not in demand.

We are accustomed to saying that there is no demand for the unemployed. But all we can mean by such a statement is that no employer wants their services. Inasmuch as our physical wants can be satisfied by labor and labor alone, it is obvious that there is always the same demand for the labor of every man that there was, for example, for the labor of Robinson Crusoe alone on his island, namely, the need of satisfying his own wants. Why, then, cannot the demand be met?

The denial of access to land is the chief and primary cause. As has well been said by John Sturgis Codman, in a little book entitled "Unemployment and Our Revenue Problem", Robinson Crusoe needed no employer. He required only that there be no interference with his use of the natural resources of the island. Why, then, in this country, where we have natural resources greatly exceeding the needs of our comparatively scanty population, where we have all the advantages of modern knowledge concerning, the methods of facilitating production in cooperation with our fellow men, should not all of us, who are able-bodied and sane-minded, be able to earn an independent living far better than that to which Robinson Crusoe aspired, instead of being periodically obliged - many of us - to walk the streets to find work?

Why unemployment? Why do men lack opportunity to work? When it is remembered that land is the basis of all labor and all production, the answer is obvious. Without access to land, labor is at the mercy of those who control the natural resources. Unless the primary factor of production is available at the command of labor, unemployment - or employment on unfavorable terms - is inevitable. The rights of labor are so intimately related to the land question that the one cannot be considered independently of the other. They are part and parcel of the same problem.

In the District of Columbia there are thousands of unemployed. These thousands of unemployed have the same demand for labor for the satisfaction of their own wants that Robinson Crusoe had on his island. But they have no opportunity to work. Why? Because, first, no employer wants their services; and, second, the necessary and basic element in the productive process - to wit, land - is monopolized, and hence not available to the unemployed.

As illustrating the vital part land plays in the problem of employment, let us suppose that, adjoining the District of Columbia, there should arise as if by magic, out of the Potomac River, a strip of land equal in area to the District of Columbia and that the land of this new magical world is rich with gold nuggets from which a laborer, in a day's work, could produce from the land $10 worth of pure gold. And suppose that every foot of this magical island would possess an equal quantity of gold and that its production would require the same amount of labor. And, again, suppose the Government, being desirous to free itself of the present relief load, would announce that after a given day any unemployed resident of the District of Columbia would be given the exclusive possession of 1 acre of land of this magical island upon which to work. How would this affect the unemployment situation in the District of Columbia? Obviously, every able-bodied unemployed person in the District of Columbia willing to work would immediately make requisition for an acre of this gold-producing land and, without the intervention of an employer, go to work and at the end of each day's labor have in his possession at least $10 worth of gold. Under such conditions unemployment in the District of Columbia would be at an end and would remain so as long as the land retained its gold-producing capacity. It would also raise the wage level to a minimum of practically $10 per day throughout the District in all lines of endeavor.

Of course, all this sounds fantastic, but the only fantastic part is the magical island. The other features of the illustration are facts demonstrable in every growing community, as upon reflection may be discerned. The factor in the illustration that transformed the army of unemployed in the District of Columbia into a group of free, happy, and contented workers was the accessibility of productive land. It may be said that in America all productive land is in use, and therefore the land question is irrelevant. This, however, is far from the truth. In every center of population there may be seen many areas of vacant land or land only partially used, as may be noted by the following example:

In full view of the Capitol and within a stone's throw of the White House there is a tract of land, located in the Capital City of the Nation, bounded on the north by Fifteenth Street, on the east by Pennsylvania Avenue, on the south by Fourteenth Street, and on the west by E Street, containing about 1 acres of land. This tract of land has great productive powers. It has a potential productive capacity many times that of a single acre of the magical island. That is to say, while one person working on 1 acre of the magical island would produce $3,000 of wealth per year, upon the tract described, if put into production to its maximum capacity, there would be produced, not only many thousands of dollars worth of wealth annually by virtue of the inherent productive power due to its advantageous location and the services rendered by society and government but, at the same time, hundreds of laborers would receive employment, while millions of capital would be brought into use. The point being that land - Mother Earth - is a vast workshop wherein there is a job for everyone willing to work.

In the foregoing illustration attention is called to the fact that society and government render very distinct services in the process of producing wealth. It must be borne in mind that these services are of first importance. All proper activities of government and the normal association and cooperation of the people of the community constitute the services that society and government render in the productive process. The net economic result of these activities attaches to and is reflected in the value of land. This may be seen in every center of population.

For example, in the city of Washington, as in all other cities of comparable size, land has great value. The most valuable is found in those sections that offer the best opportunities for trade, shopping, amusements, and other activities and conveniences that accompany modern civilized life. It will be noted that there is a very distinct and positive relation between population and the value of land. The profit arising from these values belongs to the people. J. Ramsay MacDonald, former Prime Minister of England, during his Premiership had occasion to observe that -

Rent, "ground rent", is a toll, not a payment for service. By it social values are transferred from social pools into private pockets, and it becomes the means of vast economic exploitation. …Rent is obviously a common resource. Differences in fertility and value of site must be equalized by rent, but it ought to go to common funds and be spent in the common interests.

If the economic rent of land were collected and put into the Public Treasury for the common benefit of all the people, as suggested by the ex-Prime Minister, the confusion and bewilderment concerning the labor problem would immediately be in process of clarification and solution.

It may be well to pause and recount the benefits that would accrue to the people under a proper and just administration of the Nation's natural resources. Our imagination need not be stretched to see that if the value of the services rendered by society and government were appropriated for public use in lieu of the present onerous taxes on the products of labor, government would not only be simplified, but at the same tune private business would be freed from many of its present burdens, vexations, restrictions, and regulations.

With the reform of our revenue system along the lines indicated, the Government would, so far as its revenue policy is concerned, function within well-defined natural law, and thus observe the principles of morality and justice. This, too, is a matter of first importance. The life of human society is dependent upon moral virtue. No nation, no civilization, can long endure unless firmly rooted in the principles of eternal justice. Whenever and wherever nations have departed from the path of righteousness and justice, then and there they were overtaken by ruin and disaster.

President Roosevelt has publicly declared that the most effective guide for the safety of this most worldly of worlds is moral principle. This is ancient wisdom, applicable at all times and under all circumstances. Unless the activities of government have the sanction of ethics and good morals, evil fruits will be the harvest. Good morals decree -

Thou shalt not steal.

This applies to nations as well as individuals. The vice of the violation of this moral precept is the taking of the rightful property of another without his consent. Governments, in the exercise of the taxing power, ruthlessly ignore the spirit of this rule. They have a fashion of wielding the power of taxation with an abandon of good morals and ethical precepts that would put to shame the Captain Kidds and Al Capones of all times.

Let it be repeated, the essence of theft and robbery is the taking of the property of another without the other's consent. Yet governments by the indiscriminate use of the taxing power, commit this offense without let or hindrance, as may be seen upon examination of the revenue systems of all governments.

Labor, in conjunction with capital, is the creator of all wealth. The factors involved in its production are land, labor, capital. Equity decrees that each factor shall be compensated in proportion to the contribution that each makes toward its production, and this allocation may well be left to the operation of the natural laws governing the distribution of wealth. The portion allocated to land is rent; the portion allocated to labor is wages; and the portion allocated to capital is interest.

The item "rent" is a social product, and justice degrees that it be appropriated by government for the benefit of all, and hands off wages and industry. In practice, however, governments permit rent to be collected by private interests and thus are compelled to exact tribute from the wages of labor, and the interest of capital for public revenues. In doing so they violate the commandment "Thou shalt not steal."

But it is said that the persons whose labor created the wealth, as citizens of the country under whose government they live, are in duty bound to bear their just share of the cost of government. Granted. But it must be borne in mind that the laborers, as producers of wealth and units of society, make a distinct and decisive contribution to society and government. This contribution, as stated before, is reflected in the value of land and constitutes the fund provided by Nature and Nature's God for the support of society and governmental needs of the community. To permit this fund to be privately appropriated is an unspeakable sin of omission on the part of governments and impels governments to commit the indefensible crime of robbing labor and capital in order to obtain the necessary taxes for community needs.

Bolton Hall, a prominent lawyer and a noted publicist of New York, in a few eloquent passages expounds the principles under discussion in these words:

Most of man's misery is made by mankind's mistakes.

Man lives by applying work to land and to the products of land; land is the source of food and of all raw materials. No one can create wealth or even live without access to land. Only those who speculate or share in some monopoly can get rich without working.

Even a highjacker or a pickpocket would starve if he did not work at his business.

Independence depends not upon someone giving you a job, but upon free access to places to work. Possession of each piece of land by all is impossible, but exclusive occupancy must be assured; therefore each possessor of land should compensate those excluded from the more desirable holdings.

As land value is created by the presence and activities of the community, each landholder should pay to the community the annual rental value of whatever site or other land he holds. At present we pay these billions as land rent for permission to live on this earth to landholders who do not earn them.

If the community got the full value of the service it renders, there would be ample revenue to maintain that service. Taxes would be unnecessary, and labor and capital, being tax-exempt would get as wages all they produce and if money monopolies were destroyed, they would get whatever interest superabundant capital might bring.

As nothing could be made from land without using it, land would be held only for use, and all unused land, including water power, mines, etc., would be available free of purchase price. The doors of opportunity would be open to all.

If land rent were not paid to landholders, no one could get more than wages; hence, as one could not get wages by another's labor, exploitation would be impossible. Industry and progress would have a fair field.

Involuntary unemployment and poverty would cease; the golden age of our dreams would be made possible.

This is not bolshevism nor communism. The New York State Constitution, article I, section 10, reads: "The people, in their right of sovereignty, are deemed to possess the original and ultimate property in and to all lands within the jurisdiction of the State."

It is interesting to note that Blackstone, the great English law commentator, declares that -

It is an undeniable principle of law that all lands in England are held immediately by the King. And Williams, on Real Property, in the same vein, says:

The first thing the student has to do is to get rid of the idea of absolute ownership. No man in law is absolute owner of his lands but only holds estate in them.

The Constitution of the State of New York, as pointed out by Mr. Hall, is simply in line with the well-recognized principle that the true ownership of the natural resources is in the sovereignty of the people.

Statesmen and economists, industrialists and merchants, businessmen and bankers, labor leaders, farmers, and others, meet daily in the Capital City of the Nation, planning and worrying in a vain attempt to solve the elusive and vexing problem of unemployment. If these groups would make a pilgrimage to the little plot of land lying opposite the north side of the Commerce Building, they would see a tract containing about 1 acre of land that in appearance is not unlike the thousands of acres of pasture and fallow land in all sections of the Nation. Yet if their imagination were stirred and quickened, they would perceive that this vacant tract of land has great potential productive capacity. In fact, before their very eyes there would arise a veritable El Dorado that, if put into production, would yield fabulous quantities of wealth. With this experience, perhaps their imaginations would again be stirred and comprehend the fact that labor and capital are called upon to pay billions annually as tribute to the privileged landholding interests of America for the mere privilege of producing wealth, and furthermore, realize the futility of attempting to solve fundamentally the problem of unemployment, with its attendant misery, so long as the illogical relation between land and production exists.

All our economic activities are dependent upon land. Before a farmer can till the soil, the miner produce coal, a manufacturer turn a wheel, a merchant sell a spool of thread, a banker discount a note, a lawyer write a brief, a teacher conduct her school, or a preacher expound the precepts of religion, space must be rented or bought. That is inescapable, and since such space of the earth's surface is limited in quantity, its control becomes a coveted prize because of its inherent power to exploit labor. The privileged landholding interests of America are in control of the natural resources of America. And it is this fact that enables them to demand of labor billions of dollars annually for the mere right to work and produce. This is the great iniquity of our economic order, and so long as this condition exists laborers cannot be free to contract upon just and equitable terms, even though they are clothed with the power of unionization and collective bargaining.

The importance of the land question and its relation to the labor problem are well illustrated in the anthracite coal region of Pennsylvania. There thousands of men were employed. The principal occupation of these unemployed is coal mining. When the depression came, the operators closed the mines. The miners, of course, lost their jobs. But something happened. Here were large quantities of virgin coal in the bowels of the earth. True, these coal beds, under the present scheme of things, are private property. But some of the miners, faced with their own and their families' wants, flouted the law, took possession of the private property and, without the aid of employers, are busily engaged in the production of coal and thus are solving their own problem of unemployment. They are solving the problem of making a living for themselves and their families without the aid of employers, the Federal Government, the W.P.A., the N.R.A., or the welfare agencies of their communities.

The factor that has made this condition possible in the anthracite coal region of Pennsylvania is access to land. Labor there, as Robinson Crusoe on his island, went to work without asking embarrassing questions about the ownership of the natural resources.

The fundamental wrong from which labor is suffering cannot be settled by merely bargaining and entering into agreements between employer and employee. The wrongs involved are so deep-rooted in the economic structure that failure to reform the iniquities inherent in the system along just and basic lines means hardship, suffering, and misery to employer and employee alike. Before labor can achieve economic freedom and enjoy the power to bargain on a basis of equality with the employer, it must recognize the great truth that "The earth", in the words of Thomas Jefferson, "belongs in usufruct to the living."

Hither, ye blind, from your futile banding!
Know the rights and the rights are won.
Wrong shall die with the understanding;
One truth clear, and the work is done.
Nature is higher than progress or knowledge
Whose need is ninety enslaved for ten;
My word shall stand against mart and college;
The planet belongs to its living men!