.
Downfall of the United Labor Party |
| [Chapter X, from the
book, The Singletax and the Labor Movement, a Bulletin of
the University of Wisconsin, No. 878, 1917, pp. 143-157] |
THE SPLIT AMONG THE SINGLETAXERS
The United Labor party as a new political organization, independent and
distinct from all other organizations, had made its debut. Although the
results were not so favorable as expected, the leaders nevertheless very
soon calmed down, finding the 72,000 votes quite satisfactory for the
first step of a new party, for they considered the votes received as
pure singletax votes given by the people "animated by principle,
who can be counted on in any circumstances and against all odds."[1]
Henry George, speaking of the mayoralty campaign of 1886, said:
"But there of course rallied around me large elements
who neither understood nor appreciated the principles which alone
induced me to accept a political nomination. …This year - 1887 --
a vote for me was … a vote for naked principle … so
uncompromisingly and unhesitatingly asserted as to drive off not only
the Socialists, Anarchists, and cranks who constituted the
'progressive labor party' but also half-way men (reformers)."[2]
The conclusion which Henry George made was: "Let us push on the
good work."[3] On this the Singletaxers agreed. But very soon arose
the question as to how to proceed. According to a resolution of the
Syracuse Convention they had to call a national conference of the party
and to convert it into a national party. To do this was only possible
through a national campaign in the presidential election. As to this
there appeared a disagreement among the leaders. The majority, headed by
McGlynn, were in favor of an independent national campaign, while
Croasdale and Post opposed it. They favored in the presidential election
the policy of holding of the balance of power and adopting independent
political action only in states and congressional districts. Their views
appeared in the Standard as early as the end of November.[4]
Now as to Henry George himself. Although he found some comfort in his
belief that the 72,000 votes received in the state campaign were pure
singletax votes, he was nevertheless greatly disappointed with the
results of the campaign. The loss of so many labor votes in the city of
New York and the great loss of the subscribers to the Standard
were to him not only a blow to the advancement of the singletax theory
but somewhat humiliating to his personal pride. In the Standard
he again and again blamed McGlynn, McMackin, and Barnes for inducing him
to accept the nomination for secretary of state. Furthermore, if he had
had any hope to accomplish his reform scheme by the aid of organized
labor, after the state campaign he had lost it. His disappointment with
organized labor and labor parties made up, according to his expression,
of "incongruous elements", was now complete. As the backbone
of the United Labor party was still the labor element, he naturally
considered that the career of the Singletax theory and of himself was
closed as far as the United Labor party was concerned. He afterwards
stated several times in the Standard that the United Labor party
had collapsed in the state campaign of 1887.
As he did not oppose the idea of holding the balance of power in the
national campaign, pointed out in the Standard by his closest
followers, Croasdale and Post, he apparently already meditated swinging
the forces of the United Labor party to the Democratic party in the
coming presidential campaign, hoping successfully to agitate in behalf
of his favored doctrines in the ranks of the Democratic party and to
increase the circulation of the Standard for the sake of the
same doctrines. But there was no immediate opportunity for such sudden
change, and, moreover, the United Labor party and he himself stood on a
strong singletax platform with some other radical demands -- a platform
which had nothing in common with the Democratic party.
Very soon an opportunity came. President Cleveland sent a message to
Congress on December 6 in which he advised a slight reduction of the
import duties on some raw materials. It was far from being a free-trade
message. It decidedly repudiated free-trade doctrine.
But Henry George laid hold of this message. He greeted it warmly and
commented favorably upon it in the Standard, calling "all
parties, despite themselves, to aid Cleveland in his good work."[5]
He started at once to agitate in favor of the free trade doctrine,
shifting his specific main issue, the singletax, to that of a
subordinate one, free trade.
Some rumors began to circulate in the press that Henry George was
abandoning the Syracuse platform and was going over to the Democratic
party.
As a result of these rumors, which apparently were true in view of the
new attitude of the Standard, McGlynn invited Henry George and
his closest friends to an informal conference of the leaders of the
United Labor party at Cooper Union about the middle of December. There
were present McGlynn, McMackin, Barnes, George, Post, Croasdale, and
Sullivan.
The tariff question was discussed at first. McGlynn, McMackin, and
Barnes thought it to be the best policy for the United Labor party to
ignore the tariff question in the coming presidential campaign, because
this question, if raised, would split the party, and had been
intentionally ignored in the previous campaigns and platforms.
George, Post, Croasdale and Sullivan believed that the tariff question
in the presidential campaign could not be ignored, for it was becoming
the main issue between the Democratic and Republican parties, and that
the United Labor party ought to take also a definite stand on this
issue.
McGlynn then asked Henry George if he should go into the presidential
campaign on the Syracuse platform, to which Henry George answered that
he should not. Then the ''McGlynn men" outlined the plan to call a
national conference of the United Labor party and to make an independent
presidential campaign in the following states: New York, Connecticut,
New Jersey, and Indiana. To this plan the "George men"
objected on the ground that an independent campaign in those states
would mean helping the Republicans to beat the Democrats, which plan
they called the "Butlerizing of the United Labor party."
McGlynn answered that the United Labor party ought to go into the
campaign independently and fight the rotten Democratic Tammany Hall
interwoven with the Catholic ecclesiastical machine, and that there was
not any possibility for joining the forces of the United Labor party
with that of the Democratic party.[6]
The conference ended without any agreement between these two leaders
and their followers. The first formal split between them had occurred.
The Standard made the tariff reform its main issue in the coming
campaign. "We cannot ignore this minor robber (tariff duties), and
to fairly get at the greater robber (economic rent of land) we must
fight the little one."[7]
Henry George found now that the two-party system, which he criticized
in the previous campaigns, calling both the Republican and the
Democratic parties ''shamelessly corrupt and hopelessly decayed,"
constituted "the normal political division in every country,"[8]
and that they might hold together for a considerable time, if even "the
life of distinctive principle has gone out of them. … But to bring
a principle into politics it is not always necessary to start a new
party."[9] He denied now that it was altogether necessary for labor
to go into independent politics, for "the real work of emancipating
labor and bringing about reform is the work of education."[10]
Not to frighten the leaders of the Democratic Party by a newcomer as
their competitor for spoils and not to give ground for belief that he
had changed his course for some personal interests, he stated:
"I care little or nothing for party, for I regard
parties not as ends but as means. I am not a political leader; and I
do not aspire to be a political leader, not only for the reason that
politics are not to my taste, but that I aspire to something much
higher, a leadership of thought."[11]
The second conflict which resulted in the ousting of the "George
men" from the United Labor party[12] occurred at a meeting of the
Executive Committee of the Anti-Poverty Society on February 13, 1888.
The George men constituted the majority of the Committee. As McGlynn,
the president of the society, learned a few days before the meeting that
they were planning to suspend him until the next general meeting of the
Society, he had appointed to the Executive Committee about a dozen new
members, mainly from his former parishioners, according to the power
conferred upon him by the constitution of the Society. When the George
men came to the meeting, they found about half a dozen new members in
the room. To the explanation of McGlynn that he had appointed new
members, E. J. Shriver, treasurer of the society, and Louis F. Post
(both George men) replied with a protest, calling McGlynn's new
appointment arbitrary. Meanwhile new members continued to come in, as
did several bona fide members -- George men. Both factions had
foresightedly reenforced themselves by a method of "packing"
-- the McGlynn faction by new appointments, and the George faction by
bona fide members. But McGlynn had the majority on his side.
William T. Croasdale presided. E. J. Shriver moved that the president of
the society be suspended for a "grave cause" (for attacking
Henry George for his new course in politics) until a meeting of the
Society. This motion was seconded and an exciting debate followed.
McMaekin and Barnes declared the motion out of order. But Chairman
Croasdale ruled that the motion was in order. Barnes appealed from the
decision of the chair. A roll call was taken by the chairman leaving out
the bona fide and newly appointed members. This action evoked
stormy protests. A motion then was instantly made to adjourn, and the
George men left the room. The meeting was continued by the McGlynn
faction alone. A motion was carried to expel the George men, who had
just left the meeting.
A few days later the expelled George men of the Anti-Poverty Society
gathered in a meeting as the Executive Committee of the Society, for the
purpose of suspending McGlynn from the presidency. After a long
discussion they abandoned this proposition and considered themselves as
leaving the Anti-Poverty Society. It was obvious to them that a
continuation of the struggle was useless, because the ranks of the
Society were on the side of McGlynn. Not to make any further scandal,
Henry George withdrew voluntarily from the Anti-Poverty Society.
The twenty-third assembly district organization of the United Labor
party formally expelled Henry George for "abandoning the greater
principle of the singletax for the lesser one of free trade, for having
spoken of the party as a paper organization, and for supporting
President Cleveland upon inspiration from Washington."[13]
Thus Henry George and his closest followers, a comparatively small
number of men, not only had lost their control over the United Labor
party, the Land and Labor organization, and Anti-Poverty Society, but
were expelled from these organizations. The real cause of the split
among the Singletaxers was neither theory nor doctrines, either of the
singletax or of the tariff, for they all were convinced Singletaxers and
Free-traders. It was the question of tactics, the new course of Henry
George, his going over to the Democratic party, on which they split.
While Henry George was losing his popularity among the ranks of the
United Labor party by his new course, McGlynn, the most popular man and
hero on the Standard, was gaining influential power by remaining
true to the original movement and its tactics. This and the strong
personality of McGlynn explain why he so successfully opposed the new
course of Henry George and outwitted him.
At a meeting of the Anti-Poverty Society on February 16, 1888, McGlynn
stated:
"We are not going to allow ourselves to be made the
wretched little bit of a tail to the Democratic kite. …If he
(Henry George) comes back into the party again, even if he does not
support Cleveland or the Democratic party, he will have to take a much
humbler position in the ranks than he has heretofore held."[14]
To this Henry George replied:
"I am not ready to become the stalking horse and decoy
duck of any political combination. …Yet it is because I have
refused to surrender not merely my opinions but my firm convictions
(the necessity to support the Democratic Party) that he (McGlynn) has
assumed to excommunicate me from the United Labor Party, and to
declare that, if ever permitted to come back, it must be to take a
much humbler position. If the doctor will think, he will find it
difficult to imagine a much humbler position than that which, out of
deference to him, I have for some time occupied -- that of an
ostensible leader in a party in whose managing counsels I have been
utterly ignored."[15]
THE NATIONAL CAMPAIGN OF THE UNITED LABOR PARTY
The national conference of the United Labor party met in the Grand
Opera House at Cincinnati, on May 15, 1888. Present were eighty-six
delegates from the various states, as follows: New York, 41; Ohio, 25;
Kentucky, 5; Michigan, 5; Kansas, 3; Maryland, 2; Illinois, 1; Iowa, 1;
Wisconsin, 1; Rhode Island, 1; New Jersey, 1.
The conference resolved itself into a convention. An attempt was made
to fuse with the Union Labor party, formed in a previous year at a
conference of labor and reformers' organizations at Cincinnati, but this
attempt failed.
There was adopted a platform similar to that adopted at the Syracuse
convention. It reaffirmed the Singletax as its main issue, advocated the
issue by the government of legal tender notes, without intervention of
banks, and the administration by government of railroads and telegraphs,
and favored legislation reducing the hours of labor, prohibiting child
labor and convict competition, providing for sanitary inspection of
tenements, factories and mines, and repealing the conspiracy laws. It
declared in favor of the Australian system of balloting, demanded the
simplification of legal procedure, and denounced the Democratic and
Republican parties.[16] It entirely ignored the tariff issue. Robert H.
Cowdry of Illinois and W. H. T. Wakefield of Kansas were chosen as
candidates for president and vice president, respectively.
The state convention of the United Labor party at New York was held in
Cooper Union on September 19 and 20.
As there were current some rumors that several leaders of the United
Labor party were in a deal with the Republican party, McGlynn, at a
meeting of the Executive Committee of the United Labor party on
September 25, introduced a resolution, which was adopted, declaring that
all officers of the party must support the whole United Labor party
electoral ticket.[17]
The County Convention of the United Labor party was held at Clarendon
Hall on October 10. James J. Coogan, a furniture dealer, real estate
man, and large employer of labor, was unanimously nominated for mayor of
New York.
HENRY GEORGE IN THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
In the last copy of 1887 the
Standard tried to show in an editorial that the Democratic party
in the coming presidential campaign might get labor votes because the
tariff reform was in the interests of labor.[18] It criticized the
supposed desire of the leaders of the United Labor party to gather again
all the labor elements in the party. It said:
"Now, what his (McGlynn's) committee are waiting and
hoping for is the formation of one of these 'labor parties,' composed
of politically incongruous elements which have time and again proved
utter failures."[19] It then criticized the Union Labor party
formed at a conference in Cincinnati on a platform "which was the
result of the compromises of such a mixture of heterogeneous 'ists'
and 'isms . . .' There are various indications that the committee of
which Dr. McGlynn is head are planning to make a mergement of what
they would call the United Labor party" with the Union Labor
party, the Socialists and all the other so-called 'labor elements,'
upon some sort of a hodge-podge platform."[21]
Henry George denied, merely on constitutional grounds, that the
singletax could be made an issue in the national campaign. To this
McGlynn replied that the Federal jurisdiction fully extends over the
District of -Columbia and all the territories where the singletax can be
realized by the Federal authority. Nevertheless, the tariff reform, put
forth in the message of President Cleveland, was to Henry George the
most important national issue in the coming presidential campaign. "I
regard the nomination of Mr. Cleveland as a more important political
event than anything that has occurred since the cease of the war,"
he wrote in the Standard. The Sun charged that the
advocates of Mayor Hewitt's proposal that the city should build and run
rapid transit railroads had practically become Socialists. Henry George
rejected this charge and blamed the Republicans for being Socialists. "The
protective tariff is Socialism pure and simple."[22]
The Mill tariff bill was reported to the house on April 2. The main
changes were a somewhat higher duty on the poorer grades of unrefined
sugar and a somewhat lower duty on the whiter grades. Henry George,
commenting on this bill, expressed his satisfaction with it. "For
the present time and situation it is probably better than a more radical
bill would be."[23]
He strongly opposed a third candidate in the coming presidential
campaign. "In such a campaign as this, any attempt to run a third
candidate on a singletax platform would not only be idle but harmful."[24]
Even a singletax platform demanding absolute free trade was to him "chimerical,"[25]
because it would take away so many votes from the Democratic party in
its practical struggle against protection. "Thanks to Grover
Cleveland 's patriotism and courage, a grand opportunity is offered us
to preach them (the singletax doctrines) through the ranks of a powerful
party".[26]
He sharply criticized McGlynn for not understanding the singletax
principle. McGlynn in a speech called upon the city tenants not to pay
more than a fair building rent. This Henry George termed as a "crazy
demagogic scheme"" of McGlynn who had "utterly lost his
grasp upon principle."[28] He then asked: "What right have
tenants more than landlords to the free use of land made valuable by the
whole community?"[29]
The George men or the Singletaxers -- Free-Traders, as they now called
themselves -- gathered in Cooper Union on August 7 for a conference. To
avoid criticisms and other difficulties the call was issued only ''for
those who have made up their minds to support Cleveland and Thurman, the
matter for consultation will be only as to how this support can be most
effectively rendered. …This will be not a meeting for speaking, but
a meeting for consultation,"[30] -- so wrote Henry George, urging
all singletax men in sympathy with the purpose of the conference to be
present. The necessity of such conference Henry George explained by "the
fact that men whose only aim in politics is the emancipation of labor
and the abolition of poverty, are supporting Cleveland with all their
might for the very reason that the advocates of the protectionist
superstition are telling workingmen they should vote against him."[31]
Thus was a step taken to bring the Singletaxers -- Free-Traders --
together to find ways and means to fight those who were telling
workingmen not to vote for the Democratic party.
Louis F. Post was elected chairman. W. T. Croasdale then proposed a
resolution requiring the gathering of signatures for a voting pledge for
Cleveland, as had been done for Henry George at the beginning of the
campaign of 1886. The pledge was entitled "The Singletax Cleveland
Voters' Enrollment Blank."
This plan was adopted. A campaign committee of nine was then elected to
gather signatures for the voting pledge, and also to provide for the
holding of public meetings and the distribution of literature.
The leaders of the Democratic party in New York, although wanting the
votes which Henry George could marshal for their party by his. influence
in the campaign agitation, opposed his radicalism on the tariff
question. A fear that his preaching of free trade might frighten voters
away from the Democratic party made them pray, "Deliver us from our
friends!"[32] and caused them to give out as a marching refrain in
the parade of the Democratic party the following lines:
"Don't, don't, don't be afraid.
Tariff reform is not free trade!"[33]
There was much incrimination and recrimination by the leaders of the
United Labor party on one hand and the Henry George people on the other.
The former blamed the latter as acting by "inspiration from
Washington" and as being "renegades," "traitors,"
and "in a deal with the Democratic party;" while the latter
blamed the United Labor party leaders as being "protectionists sold
out to the Republican party,'' and so forth.
As a matter of fact these mutual incriminations were very feebly
founded, if founded at all. The honesty of purpose of Henry George and
McGlynn could not be questioned. If McMackin and Barnes were somewhat
uncertain, McGlynn, under whose control these two men were, sincerely
believed in the correctness of his action for making an independent
campaign of the United Labor party. Moreover, as a Singletaxer he was a
convinced free trader. Ignoring the tariff issue in the campaign, he
opposed both old parties, and if he hated the Democratic party more than
the Republican, then there were certain causes which have been
described. The same ethical credit was to be given Henry George. The
radical change of his front was due to his entire disappointment in the
power of organized labor, and to his desire to preach his doctrines
through the ranks of the Democratic party. No direct personal interests
nor pecuniary gains were considered by him.
Hardly anyone can hold either Henry George as a "traitor" or
McGlynn as "sold out to the Republican party" on account of
the fact that some minor leaders in their following desired office or
publicity making for that purpose a "deal" with the old
parties, Democratic or Republican.
THE RESULTS OF THE CAMPAIGN
In the presidential election on November 7, 1888, the United Labor
party candidate, R. H. Gowdry, received only 2808 votes, of which 2668
were polled in the state of New York and the remainder, 140, in the
state of Illinois. The United Labor party candidate for mayor of the
city of New York, J. J. Coogan, received somewhat fewer than 10,000
votes.[34]
This was indeed a very poor showing for the United Labor party, and
meant its downfall and disappearance from the political arena.
No better success had Henry George and his friends in stumping for the
Democratic party, which was badly beaten by the Republicans. The
Singletax Cleveland Voters' Enrollment Blank had brought in only about
11,000 signatures[35] over all the United States. The number of
subscribers to the
Standard, instead of an expected increase, had decreased. The
financial help to the paper was far below that which was hoped for by
Henry George. The free-trade doctrine, which was the main thing to him
in the campaign, did not become a popular issue at all. The American
masses favored protection, and it was not so easy to change their mind
as Henry George thought. So his new course proved to be a failure as far
as its direct main aims were concerned.
Commenting on the fact that the Democratic vote among farmers was weak,
Henry George believed:
"If the Standard could have afforded to send
the farmers of New York, early in the campaign, copies … for
little time, it alone could have carried New York for Cleveland and
Thurman."[36]
This shows that Henry George still maintained the idea that farmers
were a very suitable element for his doctrines, notwithstanding the fact
that all the previous campaigns had resulted in an opposite direction.
The utter failure of both factions in the national campaign ended the
singletax agitation in the American labor movement demonstrating that
the 72,000 votes given for Henry George in the state campaign the
previous year were not pure Singletax votes which could have been
counted on '' in any circumstances and against all odds." These
votes were given rather for Henry George himself than for his singletax
theory. The split among the Singletaxers themselves proved to be even
more disastrous for the United Labor party than the ousting of the
Socialists a year before. What confidence for the success of the United
Labor party was left among its ranks was entirely destroyed by the split
evoked by the sudden and radical change of political front on the part
of Henry George. Moreover, this change injured his favorable popularity
among the masses and greatly lessened his following.
The attempt to bring the singletax into practical polities and to make
it the issue of organized labor did not succeed, and even the agitation
through the ranks of the Democratic party failed to reach its direct
aims, as the foregoing narrative shows. One may ask what was meant by
all this trouble, and expenditure of energy and time, in the fervent
prosecution of the singletax issue by Henry George and his friends. Had
it no results whatever?
It had a far-reaching educational value: It aroused the minds of the
masses, it stirred up the reformers, it excited the politicians, and it
awakened an earnest discussion among academic circles, calling attention
to the land problem and to the labor problem.
The singletax agitation was one of the events in the birth of the
modern American democracy. The Socialists issued from the struggle with
the conviction that it was much better for them to make political
campaigns independently than to fuse with other, non-Socialist parties,
and to the present day they have never again attempted fusion tactics.
The labor unions found through the whirlwind of the single-tax
agitation, that it was better for them to confine their activities to
the economic field than to "meddle" with the attempts of
independent politics on some purely theoretical issue.
The Singletaxers themselves learned by their experience in the
political campaigns that it was hardly possible for them to create a
specific political party to prosecute their theory or to utilize some
other party for the same purpose. In that respect they came to the
conclusion that distinctive formal organization for their ends was
perhaps "a little worse than useless, except as on occasion it
might spring spontaneously out of large popular demands."[37]
They worked out their own specific method of propaganda, a system of
loose conferences and agitation through literature and public speaking
among all classes of the people in the nation, utilizing every
opportunity. To this method they have adhered to the present time. But
their gain from the movement was even more than that. They greatly
popularized their theory, pushing it to the foreground as the leading
issue of the mass movement. Every theory gets its weight and importance
when it is applied to practice, and especially when it is backed by mass
organizations. Although the Singletax theory as such was never accepted
by organized labor -- at least by its vast majority -- it seemed to
outsiders to be the real recognized issue of the labor movement,
especially in the mayoralty campaign of 1886 and in the state campaign
of 1887. This apparent support of the singletax by organized labor made
it tremendously important, and, in the eyes of its opponents, even "dangerous."
This explains the alarm of the old parties, their press, and the
authorities of the Catholic Church in New York during and after the
campaign of 1886, and the excommunication of Father Mc-Glynn, in
particular.
But when the singletax ceased to be even an apparent issue of the mass
movement, it became again quite a harmless theory. The authorities of
the Catholic Church in New York found now that in the singletax theory
there was nothing inconsistent with religion, that is, contrary to their
previous statements, made after the campaign of 1886. McGlynn was
reinstated in 1892, although he remained a convinced Singletaxer just as
before, only with this difference, that he was no more a leader of
organized labor in its political efforts.
Attention should be called to a quite important reform successfully
prosecuted by the Singletaxers with the decisive aid of organized labor.
This was the Australian ballot system. The serious agitation in favor of
this reform was started shortly after the campaign of 1886. It was taken
up by organized labor over all the Union and within a few years adopted
in every state. This reform, as a direct gain for the democratization of
the election laws in America, remains as a living monument to the
single-tax agitation in the labor movement in the second half of the
eighties.
Besides these practical, direct and indirect results, representing an
important service of the singletax agitation and its leader, Henry
George, to the rising democracy, this narrative has tried to show, on a
small scale but somewhat in detail, the picturesqueness of the American
mass movements, the constantly and rapidly changing environmental
conditions, the shifting of theories, doctrines, and reform schemes, and
the radical changes in the methods for their prosecution; in short, the
colors and shades which distinctly characterize the young and rapidly
developing American nation, ambitious as it is for achievements.
NOTES AND REFERENCES
1. Standard, Nov. 12, 1887, p.
1.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Standard, Nov. 26, 1887, pp. 1, 4.
5. Standard, Dec. 10, 1887, p. 4.
6. Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1.
7. Standard, Jan. 7, 1888, p. 1.
8. Standard, Feb. 4, 1888, p. 1.
9. Ibid.
10. Ibid.
11. Ibid.
12. The George men were formally ousted only from the Executive
Committee of the Anti-Poverty Society, but it practically meant the
ousting from the United Labor Party.
13. Standard, June 2, 1888, p. 1.
14. Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 3.
15. Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1.
16. Standard, May 26, 1888, p. 4.
17. Standard, Sept. 29, 1888, p. 1.
18. Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1.
19. Standard, Feb. 18, 1888. p. 1.
20. After the state campaign In 1887, Henry George refused to use
capital letters in the name of the United Labor party.
21. Standard, Feb. 18, 1888, p. 1.
22. Standard, March 10, 1888, p. 3.
23. Standard, Apr. 7, 1888, p. 1.
24. Ibid.
25. Ibid.
26. 'Standard, Apr. 14, 1888, p. 1.
27. Standard, July 7, 1888, p. 1.
28. Ibid.
29. Ibid.
30. Standard, Aug. 4, 1888, p. 1.
31. Loc cit..
32. The Life of Henry George, New York, 1904, p. 512.
33. Ibid.
34. The Press, Nov. 8, 1888, p. 1.
35. The Public, Sept. 1, 1911, p. 907.
36. Ibid.
37. The Public, Sept. 1, 1911, p. 889.
|
