DOCUMENT 18–5: Henry George Explains Why Poverty Is a Crime

Reading the American Past: Printed Page 55

DOCUMENT 18–5

Henry George Explains Why Poverty Is a Crime

A California journalist and reformer, Henry George was a fierce critic of the economic inequality of the Gilded Age. His book Progress and Poverty, published in 1879, became a nationwide best seller. In a speech delivered in Burlington, Iowa, excerpted below, George summarized the basic theme of his book — that poverty was neither inevitable nor natural, but instead resulted from the concentration of wealth in land. George's speech addresses a widespread perception that the economic inequalities so evident during the Gilded Age were somehow wrong and sets out to explain why.

An Analysis of the Crime of Poverty, 1885

I should like to show you ... that poverty is a crime. I do not mean that it is a crime to be poor. Murder is a crime; but it is not a crime to be murdered; and a man who is in poverty, I look upon, not as a criminal in himself, so much as the victim of a crime for which others, as well perhaps as himself, are responsible. ... The curse born of poverty is not confined to the poor alone; it runs through all classes, even to the very rich. They, too, suffer; they must suffer; for there cannot be suffering in a community from which any class can totally escape. The vice, the crime, the ignorance, the meanness born of poverty, poison, so to speak, the very air which rich and poor alike must breathe. ...

But while a man who chooses to be poor cannot be charged with crime, it is certainly a crime to force poverty on others. And it seems to me clear that the great majority of those who suffer from poverty are poor not from their own particular faults, but because of conditions imposed by society at large. Therefore I hold that poverty is a crime — not an individual crime, but a social crime, a crime for which we all, poor as well as rich, are responsible. ...

If poverty is appointed by the [divine] power which is above us all, then it is no crime; but if poverty is unnecessary, then it is a crime for which society is responsible and for which society must suffer. I hold ... that poverty is utterly unnecessary. It is not by the decree of the Almighty, but it is because of our own injustice, our own selfishness, our own ignorance, that this scourge, worse than any pestilence, ravages our civilisation, bringing want and suffering and degradation, destroying souls as well as bodies. ... And yet the peculiar characteristic of this modern poverty of ours is that it is deepest where wealth most abounds.

Why, to-day, while over the civilised world there is so much distress, so much want, what is the cry that goes up? What is the current explanation of the hard times? Over-production! There are so many clothes that men must go ragged, so much coal that in the bitter winters people have to shiver, such over-filled granaries that people actually die by starvation! Want due to over-production! Was a greater absurdity ever uttered? How can there be over-production till all have enough? It is not over-production; it is unjust distribution. ...

The dangerous man is not the man who tries to excite discontent; the dangerous man is the man who says that all is as it ought to be. Such a state of things cannot continue; such tendencies as we see at work here cannot go on without bringing at last an overwhelming crash.

I say that all this poverty and the ignorance that flows from it is unnecessary; I say that there is no natural reason why we should not all be rich, in the sense, not of having more than each other, but in the sense of all having enough to completely satisfy all physical wants; of all having enough to get such an easy living that we could develop the better part of humanity. There is no reason why wealth should not be so abundant, that no one should think of such a thing as little children at work, or a woman compelled to a toil that nature never intended her to perform; wealth so abundant that there would be no cause for that harassing fear that sometimes paralyses even those who are not considered the poor, the fear that every man of us has probably felt, that if sickness should smite him, or if he should be taken away, those whom he loves better than his life would become charges upon charity. ... I believe that in a really Christian community, in a society that honoured not with the lips but with the act, the doctrines of Jesus, no one would have occasion to worry about physical needs any more than do the lilies of the field. There is enough and to spare. ...

There is a cause for this poverty; and, if you trace it down, you will find its root in a primary injustice. Look over the world to-day — poverty everywhere. The cause must be a common one. You cannot attribute it to the tariff, or to the form of government, or to this thing or to that in which nations differ; because, as deep poverty is common to them all, the cause that produces it must be a common cause. What is that common cause? There is one sufficient cause that is common to all nations; and that is the appropriation as the property of some of that natural element on which and from which all must live. ...

Now, think of it — is not land monopolisation a sufficient reason for poverty? What is man? In the first place, he is an animal, a land animal who cannot live without land. All that man produces comes from land; all productive labour, in the final analysis, consists in working up land; or materials drawn from land, into such forms as fit them for the satisfaction of human wants and desires. Why, man's very body is drawn from the land. Children of the soil, we come from the land, and to the land we must return. ... Therefore he who holds the land on which and from which another man must live, is that man's master; and the man is his slave. The man who holds the land on which I must live can command me to life or to death just as absolutely as though I were his chattel. Talk about abolishing slavery — we have not abolished slavery; we have only abolished one rude form of it, chattel slavery. There is a deeper and a more insidious form, a more cursed form yet before us to abolish, in this industrial slavery that makes a man a virtual slave, while taunting him and mocking him with the name of freedom. Poverty! want! they will sting as much as the lash. Slavery! God knows there are horrors enough in slavery; but there are deeper horrors in our civilised society today. ...

This land question is the bottom question. Man is a land animal. Suppose you want to build a house; can you build it without a place to put it? What is it built of? Stone, or mortar, or wood, or iron — they all come from the earth. Think of any article of wealth you choose, any of those things which men struggle for, where do they come from? From the land. It is the bottom question. The land question is simply the labour question; and when some men own that element from which all wealth must be drawn, and upon which all must live, then they have the power of living without work, and, therefore, those who do work get less of the products of work.

Did you ever think of the utter absurdity and strangeness of the fact that, all over the civilised world, the working classes are the poor classes? ...

Nature gives to labour, and to labour alone; there must be human work before any article of wealth can be produced; and in the natural state of things the man who toiled honestly and well would be the rich man, and he who did not work would be poor. We have so reversed the order of nature that we are accustomed to think of the workingman as a poor man.

And if you trace it out I believe you will see that the primary cause of this is that we compel those who work to pay others for permission to do so. You may buy a coat, a horse, a house; there you are paying the seller for labour exerted, for something that he has produced, or that he has got from the man who did produce it; but when you pay a man for land, what are you paying him for? You are paying for something that no man has produced; you pay him for something that was here before man was, or for a value that was created, not by him individually, but by the community of which you are a part. What is the reason that the land here, where we stand tonight, is worth more than it was twenty-five years ago? What is the reason that land in the centre of New York, that once could be bought by the mile for a jug of whiskey, is now worth so much that, though you were to cover it with gold, you would not have its value? Is it not because of the increase of population? Take away that population, and where would the value of the land be? Look at it in any way you please. ...

[O]ur treatment of land lies at the bottom of all social questions. ... [D]o what you please, reform as you may, you never can get rid of wide-spread poverty so long as the element on which and from which all men must live is made the private property of some men. It is utterly impossible. Reform government — get taxes down to the minimum — build railroads; institute co-operative stores; divide profits, if you choose, between employers and employed — and what will be the result? The result will be that the land will increase in value — that will be the result — that and nothing else. Experience shows this. Do not all improvements simply increase the value of land — the price that some must pay others for the privilege of living? ...

I cannot go over all the points I would like to try, but I wish to call your attention to the utter absurdity of private property in land! Why, consider it, the idea of a man's selling the earth — the earth, our common mother. A man selling that which no man produced — a man passing title from one generation to another. Why, it is the most absurd thing in the world. Why, did you ever think of it? What right has a dead man to land? For whom was this earth created? It was created for the living, certainly, not for the dead. Well, now we treat it as though it was created for the dead. Where do our land titles come from? They come from men who for the most part are past and gone. Here in this new country you get a little nearer the original source; but go to the Eastern States and go back over the Atlantic. There you may clearly see the power that comes from land ownership. As I say, the man that owns the land is the master of those who must live on it. ... That which a man produces, that is his against all the world, to give or to keep, to lend, to sell or to bequeath; but how can he get such a right to land when it was here before he came? Individual claims to land rest only on appropriation. ...

[T]he way of getting rid of land monopoly ... is not ... to divide up the land. All that is necessary is to divide up the income that comes from the land. In that way we can secure absolute equality; nor could the adoption of this principle involve any rude shock or violent change. It can be brought about gradually and easily by abolishing taxes that now rest upon capital, labour and improvements, and raising all our public revenues by the taxation of land values; and the longer you think of it the clearer you will see that in every possible way will it be a benefit.

From Henry George, The Crime of Poverty: An Address Delivered in the Opera House, Burlington, Iowa, April 1, 1885, under the auspices of Burlington Assembly, No. 3135. Knights of Labor (Cincinnati: The Joseph Fels Fund of America, 1885).

Questions for Reading and Discussion

Question

TQFS1eR29EYdAh+VSdmZ4babrMZi6HA7qGvxSsFLuHfhjamHHKby06JbDCiShsMP/OgGyS+mcP4dfujVxzr8Io3IuObwF1PiCO8BxEoRJp1alyLFYg1MyMNPoxjlGzc1xnItKpY/Q5q5DTdEAH6SspLolBz4M9U06aOWfpCKDgsfedc8ocGl1KQUDrnAmqPJLqkhOfZDshO53zaMbq4kxVwZBoWnluZMBfGVem21UMbEeTrL8lRjImryRDR8rqWi483utA==

Question

GzAl++QWI4tod8gnaQlK42EUMewDHp+v+lXolT9Il82Te28qh52/QW4k4ZsspWCD621TktzDPSDORO7cP+mw9JtQZW5I/Eq0BSzt0sBxqaE5+Czj47Sm4D5J7UticRGQ9NKL0bYbvbMbHoqSLBKeYfreO+UfRqroiXOOQpS8dKI3O4QPUgAxrg0DKpPnuS/TAvOzlFRHODykF8pdSlPh6ZYwSh6T6FdeK50Ft/tTeMackIqXSSaCP+8BP64XrUINWZ9/HtN36Hum857lyynJvbC4LKznAr2qEGmtcFYp/KF5PbAIyG2g9RyW/60GMlDv

Question

6BOLYGaE4li6pz5TqfhbBsdXhlZuj1fNnw+E9Rt3s8fJf0oU69apaiW39XYjLMR879s/aqZayvDOVTHeqbvQj0iHiUNth3Gx+xKWXEZNNDU6J231YUWOpJuZBSscHu3p+Rx/RiAMmPEkpcenN0u66EC+gQ0l7qlySUGi3R9u0Qa5+hvC9yAU1hkOo22JdJJ64AD9R5J/JZlFvkCtD7yCVQ==

Question

7DvquSgNdYn4QXKSxSX0bR21s6QgHber0qy7nwT1x7CTMgQCCAGmE7dwT9SJs0tHv+HmWL/r1yEUSROqH9NnvqHd89ahqf37pbeBjIUQ2FqjiTVwkDDdyigQE42H8ZKDel+6v34vAi5jQaJBOhJf56wgeWKtLNSqBjcwxmf1ikkpzMzGue2DVW1f2hbqZ2IIbZDGkRwf4C3zqsj57AN8DLUlpSxbeOqbKhO+V7QsXFtJCkCC0shPzHzX1x+q/ciQYjRmn8wUgNBRse91Jw8XD8fDH/4yuY4yBxcW3FngZU7WB9wJ

Question

eUH98obX0P/xwQgew3m14K1xRQQDT+qIjO0Wcr0jonNC+0f1zvnMgvELoZwj6MIh2aD1g6v36JcIlCi/jqVhU5kFZlhnou51BgdptReqMSBj76817VvR26FZ4d/hwSsCBj8J9zSsIOIbdYY6