Indeed, George's theory is but a development of one aspect of the Ricardian theory of rent and value and of Mill's theory of unearned increment, and, of course, pushed to extremes, the theory may become absurd, but, understood in the right way, with all its limitations, it may yield, as events have shown, valuable lessons.*

iii

set

George's theory, which has been stated above in its most acceptable form, was adopted by the English and the Scottish Leagues and the League's Members in Parliament themselves to put it into practice. More than one Bill for the taxation of land values were promoted in the House by private Members, the most important of them being that of Mr. C. P. Trevelyn and that of Dr. Macnamara. The drastic amendment, amounting to rejection, by the Lords, of the Government's own modest Bill of 1906 applicable to Scotland brought matters to a head, and the Taxation of Land Values Group in the Commons set itself to promote a grand memorial to Government.

The memorial was

* For a trenchant criticism of George's theory, see his own countryman Major Walker's Political Economy,

pp. 417-433.

ready in 1909. It was presented to Government that very year, signed by no less than 250 Members of Parliament, and urging the inclusion of a tax on land values in the next Budget.

The result was the now famous budget of Mr. Lloyd George, then the Chancellor of the Exchequer, holding views on the matter identical with those of Mr. Wedgwood at that time. That Budget, it is now well-known, embodied certain land value duties. It also provided for a complete valuation of all land in the United Kingdom. The thin end of the wedge was thus inserted to the satisfaction of the Taxation of Land Values Group. The taxation proposals were, however, of a very timid nature in their opinion, and this Group in Parliament, composed of Liberal and Labour Members who favoured such taxation, issued a statement of policy which they wished to be followed. The Land and Taxation Reform Memorial, as this statement is now known, was characterised by three important features. It demanded, for one thing, that the land valuation should be made public. For another,

it wanted that the local authorities should be empowered to levy rates on the valuation. Thirdly, the Group asked for a provision in the Budget for a tax to be levied on all landvalues, to be applied: (a) in providing a national fund to be allocated toward the cost of such services as education, poor relief, main roads, asylums, and police; and (b) in substitution of the existing duties on tea, sugar, cocoa, and other articles of food. Subsequent events have shown the large amount of success that attended the campaign of the League: so much so indeed that taxation of land values on well-defined lines, and with reference to all the circumstances of the case, is now an accepted fiscal policy with almost all the advanced nations. Many members of the League were, however, not content with what they considered this but partial success. They wanted the country to adopt the system of single tax. But this system has, in the circumstances of modern life, too many limitations that the support for it at present at any rate among statesmen, financiers and economists is very limited indeed.* Mr. Asquith declared in 1912

* Bastable, Public Finance, pp. 431-434

that it had not even one supporter in the Cabinet and it is doubtful if the Cabinet has since contained men who were altogether for it.

The above incident is noteworthy from our point of view as showing Wedgwood's predilections, his progressive outlook, his close relations with Labour Members and his fighting temperament. How this progressive outlook and this cordial and intimate relations with Labour bore fruit later on will transpire in a subsequent chapter.

CHAPTER III.

THE WAR AND WAR SERVICES.

On that fateful day, August 4, 1914, the declaration was made by His Majesty's Government that England was in a state of war with Germany. The news flashed throughout the country amid the wildest scenes of an unparallelled outburst of enthusiasm. Captain Wedgwood of course shared in this general enthusiasm. He was a gallant soldier and every gallant soldier likes to participate in a just war. Let there be no mistake on this point. There are doubtless many "gallant" soldiers who delight in war, not because it is just, but because it is war. The German militarists are of this type: war to these is an end in itself, and is to be courted rather than shunned. Wedgwood had of course distinguished himself in the field, but he did not like soldiering for the mere pleasure of the excitement that the occupation afforded. He had higher aims, far more noble ends: he was not a militarist; he was a cultured humanitarian.