it is not probable that it is very greatly to the advantage of a workingman to live in a rented house. During the past three or four years it is likely that the hirer has had an advantage over the owner, but their circumstances will be reversed by a rise of prices.

It does not appear to have ever been clearly settled how taxes are divided between capital and labor. The view that the tax upon mortgages is paid by the borrower seems to correspond with the assumption that capital always escapes taxation by transferring it to the consumer. But in the case

of general taxation capitalists would pay as consumers the taxes that they appeared to evade. The question then arises whether capitalists can maintain their profits undiminished by lowering the rate of wages, thus landing all taxes finally on the shoulders of the working classes. If we consider profits as "the leavings of wages," and wages as fixed approximately at a given figure by the indisposition or inability of workingmen to subsist upon less, we must conclude that the expense of shelter has some effect upon wages and therefore upon profits. If the builder must make a certain profit. he must also give certain wages. The workman, according to the theory, insists upon shelter of a given kind and if the cost of this shelter is increased he must have increased wages. Adopting this theory we should conclude that the tax upon mortgages, although apparently resting upon the borrower, may be to some extent transferred by him to the whole society in the shape of enhanced wages. This conclusion will be the more plausible if we consider the expense of hiring a house to be approximately equal to that of buying a house on credit. The inference to be drawn would therefore be that taxes that fall upon the laboring class as a whole are really, to some extent at least, taxes upon profits. If it could be shown that the value of real estate has declined more of late years than the value of wages it might be considered as evidence in favor of this view. Of course we must suppose the increase of population to be suspended or restricted while such changes are going on as have taken place within the last five years. Another aspect of the case to which reference was made at the outset is that afforded by periods of violent change in values. Our sympathy is appealed to in behalf of those who

have invested in real estate with little capital and have therefore suffered the loss of their investment. This is the great "debtor class" of whose existence we have heard so much in the speeches of partizans. This class certainly deserves pity on account of the hardships they have undergone from the action of the government in inflating the currency, and the necessary subsequent contraction. But the tax upon mortgages is only incidentally connected with this suffering. If there were no tax, still many would have found that their investment had disappeared. No laws can save men from the results of imprudent investments. Real estate is notoriously fluctuating in value, and for a workingman to buy a house on which he can pay but one-half the price, is an act which it can hardly be regarded as wise policy for the State to encour age. When prices are down, such an act may be the height of wisdom; when they are up, and especially when the currency is inflated such an act is of a highly speculative nature, and is for the ordinary working man the grossest folly.

We may perhaps do well to sum up this somewhat perplexing argument. We find grounds for maintaining the following positions.

1. In times of depressed business the holder of real estate is under a disadvantage in his efforts to sell. He may sell at less than cost, and he may consent to pay the mortgage tax himself rather than not sell at all. In this case the borrower

does not pay the tax. Mr. Adams admits this possibility when he speaks of land's losing its value in bad times.

2. In times of active business the workingman is not obliged to buy on mortgage unless he deems it for his interest to do so, and if large numbers of them prefer to invest in this way rather than in savings banks, it is to be presumed that they regard their investment as the best they can make.

3. Mr. Adams declares that the mortgage tax raises rent. Hence it is a tax upon all workingmen, whether they buy houses on mortgage or put their savings in the bank.

4. A tax that affects all workingmen may be returned in part to them in the shape of enhanced wages. If this takes place the mortgage tax is a tax upon profits as well as wages. From other considerations we derive these inferences.

1. Since a great deal of wealth cannot be productively employed by its owners, it must be either lent or spent.

2. If a tax upon loans be imposed, it must be paid by either the borrower or the lender.

3. If the borrower refuses to pay the tax the lender must pay it. If he does not he must either consume his wealth or lend it in some way that is not taxed.

4. If all lenders choose to lend upon notes to escape taxation, their competition may reduce the market rate so that their return will be no greater than if they lent upon mortgage and paid the tax themselves.

5. If four per cent. is the market rate for money and mortgagers pay seven per cent., it is fallacious to infer that "the only effect of taxing loans is to raise the rate of interest." The effect of taxing loans may be, as shown in (4), to lower the rate of interest. If there were no mortgage tax the mortgager would not necessarily borrow at four per cent. The greater profit to be derived from loans would so encourage borrowers that mortgagers and all would have to pay five or six per cent. (This is a modification of the received theory of political economy that is of great importance, and has not, so far as I know, been previously noted.)

6. The question whether the borrower or the lender shall pay the tax upon loans is settled by the prevailing rate of productiveness of labor. If profits are very high, borrowers will consent to pay high for their loans. If profits are low they will not consent to pay more than a given rate, and if that rate is above the minimum return that will content the lender, may consent to pay the tax rather than let his wealth lie idle. 7. If a certain amount must be raised by taxation, and all taxes are paid out of the returns of productive labor, whatever sum is raised now by taxing loans must be raised in some other way, if the loan tax is abolished, out of the returns of productive labor, i. e. out of wages or profits.

he

8. Before new taxes are imposed the decision must be made whether they shall come out of wages or profits. If out of wages, it is necessary to show that the workingman will be better off then than he is now. If out of profits, it is necessary (for reasoners occupying Mr. Adams' ground) to show how the capitalist will be prevented from transferring the tax

to the shoulders of the workingmen. It will be worth while also to enquire whether all taxes are not paid in the long run by real estate. In that case how would the workingmen be bettered by a change?

9. Since a tax upon loans secured by pledges enables those who borrow on the security of their good faith to do so at an advantage, and, furthermore is an inducement to every one to work with his own wealth rather than live in idleness, would the results of the abolition of the tax be altogether good?

10. Since the great extension of credit results in violent fluctuations between prosperity and adversity, is it desirable to encourage borrowing any more than it is at present encouraged? On these last three heads I do not express any opinion.

The truth of the matter is that we are brought face to face with a tremendous question of public policy. It is a question that is alarmingly pressing in India. It looms up in Rumania. It shook the city of Rome so long ago that only vague accounts of the disturbance have come down to us. It was treated in a drastic fashion by Solon of Athens. The question concerns the position of the State in relation to the incurring of debt by the laboring classes. To say unhesitatingly that as soon as the workingman has saved five or six hundred dollars, every encouragement should be given him to buy a home for himself on mortgage, and "pay off the debt by instalments," is to decide a great question too easily. The aim about which all are agreed is to create good citizens. Certainly the possession of land is the best means to this end. But the failure to retain land on which an instalment has been paid, to be sold out, to lose money and labor and home-good citizens do not arise from such experiences, or from the sight of such experiences. But so long as business is done on credit, so long will there be times of activity and dullness, high prices and low prices. And so long as human nature remains as it is, it will believe in the time of high prices, that the high prices are going to last, and will enter into obligations accordingly, which in the time of low prices it will be unable to meet. This perennial infatuation, this inability to represent to the mind the pains and hardships of future payment, is certainly a fact to be considered before the state undertakes to encourage borrowing by

the poor.

ARTICLE XI.-NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS.

THEOLOGICAL AND RELIGIOUS.

CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES.*-In the First Part of this volume the Principles of Induction are discussed, with copious illustrations from various sciences. The subject of the Second Part is Theism and Christianity. In this part the author considers the personality, omnipotence, wisdom, and benevolence of God; the congruity of miracles in the Christian system; the character and power of Christianity; and the imperative character of probable evidence on such a subject. In the Third Part he gives a resumé of the specific evidences of Christianity. Mr. Wright is favorably known as an author by timely and instructive articles on the relations of science and religion, and has shown himself well qualified to handle the subject of this volume. The presentation of the argument is forcible and convincing, and the book is instructive and suggestive. The author expresses the hope "that none of it is beyond the reach of plain men and women of thoughtful turn who make up their lack of school privileges by increased assiduity in their private reading and study." We think it well adapted to this class; and to meet the coarse assaults on Christianity, through the press, which are industriously circulated more widely than ministers and Christian people are generally aware. It will be valuable to ministers as giving in compact form the result of much reading and thought by a vigorous mind on the recent aspects of scepticism.

In the opening chapter the author tells us that the phenomena of finite mind are products of the forces of nature, and thus excludes finite mind from the supernatural. This logically leads to agnosticism. The only knowledge which we have of personal being or spirit is that which arises in our knowledge of reason and free-will in ourselves. If the reason and free-will of finite minds is included in nature and excluded from that which is above nature, then, though we may believe that something unknowable exists transcending nature, we cannot say it is God, and cannot

The Logic of Christian Evidences. By G. FREDERICK WRIGHT. Andover: Warren F. Draper. 1880. pp. xiii. and 312. New Haven: E. P. Judd.