The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas, et Praevalebit. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1886. THE REVENUE RETURNS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1338, 10 September 1886, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas, et Praevalebit. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1886. THE REVENUE RETURNS.

The financial outlook is not by any means a rosy one for the colony generally, any more than for our producers and business men, and, unless things take a speedy turn for the better, when Parliament again assembles Sir Julius Vogel will have to report a disagreeable deficit upon the estimates for the year. Up to the end of last month the revenue had fallen short of the estimate by well on for ;£i 30,000, and at this rate the deficiency by the end of March next would reach over a quarter of a million. It is to be hoped, and there is some ground for indulging that hope, that the tide will turn ere then, but. even though a very considerable improvement should take place, it is scarcely to be expected that the leeway already made will be recovered. In view of this state of affairs it becomes the imperative duty of the Government to exercise the greatest possible economyin departmental expenditure and it will be assuredly expected oI them that they should make good the premise of the Premier, more than once made during last session, to effect large reductions, his own estimate of the possible saving in this direction being from to But this will not suffice to balance the ledger, and there must either be a further reduction in the outgoings or a considerable increase in taxation. And, though there are those who will regard the suggestion as little short of high treason, we venture to think lint part of the reduction of expendituie which remains to be made must be made under the head of Educa-

tion. We would be the last to propose the discontinuance of our State schools or the crippling of our educational machinery, but we demur to the doctrine that it is absolutely necessary that all education should be free. Indeed, it is only nominally free now, for the cost has to be paid and is paid out of the general taxation, and the worst feature of the existing system is that the rich man is called upon for less than his share of the cost while the poor man has to contribute more than his fair quota—a state of things that mnst always occur while so large a proportion of the public revenue is obtained from taxation imposed upon articles of general consumption, and while the remaining share of that revenue which is raised by direct taxation is levied upon an even instead of an ascending scale. We concede at once that it is the duty of the State to see that education is provided even for the verj poorest of its subjects, but we contend that if education be provided free it should only be up to a certain standard—say the Fourth of the existing school syllabus—and that a fee should be charged for the higher standards. If this were the case very considerable

relief would be afforded to the Educa« tional Estimates and the necessity for any large increase of taxation would be avoided. In making the change liberal provision should also be made in the way of State scholarships, open to general competition, which would entitle the winners to free education in the higher standards, so as to give the opportunity of advancement to the children of the poorest, but this done all would have been done that is necessary and, as we have already said, a considerable nett saving would be effected. If after all that can be done in this and other directions, the public expenditure • is still in excess of the revenue, then the only remaining expedient, if we are to pay our way, is to impose additional taxation. And if that be found necessary the only just system by which it can he raised is by changing the incidence of the present property-tax or (as we should prefer) the substitution for it of an income-tax. What we mean is that our direct taxation should he so levied as to fall fairly upon the tax-payers —that it should be adjusted in accordance with the sound principle of “ the measure of the sacrifice." That is to say, that a higher rate per cent, should be charged upon the larger incomes or larger properties as the case may be, the man with a clear £ 10,000 a year being called upon

to pay a larger percentage than the man with p£iooo a year, and the man with a year a higher rate than the man with an income of Under a just system of this sort the Property-tax or Income-tax could be so adjusted as to fall with much less weight than does the present property-tax upon the smaller property-owners and while bringing into the Treasury a considerably larger gross sum than is now yielded, it would still not press unduly upon the shoulders of the wealthy. It is well known that as regards this last matter the opinions of some of the prominent members of the Ministry are, in accord with the view which we have expressed—Mr Ballance, for instance, having plainly so stated in his speeches prior to last session—and it is earnestly to be hoped that Ministers will, when Parliament assembles again, and in view of the necessity which we are persuaded will then lie upon them of devising means to make ends meet, evince the courage of their opinions and propose measures to give effect thereto.