LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 105, 27 January 1908, Page 11

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

I WEALTH AND ITS OBJECTIONS. THE. OTHER SIDE OF THE QUESTION. Sir,—Thanks to tho ill-feeling towards the capitalist eit>sses, so sedulously fostered by Liberal Governments during their long tenure of office, the romarks made by the Chancellor of the New, Zealand University .Will l probably find but fow dissenti,'onts".';!. There aro, however, reasons for thinking!! that, the object of his worship, the Amoricaii' capitalist, should not bo allowed the tmdhallengod right, to wear a halo to the exclusion of his leas wealthy, but no less patriotic. New Zealand brother. ■ ,

■ Tho! New Zealand democracy has been ; taught, rightly or wrongly, to rogard tho oapitalist.'asthe "fat.man,", fully ripe for tho knife of tho spoiler; a fat goose, provided by a kind Providence, for the people's Michaelmas feast. That being so, who can' 'womler Vthat the people eagerly-accept the , doctrino thai tho annexation by-majorities-of the' property of minorities constitutes no •broaoli,\of the Eighth Commandment: that though it would be wrong forcibly-to rob a man of: his' money, yet tho same act is ii • xightobns one if-sanctioned by an Act of Parliament ju.e.,^by the will of. a, majority. ' In ' pursuance of these ...views, the New Zealand capitalist has been compelled to pay a heavy graduated income tax, and-to pro- / vide for heavy death duties, from which his American brother is free. If he remonstrates he is told that this is required to provide funds for tho numerous Socialist undertakings of tho country: old age pensions, charitablo subsidies, public works for the relief of. the .unemployed,. State coal mines, free •Wucatipn, national scholarships.' I?or all these he has to provide the' " wherewithal," but he is, for class reasons, rigidly exeluded> from deriving any . benefit . from, them. Is it unreasonable' that he should' feel,; it' somewhat hard that the democracy should first of all'forcibly take from him a large. Amount of his property on the plea that it: is, required for "charitable purposes (by which I mean the providing of benefits for which the beneficiaries do not themselves pay the full cost); and then approach him . acaiqyi hat in hand, asking; with mendicant wnine for another dip into his purse? Why should he be blamed if he says:—"No, you have snatched from me- the charitablo contribution- which otherwise I would have freely and gladly given, just as my American • brother ;has"done. Either.; cease to rob mo and Viet-mo give voluntarily, or ccasa to . blame nie if you prefer to continue robbing me.', 'How can I be expcctcd, after being ' robbed.i 6f one-half of my possessions, to give away therest?" " _■ , ; Again, what cant there lies in the frequent cbtaplaint that capitalists. so seldom beqheath money to Charities and universities! Thero is nobleness in a man's action when ho sacrifices his luxuries and desires in order to fihd.'m6ney. : to endow public clarities during hißjlifertimo; but what - nobloness is there in/the base of a man who has lived a life of luSiiry.and self-indulgence; and then, shortly before death. cuts off from him all power of > further, enjoying his wealth, decides to'bequoaih i vh'andsome legacy:'.to. a -university / or.',,a The self-denial of the giver whiih, measures the value of every gift must be crfdited to his heirs, but in no way to himself; : A'_ charitablo legaoy is often the mcatiost. action of a man's lifo. An attempt, to lay tip riches in .heaven at tho . of.another! A "firo insurance," . for-.which another pays the premium! ' '< I am, etc., . ' ' G. E. A. Wellington, January 24, 1908.