NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1538, 6 September 1912, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

In the House of Representatives yesterday the Minister of Finance brought down the leading totals of the public finances for the five months ended August 31 last. Tho actual figures are of no great significance or value, since it must be some time before the new Government makes its influence felt upon the national bal-ance-sheet. The important and unusual feature of Mr. Allen's statement was the publication of the totals of expenditure. In the past the public was constantly being presented .with the 'revenue figures, which were always accompanied by emphatic references to the great improvement upon the preceding year, or eight, or four, pr three months, or whatever the period might be. The expenditure was never given: we always had to wait for the statutory quarterly or yearly returns. In the meantime, of course, the growth of revenue had Rot a good start in the public mind. This system did much to the public to plunge and to support the Ministerial plungers. We welcome Mr. Allen's innovation. The member for Awarua endeavoured to create the impression that the details of expenditure given by the Minister could not be genuine. No doubt they may turn out to be inexact, by a few score or a few hundred pounds, but a few hundred pounds one way or the other cannot affect the broad teaching of total running into millions. It is made clear, at any rate, that there never was any good reason why the Continuous Ministry should have withhold the rough totals of expenditure. The current month will end a new quarter of the year; Mr. Allen should see to it .that he docs not give the revenue figures next month without at the same time giving the approximate expenditure. He must break as completely as possible with the bac' 4 sly, old method of the Spoils party. •

The other day we exposed the injustice of the proposal that of all the forms of what is called "unearned increment," only the "unearned increment" of land values should he taxed. While the subject is still fresh—it will not remain fresh very long whatever the demagogues do— we may notice an interesting treatment of the point by the London Spectator. "Though so-called unearned increments, it says, "lie all round us, the Radical eye is so made that it can only detect mem ru land":

"Take, for example, the unearned increment in slocks and shares.. The present writer, some seven or eight years ago, placed a small amount of his humble savings in Canadian Pacific Ordinary Stock, buying them at what appeared to he. the somewhat high prico of 175 for the nominal 100. At present these shares are standing ait 275, or very near. It would surely be an abuse of language to say that he had earned this increment, for.during the intervening period he'had done absolutely nothing, so far as these shares were concerned, but sleep and eat. Ho had in effect no influence whatever upon the management of the line or in promoting the prosperity of Canada, to which even more than to good management the increased value of the shares is due. Yet this increment for some reason or other does not in the least attract the envy, hatred, malice, and all' uncharitableness' of the single taxer. It is regarded as a most legitimate perquisite. If, however, an infinitely smaller increment is traced to land, it is regarded as an outrage which must bo stopped at all costs."

The more one reflects upon the fact that values of all kinds are advancing owing to what the demagogues may call community action—the cause of the advance may be fashion changes, increased prosperity, changed tastes, discoveries of wealth, scientific inventions, or fifty other things for which the community is not responsible—the more clear becomes the monstrous injustice of picking the farmer's pocket and letting everyone else off. . i

The Houso is beginning to find out the member for C'hristchurch North. There is—and it is a good thing that there is—something of a general give-and-take behind all the acrimonies of debate in Parliament, but the member for Christchurch North is beginning to be treated as altogether too much of a good thing. On Wednesday, in supporting the Marriages Validation Bill, he could not resist having an offensive fling at a Minister, simply, one can see, because it was a Minister. The Bill was one that divided both parties, and nobody excepting Mr. Isitt thought of letting a partisan tongue wag. As a result he had to endure what any other member would regard as a very unpleasant humiliation. For Mn. G. M. Thompson, a model of courtesy and sincerity, felt constrained to express his dislike of being for the occasion on the same voting side as the member _ for Christcnurch North. In winding up the debate, too, Mr. M'Callum, who was fatherin" the Bill, also felt himself obliged to rebuke Mit. Isitt for his want of tact and of savoir ftiire, and, indeed, of a sense of political propriety. He expressed a 'view that is common amongst Parliamentarians when he indicated that Mr. Ism's support is a thilig to flee from. It would be pleasant to be able to think that time might make the member for Christchureh North less uncouth, but we fear we cannot promise ourselves that pleasure. The Opposition, however, must put up with him, we suppose.

The correspondence read in the House of RepretenUtivpfi yesterday hi the Minister oi Fiaauco. contra,.

dieting a statement made by the Public Service Commission, plainly cannot be regarded 'as the last word in the matter. The Secretary of the Treasury and the Auditor-General both deny that misleading information was sent to them by a certain official. How do they know this 1 They may believe that the information supplied to them was not misleading, but it must not be overlooked that the members of tho Commission were afforded special opportunities of obtaining information, and their sources of knowledge may not have been open to the particular Departmental officers who have now come forward to contradict tho statement in tho report. It is difficult to believe that careful and capable men such as tho Commissioners undoubtedly arc, who would have no interest to serve one way or tho other beyond stating the facts as they found them, could fall so completely into error as is suggested by the Departmental officers responsible for the letters read to Parliament, yesterday. Before accepting such a conclusion we shall to await a reply from the Commissioners, who, although disbanded as'a.Commission, can still as individuals defend themselves and their report, should they deem it necessary, from any aspersions cast upon them.