EXPOSED AGAIN.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1876, 9 October 1913, Page 4

EXPOSED AGAIN.

LOCAL OPPOSITION JOURNAL'S RECKLESS METHODS. WILD MISREPRESENTATION. J lie following article taken from thtf Inranaki Herald" on Monday last adds anothor to the long list of exposures of tho reckless misrepresentation practised by the local mouthpiece' of tho Opposition in its eiforts to in-' juro the Massey Government:— "A few days ago, on the motion of Mr. Witty, member for Iliccarton, a re turn was presented to the Houso relating to mortgages registered in tho Dominion during tho financial year ended March last. It showed that mortgages' to tho amount of £22,097,478 were reg- 1 ' istered, bearing interest at various rates up to 20 per cent, per annum. Tho 'New Zealand Times' promptly seized upon, this as a text for ono of tlio violent and j misleading political articles it daily serves up for tho delectation or deception of its readers. First of all lauding Sir Joseph Ward up to the skies for i providing tho people with choap money ! and, by means of tho activities of tho-' State Advances Ofiice, keeping tho nil-', ing rates of interest down to a reason-; able limit, our contemporary goes to say that tlio starvation of tho Do- j partmcnt by tho Reform Government Had, of course, the opposite ell'cct. Its . remarks arc worth quoting:— '. "No sooner had tlio Tories become es- : lablished on tlio Treasury Benches thou tlio local money market hardened. Rates of interest began to rise, at first only perceptibly, but later rapidly, until tho; average , increase was, as we stated yea-1 terday, anything from 2 to 4 per cent. : Indeed, we probably understated tho position, for t'hc report submitted to Parliament shows that after tho Tories had worked their will for nino months (from July, to March, 1913) raUfiof interest on registered mortgages had reached abnormal figures. This 13 not it conjecture, nor an opinion. It is a demonstrated fact, proved from public records. Tho interest paid on mortgages during tho first Tory financial year ranged from to 20 per cent.! Owing directly to tho Government's hostility to, that great Liberal institution, the Advances Department, and to tho same Government's warm .regard for tho Shylocka •of this life, souio unfortunate borrowers liad to pay last year for their accommodation actually as much as lour 6hil-, lings in the pound! There were several mortgages at 15 per cent., more at 12J, 12, and 11 per cent., over fivo, hundred; at In per cent., 25S at 9 per cent., and moro than two thousand transactions at. 8 to 81 per cent. Wo invito tlio publio to contrast theso usurious rates, theso crippling and cruel charges, which must inevitably liavo handicapped progress, embarrassed the farming community, and.' seriously lessoned tho demand lor labour—wo ask the publio to contrast what 1 has happened under tlio Tory Govern-, ment with the situation that existed' when Sir Joseph Ward was Primo Minister and reinforced the local supply with three and a half millions of outside money, available at something like 4Jper cent. As a dircct result of tlio Government stopping what they so impudently and liypocyitically dcscribo as plunging,' the rates of interest have risen to a height, unparalleled since the da.vs when Toryism was previously tho dominating element in the constitution. Iho leign of the self-styled 'Reformers 16 a snlcndid thing for tho money-lenders-at Homo • nnd abroad, by tho way-but a disastrouq, thing for all tho pcoplo in land who desire financial assistance. . A terrible indictmcnt indeed, wlucli | few of tho "Times' " readers probably I would take the trouble, to investigate| further. Having .an idea, howm-er,j that we had heard of even more than M • per cent, being paid by mortgagors ill tho halcyon days of "Liberalism, wo» accepted the invitation to institute a comparison, and what did we find tho twelve months muled March dl, U" (Sir Joseph Ward's last complete year),; mortgages to the- total amount or £20,998,622 were registered at rates! of interest running .up.to 25 per cent. . To make the comparison as accurate-as, possible with' the figures at our command j we calculated the average rate paid on | tho mortgages amounting to • £20 891,185, upon which tho actual rato paid is stated in tho return as pub-, lished. This average works out at 5.69 per cent. . Then taking the. corresponding figures for Sir Joseph s rear 1911 we find that, on £1/,108,116 an average rato of 5.41 per cent, was paid or .28 per cent. less than last vear, not a great difference considering that money tho world -over must Ima been fullv .50 per cent, dearer last year than two vear's ago. The percentage is not exactly accurate in cither case, because in 1911 tho rates were not specified with rcsncct to £3,836,595 lent, whilo last year th'ey were-not-specified with respect to £885,616, and it is nil' possible to say whether these would, raise or lower tlio average. . Further, in 1911 mortgages were Registered to the amount of £53,911 at rates below 4 per cent., which would, of course* reduce tho average for that year Blight-": lv. Last year, however, it would apli'ear—though tlio' return as published does not snow it—that a consideiabiy larger amount bore interest at rates lesj j than 4 per cent., for there is £820,6/' n° W accounted for in the return whielil would make the average compare oven' moro favourably than it does on tho figures wo have taken. Now let us seo how tho "New Zealand 'limes has misrepresented tho figures. It says tlio rates of interest are anything from i to 4 per cent, 'higher under the Refpim Government than before •it came into office Tho fißures prove that the aver* ago rato is about a quarter per cent, higher. Then it says that tho inter* est on mortgages during tho first lory-, financial year ranged from o* to 20 per cent." This is untrue, bccauso tlio return shows that something like eight, millions wcro borrowed at 5 per ecnt-. , and under. However,. tho return tor 1 1910-11 shows that the interest ou inorU during tho last " Ward " financial vear ranged up to 25 per cent. 11l 190S-9 tho rates went as high as 2/J per cent., W<Un 1911-12 thoy went up to 20 ser cent. 0! courso tlio amounts borrowed nt th'ju high rates arc not large, but it is a deliberate misrepresentation on the part (rf the "Times to say .that it, was " directly owing to tho Government's hostility to the Advances Department" that borrowers liad last year to pay as Uiigli as four shillings in tho pound for accommodation. As a matter of fact last year tho amount lent at rates over 10 per cent, was considerably less than in 1910-11. Finally tho rates have not " risen tot a height unparalleled since tho days when Toryism was previously tho dominating element." Tho returns provct that 5 l>or cent, more was paid undo? " Liberalism " than under Reform.