Correspondence.

Feilding Star, Volume XVII, Issue 66, 14 September 1895, Page 2

Correspondence.

THE POLICY OF THE LATE HON. JOHN BALLANCE. Letter No. 2. TO THE EDITOR OF THE STAR. '■ SIE, — It is customary for poliicinns when charged by their opponents with having made certain statements ou tbe platform to say, "Oh 1 I never said so, the stenographers have wrongly reported me." But when the statements and opinions are printed over their own names, and published in pamphlet form, I think one is justified in insisting that they are the real opinions of the writers. I will now draw the attention of your readers to a pamphlet published in 1887, entitled " A National Land Policy Bused on the Principles of State Ownership," by the Hon. J. Ballance, -who says in the introduction the articles were contributed to the Dunedin Eclio, in 1882, and that this paper was then being edited by his friend Sir Robert Stout, who had long boon the ablest and most eloquent advocate of the nationalisation of land in the colony. The present Ministry, but more especially the Premier and Minister of Lands, have often declared in Parliament, and cut of it, that they arc carrying out the policy of their late chief. What is this policy ? Mr Ballance sa3 7 s in his introduction to this pamphlet that the articles contained in it " set forth without unnecessary detail a plan for the nationalisation of the land of the colon}', Crown lands, reserves, Native lands, and private lands, and that the time has arrived for a proposal to embody the principles in legislation." And he sa3's, further, he thought the theory had been sufficiently discussed and expounded. Need I point ont to your readers that this theory is Henrj 7 George's, and not Mr Ballance's, and, therefore, the latter must be a plagiarist — if I may be allowed to use this word — of oue who adopts the ideas if not the exact words of another. A statesman, I submit, would have investigated the theorj-, he would have set officials to work ou statistics and have calculated whether the increment on the land in New Zealand, taken at so low an interest as five per centum per annum, would have left the State a profit for working purposes, for Henry George allows that interest (fair) is right and just. No, Mr Ballance, like many self-taught and halfeducated people jumped at conclusions and accepted the theory, because it was popular among a certain set of voters. And on this theory he proposed to legislate so that all the lands of the colony be nationalised. I have made calculation after calculation ; I have taken the present value of estates in various parts of the colony, and, working from the date of the Crown grant, I fiad that on the average there has been no u.uanied increment. Therefore, it follows that b3 r the adoption of this most unstatemanlike theory that [ the State would be a great loscv by buying up private estates. I am, etc., Geo. Wilks. Feilding, September 13th, 1895. Mil GOODBEHERE'S FINAL REPLY TO THE MAYOR. TO THE EDITOR Ol" THE STAR. Sir, — As a finale to this correspondence I only wish to observe that I am quite as willing as the Mayor is to leave it to those of your readers who have carefully perused it, to judge as to whether or not I was perfectly justified, after waiting for close upon five weeks, in complaining of the non-acknowledgment, either by the Mayor or the Council, of my remittance to the Mayor of a subscription towards the expense of the removal of the bell-tower, for the optional acceptance of the Council, as explained in my original letter to you published on the 9th instant. I am, etc., Samuel Goodbehere. Feilding, Sept. 13. 1895.