The Globe. SATURDAY JANUARY 19, 1878.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1210, 19 January 1878, Page 2

The Globe. SATURDAY JANUARY 19, 1878.

Continuing our summary of Mr. Montgomery's speech at Akaroa from yesterday, the next point noted by him was a Bill which provided for reserving 850.000 acres of land for opening up district railways, but it was thrown out in the Upper House. Had it become law it would have enabled them to make the lines to Malvern and Little River, one to Waimate and one to Geraldine. He intended, however, to introduce a similar Bill next session. He next shortly sketched the provisions of the Land Bill, and went on to give his views as to the manner in which Native lands should be dealt with. He would like to see a Bill passed giving the Government power to survey the Native lands in blocks and lay oft' the same; also that out of the sale, the Government should be recouped the cost of the survey, and also receive a royalty for a Ooavu title. Mr. Montgomery next Avent on to speak of the debt, and the means to be provided to pay the interest. He is of opinion that very little assistance will be derived from the railways. The profit on them this year is estimated at £'166,000, and looking at the lines constructed in the North and elsewhere, the idea of the profits from railways helping to pay the interest and sinking fund would prove a delusion and a snare. Not only therefore would all the land fund be absorbed, but he thought, fresh taxation would have to be imposed. He was in favor of a property, but not an income tax. With what he had to say on this point we cordially agree. We have always maintained, that, as property has been vastly increased in value by the immigration and public works policy, it is only just that it should bear a fair share of the public burdens. As Mr. Montgomery pointed out, justice demands that those who become rich, and whose property is enhanced in value by immigration and public works, should pay a fair share towards the burdens. But he was opposed to an income tax, because it is inquisitorial, and presses unjustly upon people who have families to maintain, whereas a property tax reaches those who at present evade paying anything at all to the revenue.

On tlio question of representation, he was of opinion that a redistribution of seats should he made, and tho basis should be population—not the number of {he electors. Tho latter system put too much power into the hands of the digging population. As to the qualification of the electors, what he wanted to see was residential suffrage, guarded with certain checks. He would have a man reside in oV3 district twelve mouths before he should hn entitled to a vote. By this means he could not possibly exercise his vote for eighteen months aft** he had resided in the district. There would also be the chock that so soon as be went out of the district he would 'lose 'his vote, and he would bo reacquired to be registered every year. With checks be thought numbers would not obtain undue power. Ho objected to manhood a man

man, irrespective of any interest in the country. At the close of his address, Mr. Montgomery received an unanimous vote of confidence.

In yesterday's issue we gave a brief outline of Mr. Montgomery's speech concluding with some reference to the explanation he gave of his relation to the Grey party. The more this explanation is looked into the more incomprehensible it becomes. The finance of the Atkinson Ministry was, he said, unsatisfactory, because Treasury bills were issued for the benefit of those provinces which had no land fund, and Canterbury was thus called on to pay the interest, which was just the same as if our land fund had boon taken. But Mr Montgomery overlooks the fact that Canterbury would have been called upon to pay her share only of the interest. This, togother with the £58,000 proposed to be taken by the Atkinson Government, would be a small sum after all, compared with the " highway robbery" of Sir G. Grey. Mr. Montgomery has a strong objection to our money "being taken away and spent in districts whore they have for years been selling their land at 5s or 10s an acre, or, as in many cases, giving it away." Under the Atkinson Government nearly the whole of our land fund would have been secured to us up to the 30th of June next, and Mr. Bowen assured us that before any change was made in the land fund system the constituences would be consulted, and i hen the proposals of his Government would have embodied a system which should ensure a specialisation of the land fund for public works and specified purposes. What Mr. Montgomery so much objects to, the Government he has been supporting has been doing with a vengeance. The estimates are crowded with sums for roads and bridges in Otago, Auckland, and elsewhere, while Canterbury, which is providing nearly all the funds, receives next to nothing. To this it may be answered, of course, that these districts require such works, while we do not. There are many in the colony who honestly think so. But Mr. Montgomery is not entitled to use this argument. He upholds the compact of 1856, and therefore holds that the proceeds of the land sales should be spent where they are raised. But by supporting the Grey Government he has helped to keep in office a set of men who are deliberately plundering Canterbury and spending the proceeds elsewhere. During the last fortnight or three weeks Messrs Larnach and Macandrew have been receiving deputation after deputation, and promising all kinds of pecuniary assistance to the districts from which they come. With them Otago is New Zealand, and now when they have the opportunity they mean to help themselves in every way possible. By his vote last session, Mr. Montgomery helped to keep in power a set of men who ignore Canterbury's existence altogether, except as a source from which to draw unlimited supplies of money, and yet he expects us to applaud his efforts.