MR WASON AT ASHBURTON.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1263, 5 April 1878, Page 3

MR WASON AT ASHBURTON.

Mr WasQn addressed a meeting of Ms constituents in the Library Ral!, Ashburton, on Wednesday evening. The attendance was fair. On the motion of Mr Bullock, Mr W. C. Walker was voted to the chair, and briefly introduced Mr Wason. Mr Wason then addressed the audience. The speech wan mainly a repetition of that delivered at Sheffield on the previous evening, and which was fully reported in these columns. In reply to a question from one of the audience relative to the new leases of runs, Me Wason said that the question of new leases had baen fairly jfo. ght out. He had told them he would support the scheme of putting th?

rung up to auction; in fact he would have gone so far as to bring in this measure himself, had it not been done by another. Mr Saunders said that the rapid way in which Mr Wason had got through his speech rendered it impossible to avoid missing some questions. He had hoped some younger man. would have taken part in this meeting, but as no one had done so, he would make a few observations. With reference to the saving by the Atkinson Government which they were told of, he did not think the saving so very great after all. They knew of railways being unfinished and trucks coming from England, which should hava been here. The moment we abolished the provinces we lost our land fnnd. Was it Major Atkinson or Sir George Grey who did this? Who did away with our Superintendents of provinces, elected by ourselves, and on whom we could rely ? With respect to the Treasury bills, the consequence of this system was to raise money for poor provinces, and leave those which had funds to pay. It was equivalent to telling ns we had parted with our watch-dog, and now they would take our sheep. After the manner in which a jury had acquitted Mr Jones, he thought that all would agree with him in thinking that Mr Whittaker was not the man to bring a Native Bill to the House. Mr Wason bad proposed the strangest form of manhood suffrage he had ever heard of. He wanted gold and coal miners and men paying o£l per annum to have votes. It seemed strange to him (the speaker) that miners should be possessed of more intelligence than masons, carpenters or bakers. He believed in Sir George Grey’s scheme, that the man who had resided twelve months in the place should have a vote, whether he paid <£l or £lO. There might be danger in very poor persons having votes, but every honest man should have a voice iu the matter. He believed, if a number of poor persons were allowed to vote, rich ones would buy them up. Sir George Grey’s scheme of manhood suffrage was good, the best he had ever heard of. A man must reside twelve months in a place, which would give him an interest in the country, and the country would educate those who were to become entitled to votes. This was better than to keep them ground down. The upper class would find it better to raise the working class to a higher standard, some of whom might perhaps some day become members of the Government of the country. With reference to the taxes, he thought there was a great difference between a property tax and a land tax. If they put a tax on land, they did this—they made men"careful of how much land they would hold. He did not say there was anything wrong in n man buying land to any extent he could, but what they had to do was to do was to make laws, so that a man could not injure his neighbors in any way. Suppose a man bought a block of land, and left it unimproved as he found it, and another bought one sect on, and cultivated and improved it — was it fair that the man who improved his own land, and, by so doing, his neighbor’s aho, should pay more tax than the man who bought his land and lets it lie idle. He (the speaker) said—No. If they mu,t have a tax, let them tax something that injured the country, not that which benefited it. He thought it an advantage that rich men should pay more than the poor. He would not for a moment have *t thought that he advocated putting taxes on one more than another. He was not sure that the taxes of the working men did not sit heavin’ on the employer. It must be remembered that taxes were obtained from the Natives through food, &c., which could not be had if a land tax was levied. He thought it would ho more just to tax property than necessaries. At present they were not making both ends meet. How long they could live on borrowed money he did not know. Some day they would have to pay up, and they must do so from their land tax. He looked on a tax, that would prevent men holding land and not using it as a benefit. In 1845 Lord John Russell pointed out that the greatest impediment Ne>v Zealand would have would be men holding large tracts of land and not using it. About the runs, Mr Wason had told them that he was in favor of putting the runs up to auction. He believed Mr Wason thought he would do as he said, but when he got up to Wellington among his brother runholders ho could not resist the opportunity of extending the leases. Why should thoseleases be extendedin 1877 when they did not run out till 1880. Sir George Grey had said, “So long as he had a constitutional peg those leases should not be extended without an increase. Another thing—when a number of men got themselves into the House, and found measures under discussion which affected their property, it was their duty to sit down and not vote.” [“No, no.”] He (the speaker) said it was not decent for runholders to sit in the House and decide whether the leases should he extended for ten years or not. Mr 'Wason, in replying to Mr Saunders, said that, speaking of the land transactions in the North Island, a committee, consisting in part of members of the Opposition, had been formed. This committee had reported that the transaction referred to was a judicious one, and had exonerated Mr Whitaker. He could not understand a land tax, such as Mr Saunders proposed. A pure and simple land tax he could understand, but he cordially agreed with Mr Saunders that absentees should be taxed. Tec next question was one which did not affect him personally, viz., members voting on the Pasturage Bill. He was not now a runholder, and, therefore, had no brother runholders, andhe felt sure Mr Saunders would be the last to attribute to him a desire to enhance the value of his land at the expense of the country. The conditions of renewing the leases were these—that from 9d to 2s per sheep will have ta be paid for the renewal, and thoso renewals would not he decided by runholders. The Government would appoint a valuer. If the runholder disagreed with the valuation it must bo decided by arbitration. He trusted Mat Mr Saunders would do the Canterbury members justice when he (Mr Saunders) found he hadbeen mistaken. With regard to Treasury Bills, those Bills formed part of the indebtedness of the colony, and were similar to Exchequer Bills at homo. Mr Saunders said the leaving the Government to appoint a valuer for the lenses of runs, and the runholders another, was equivalent to the runholders appointing both. Mr Charles Reid said he considered the system of leases, as explained by Mr Wason, quite simple. He did not think there was much fear of the squatter’s being too leniently dealt with, and thought that, in case of dispute, nothing could be fairer than arbitration. With reference to the Ashburton Railway, he believed Mr Wason had done them justice. He had much pleasure in proposing a vote of thanks to Mr Wason for the able Hpecch ho had given them. Mr Bullock seconded the motion, and in doing so would say a few words, He thought the runs of Canterbury were things of the past, except in the hill country. When Mr Wason was returned, the country between the Eakaia and Rangitata was occupied by a few sheepruns, bat was now filled with prosperous farmers. At the next meeting of the Assembly the question of increased representation would ha brought up. In days gone by, when they had only a few runholders, they had one representative. Now it was certain that one member was not sufficient for the Coleridge district. B e thought that they should impress this on Mr Wason. .

Mr Saunders thought that as they had so lately passed a vote of thanks to Sir George, Grey in this very hall, they could not altogether agree with the views expressed by Mr Was on. Ho therefore moved, as an amendment —“ That this meeting thanks Mr Wason for Ins address, but cannot agree with him in the political opinions to which he has given expression.’ *— [Cheers and Dissent.] Mr Leggitt seconded the amendment, The Chairman put the amendment, nineteen voted for it and twenty-four against, the original motion was then put and carried. A vote of thanks, to the chairman terminated the proceedings,