WESTLAND'S SHARE OF CANTERBURY'S DEBT.

Grey River Argus, Volume V, Issue 349, 9 April 1868, Page 3

WESTLAND'S SHARE OF CANTERBURY'S DEBT.

THE HON. JOHN HALL'S SPEECH VX THB PROVINCIAL OOVNCIL. In the Canterbury Provincial Council, on the 2nd inst, the Hon. John Hall moved the House into Committed to consider the following resolutions : — l. That in the opinion of this Council the existing apportionment between the Province of Canterbury and the County of Westland of the permanent debt of the original | Province of Canterbury and the County of Westland is not consistent with sound policy and justice. 2. That it is desirable that such apportionment should be rejconsiderpd by the General Assembly at its next session. 3. That a copy of the above resolutions be transmitted by Mr Speaker to both Houses of the General Assembly. The hon. member trusted that whatever hon. members' opinions might be as to the advantageousness or otherwise of this arrangement, they would consent to say that it onght to be re-con-sidered, if he could show them that it was an essentially unjust and unfair one. He need not point out that when a partnership was dissolved, either as between individuals or a State, there must be some arrangement come to ; and although the liability of the dobt incurred before the dissolution must continue to extend over the whole original province, yet the manner in which the interest and sinking fund should be actually drawn must be apportioned in some way or other. Canterbury was the first province in New Zealand in which a like apportionment had taken place. In the case of Southland, when that part of the colony separated from Otago, the matter with regard to its portion of liability for the dobt incurred before separation was effected was referred to and settled by arbitration, and nothing more was heard about it. The liability of Hawke's Bay, when it separated from Wellington, was, he beieved, settled under the New Provinces Act of 1858. That was to say, the debt was apportioned not to the Customs revenues pniy, but according to the whole revenues of the province, from customs and land. He was not aware whether this principle had not in some way been modified in the case of Hawke's Bay, but he thought not. In the case of Marlborough, when it separated from Nelson, the matter of its liability was referred to arbitration, The County of Westland Act brought in by the Government, proposed the appointment of arbitrators— rone by the General Government, and one by the Superintendent — to settle the question of its liability for the debts Canterbury had incurred, but owing to a variety of circumstances to which he would not allude at any length, an alteration was made, and the customs r evennes were made the measure of the debt which the County of Westland should /share. Now, such an arrangement as this was unjust. There were two principles which applied in the case of one district separating from another. One principle which suggested itself was, that a partner leaving took with him a certain amount of property which had been legally mortgaged, and therefore he must take a fair share of the mortgage with it. The other principle was, that when two districts separate and undertake to pay between them the debt which had been incurred by them as a whole, it is fair to consider in what proportion each district has benefited from the expenditure of that money for the raising of which they are liable. With regard to the value of the pstate which Westland had taken over, iv point of extent hon. members would see at once, on looking at the map, that the district of Westland was about from a quarter to a third of the size of the remaining province of Canterbury. Supposing the original province to contain twelve millions of acres— rand it was stated to be thirteen millions (he was speaking from recollection only) the district of Westland would contain about three millions of acres, and the remainder of the province nine miilions. He did not think it necessary to go into the question of area, because the mere aiea would- not afford an estimate of the value of the estate taken by Westland. Hon. members must know that a very great proportion of these three million acres was a dense forest, and useless for agricultural or pastoral purposes. He did not ignore that it had a value in its mineral resources ; and it was difficult to institute a comparison between the value of these two classes of land — whether the auriferous on the West Coast, or the pastoral and agricultural on this side of the province, were not more intrinsically valuable. There, was one consideration which might help the Council in this matter, and that was, what was the revenue which the two districts yield] The land revenue of East Canterbury for the year ending June, 1866, was LIBI,OOO odd, and in 1867, L 166.000, exclusive of pasturage rents, which would considerably augment the revenues, and which inthempelve3 constituted the most perfect revenue which any State or individual could possess. He was quite willing to admit, on referring to Westland's revenue, that the gold duty might fairly be called land revenue, because it was a charge made on the miners for extracting the gold. The gold duty collected in Westland during the year 1866 amounted to L 45,600, and in 1867 to 145,740 6s 7d. There were also charges made on miners' rights and business licenses, but he did not think that these could be included under the head of land revenue. They were more than all expended in the keeping up of police, &c. In 1866 the amount realised for the sale of waste lands in Westland was 143*65, and this amount, added to the sum obtained in the shape of gold duty, would bring the whole revenue in connection with land to below half of that raised in the east part of the province, and if they compared it with the revenue of East Canterbury of former years, it would only be a quarter. So much for the value pf an estate which had been taken over by Westland, and if the measure of her liability were to be measured by the value of ber estate, she, would have to bear one half of the debt of the whole province. The Council ought to consider what benefit Westland had received from the loans. If, for example, LSOO out of L7oonad been spent in Westland, he«thought hon. members would say that Westland ahovld bear more than a half of the liability. Consequently, it was necessary, in order that a fair decision might be arrived at, that the Oounoil should calculate the amount of debt incurred and the benefit which had accrued to both sides of the province in its expenditure. There was the Immigration Loan pf 1866 ; Westland did not get a penny «nt of that ; nor did she get a penny out

of the loan raised for the Lyttelton and Christchurch railway. Then there was the Half Million Loan, of which, according to one account, Westland was liable to the amount of LH7,OOn; and according to another, of L 104,000. He would assume it to be LIIO,OOO. He had told the people of Westland, over and over again, to their face, that that was not the whole amount that should be charged for ; that there were charges which it was but right they should be charged with, such as the j expenses of Government aud the expenses of their members in attending sessions of the Council in Christchurch. He did not think that a single itom should be excluded from the list of charges. There was one point which he thought should bo borne in mind by the Council, that the railway and half-million loans were raisud upon the security of the aggregate revenue of the province — that was to say, upon the Customs and land revenue. Therefore it appeared to him to be inconsistent wiih the original intention, inconsistent with justice that Westland's liability should be measured according to the Customs revenue alone. Hon. members might ask what he considered was a fair charge, but he declined altogether to say what would be a fair charge, and he thought the ..General Assembly and the Council ought to decline to say what would be a fair chcirge, because it should be left to thorough business men— men in whom all &ide 3 had perfect confidence — to iuquhe into all the circumstances, and determine what was the exact proportion of the debt which each part of the province should pay off. He thought it was an unjust and im politic arrangement to charge Wostland according to the measure of her Customs j revenue, aud the people were very much dissatisfied .and irritated with it ; and one of their chief objects was not merely to gat rid of the charge, but of the injustice. Under the present arrangements, the Provincial Treasurer did not know how much he had to provide to pay interest and sinking fund, either from year to year, or month to month, because it was determined on the rising or falling seale — as the case might be — of the Customs revenue. The Goi vernment had from time to time stated that they wanted to know what their liabilities were, but it was impossible they could know under tlieir present arrangement, for the revenues of Westland were liable to fall off at any moment the population chose to go elsewhere. The lion, member went to state the circumstances connected with the passing of the Westland County Act, and complained that Westland had been saddled with the greater part of the L150,0000f debentures sold i:#. London by Mr Crosbie Ward, although the district had not got a farthing of the money. Did any lion, member suppose that when this matter was brought under the notice of the General Assembly, it would not be re-considered ? The whole indebtedness of the province at the time of the passing of the Westland County Act amounted to L 513,000, and the largest proportion of this was thrown on Westland — nearly half as much again as that which East Canterbury had to bear. He did not think he should appeal in vain to hon. members when he asked them to jiass the resolutions standing in his name. ■ I