WELLINGTON TOPICS

Hokitika Guardian, 8 June 1928, Page 4

WELLINGTON TOPICS

NEW ZEALAND FOOTBALLERS. DEFEAT IN SOUTH AFRICA. (Special to “Guardian”.) WELLINGTON, June 5. “Just what New Zealand needed,” said a AVeliington football veteran when he heard of the defeat of the All j Blacks by-the South African WesternRrovinees team on Saturday. “ llotli the game and the players, those on tour and those here,” the veteran went on to say when challenged hv the inquiring faces of the Club mates to whom his comment was addressed, “ will be all the better for this rebuff. New Zealand got it into its head some twenty years ago, when L was playing the game and suffering under the same delusion myself, that it could ‘ lick all creation ’ at Rugby and was ready to do so any day in the week. But as a matter of fact. South Africa, considering all the circumstances has done just as well as New Zealand has done, and has not been imagining it has nothing to learn from its opponents.” At the conclusion of the discussion it was agreed that the New Zealanders would be none the worse for their defeat. “ A SALUTARY REVERSE.” The good sportsman who writes football notes for the “Dominion,” after drawing such deductions as lie might from the cabled account of Saturday’s game, pays an appropriate compliment to the winners. “Hearty congratulations,” he says, “ must go out to the valiant men of Capetown, who in defeating the All Blacks, accomplished something no team in England. Wales, Ireland or France was able to do in IDT!.” This authority, also, reminds the New Zealanders’ admirers that so long ago as 1012 the South Africans lost only three matches during their tour of the Old Country. They were beaten by Newport by 0 to 3, by London by 10 to 8, and bv Swansea by 3 to nil. But against these defeats they were able to place such victories as New Zealand’s representatives never have achieved. They won the whole of their international matches, beating Scotland by 10 to nil ; Ireland by 33 to nil ; Wales by 3 to nil ; England by 0 to 3, and France by 38 to 5. 1 hen there was their visit to New Zealand in 1921. when, hs the “ Dominion ”, writer say-S, “on our own grounds and under our own referees,” they finished up square in the three test matches and lost only two games during their tour. Since then South Africa has made very great progress in tho game, and it will not be surprising if on theii own grounds they finish up very closely with the present invaders. A DIFFICULT YEAR.

The “ Dominion ” this morning assumes its rentiers that the public accounts reveal the fact that there has been a due regard to economy “where possible.” Amplifying its point it observes that “ without careful control of the financial operations the surplus of C 179,077 could quite easily have been turned into a deficit.” Just by way of showing bow this might have been effected it points out tha the expenditure in the Agriculture Department during the year increased by 243,540, in the Education Denprtment by £20,018. and in the Industrial Research Department by £-11.770. “It is apparent,” tho morning paper says, “ that the departments concerned with fanning interests, industrial research, .'duciumii and charitable aid have absorbed tho greater part of the savings effected in other''departments.” increased charitable aid expenditure,’ this authority admits, “ is not a pleasant item,” but in other respects it submits contingently, “ the increases should represent money well spent.” ft still remains to lie seen if tliev will, i lie results yet have to lie produced. THE TAXPAYER.

in this connection it may bo opportiiiio to observe that the -Minister of Finance Ims promised to consider the feasibility of reducing.the income tax (luring the nnprouehing session. Ho

has not committed himself very deeply on the- subject, and during the recess he luis scarcely alluded to it at all ; hut, for what it is worth, the promise stands and Mr Stewart is a man of lux word. The graduation of the tax which ho effected last year retained a big percentage increase on the rates of 1914, but no doubt represented an honest attempt to secure something in the nature of equality of sacrifice. The contribution of a taxable income under £3OO was increased, compared with the rate of 1914, by 5 per cent; between £4OO and £1250 by 20 per cent ; between £1250 and £ISOO by 24 per cent; and then by what the Minister deemed just progression between £ISOO and £IO,OOO from 30 per cent to 231 per cent. These, presumably, are the bases on which the next revision will proceed.