Correspondence.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VIII, Issue 491, 18 July 1857, Page 5

Correspondence.

To the Editor of the Lyttelton Times. Gtu —After the publication ot the Census v s* of 31st March, 1857, the letter of "A Timber of the Provincial Council," defending tie restrictive immigration resolutions, surprises

&%\ie object of restricting the vote for irarai- ■ tion appears to have been to proportion labour trfcapital. I maintain, however, that in every Lune colony progressing favourably, capital is olwavs outstripping labour; and nowhere is this ftct clearer than in Canterbury. At a distance f 16 000 miles from England, with passages °ostin°iwhat they now do, to suppose that an Lnenditure of £20,000 can overpeople this province seems preposterous. For my part, as ,an Englishman, I hold that population—so long as each can find honest employment, a climate temperate, and a soil not ungrateful—is the true / iiirce of all wealth: as a colonist, that the 'more we can bring here of our distressed fellow countrymen, the more we shall add to our wealth and comforts while relieving their want and misery- . • ii ij. • • After witnessing the results, in six years (from 1850-1), of the planting some 3000 souls in this province when there was scarcely a plough, cart, horse or bullock to be had, —when barely an acre was turned up, and when perhaps not three sheep per head could be found, —it seems incredible that any Canterbury man should fear to add, at once even, 2000 to a population already numbering 6000, and possessing probably eio-ht or ten times the capital they brought here in°lßsl- If any disproportion existed then, it was in the excess of labour over capital; while now the excess is completely reversed. The Canterbury Association sent out about 18 ships in the year.; 1850. £10,000 is said to be the average capital which leaves England in each emigrant ship. I will go far, and admit that each of the eighteen^ ships brought that sum, though very few cabin passengers arrived latterly. This would give a capital (unproductive then) of £180,000, for a population of 3000 of all classes, ages, and sexes. Take, now, the Census on 31st March, 1857. We have, roundly— Sheep, 276,000 say at only 105.... £138,000 Cattle, 15,000 „ £5.... 75,000 Horses, 1300 „ £30.... 39,000 Pio-s, 5,800 „ £1.... 5,800 Landin grain, 6000 a. „ £5.... 30,000 Grass land, 1300 a.. „ £4.... 5,200 Fenced, 24,0Q0a. ... „ £3.... 72,000 Houses, 1200 „ £100.... 120,000 £485,000 Add to this the accumulation of "plant" and personal property of all kinds which, must accompany such possessions, and which another £200,000 would not purchase. Bear in mind that the population of 6,000. are now paying £20,000 a-year of customs duties, and another £20,000 for land, (equal to a taxation of £7 per head!) and will export next year, of wool alone, some £80,000 worth. That this export will more than double itself for the clip of 1858, while the present capital from which it will spring will by that time also have more than doubled. Contrasting then thfe loosest, roughest, and certainly lowest estimate of our position (which is essentially one of progress) with what it was in 1851, it is evident that our wealth is fast outrunning our means of handling it, and that without a speedy and abundant supply of labour we shall all. be enormous losers. There is no " clap-trap " here. Were I to place things at their exact value,to go more closely into calculations, I do not doubt my ability to prove the reasonableness of a belief, entertained by not a few, that we own now at least a million and-a-half of property. That is, while our capital has increased by eight times its original amount, our population has only doubled; and while our capital is still rapidly increasing, our population is almost stationary. I am not concerned to go more exactly into calculations. I merely wish to point to obvious facts weighing against restriction of any kind on such immigration as we could at the best hope for in our position relatively to England, and with our slender finances. I leave it to others, if they please, to discuss the subject more accurately. My own conviction is, that if we could find means to dispose of our 3,000 selves in 1851, witb results so advantageous, we and the other 3,000 who have since joined us, could not fail to find full and profitable employment during the next two years for another 3,000 souls; and after that, for at least 2,000 more per annum. I am, Sir, Yours, obediently,

To the Editor of the Lyttelton Times. Sir,—-Though you refused to publish my recent letter, for reasons best known to yourself, 1 trust that, in the spirit of fair play arid of allowing both sides of a question to be heard, you will not refuse to insert a few remarks that ■I have to make on the letter of your correspondent "Philodramaticus." This ardent advocate of the stage makes two or three assertions which do more credit to his assurance than to his erudition, and I would recommend his Perusal of Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Empire, before his again asserting that the experience of past ages proves that dramatic entertainments are especially adapted to inipr Ove the people and to refine their tastes." f , } nk tha^ any man who has much knowledge oi history, ancient or modern, will find that the introduce- -p ' w ~':-~- — - 1-••■'*"' fl«^.d;«n to {■■■ : - :'-i-;-v-::v::-;w

their fall from hardy virtue, simplicity, and industry, to idleness, luxury, and effeminacy, ending in degradation and ruin. In a new country like this, especially where the steady industry of each individual is of such importance to the community at large, I cannot but strongly deprecate the introduction of theatricals, which I feel assured experience has proved to be a school for immorality and an asylum for vice and prostitution. With regard to keeping such entertainments purely moral and well regulated, I fear this would be a task too onerous for the highest abilities, and, if " Philodramaticus " himself could succeed in this, he might indeed be styled the wonder of the age. His sincere respect for true religion seems only manifested in denouncing as fanaticism and hypocrisy (in the spirit of true charity) all religious sentiment that does not coincide with his own easy notions on the subject, or which would refuse to walk hand in hand with that institution most calculated to inflame evil passions and disorder the imagination.

C A. MAESACK

Beulah, July 9th, 1857,