Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 4207, 14 September 1874, Page 2

Oh tho afternoon in which the Legislative Council caused some embarrassment and confusion by throwing out the Railways Bill, which had to be re-introduced in a modified fashion and rushed through Parliament, the Hon. Mr. Buckley spoke against it, and read some rather telling quotations from the London Economist in support of his argument against increasing the indebtedness of tho Colony. That journal is so well known as a high authority on questions of finance that it is fair to presume Mr. Buckley’s quotations would have some weight with hon. members of the Council, and perhaps swayed their votes. At that time we were not in a position to refer to the article alluded to, but since then we have been able to do so, and we find that it bears a very different interpretation to tho one it appeared to have, when reading only the quotations of the hon. gentleman. Moreover, his argument was calculated to mislead. He was certainly understood to say that the Economist instituted a comparison between the financial troubles of' Canada and the like that were ahead of New Zealand. In Hansard, he said the article “commented very strongly on a financial statement made by the Finance Minister of Canada not very long ago. There was a comparison of the position of New Zealand, which he thought was a very startling one ; and although he was quite willing to allow, taking all things into consideration, that we might look upon ourselves, from various causes, as being, perhaps, a richer Colony, as far as the population was concerned, than Canada, there was a great deal to be alarmed at in tho figures he referred to.” . Beading the article wo were somewhat surprised to find that there was not a figure or syllable in it referring to New Zealand. Mr. Buckley said he thought the quotations which he read were exceedingly applicable to New Zealand ; but a perusal of the article would demonstrate that there is no analogy to be instituted between the circumstances of the two countries. It was headed, as he said, “The Danger of Hasty Expenditure upon Public Works,” and it showed that the interest of the debt of Canada had from £900,000 in 1868 increased to £1,283,000 in 1874. Referring to the Canadian Pacific Railway, Mr. Buckley correctly quoted tho following passage : ‘ 1 For a very long term even after the actual construction of this railway, an enormous charge must be levied upon the country to keep it in full working order and repair, and the fact must be steadily kept sight of in considering the real character of thatproject. . . And now the penalty must be paid for all these extravagances. There is no kind of expenditure which requires more careful study beforehand, and more rigorous restriction to objects which are sure to pay than expenditure on now public works.... Canada has committed the most serious blunders in these respects, and the result is the large deficit and gloomy outlook we have described.” Then Mr, Buckley estimated the Customs taxation in Canada at 30s. per head, and here at 635. 6d. The article, as ho said, condemned the expansion of territory policy that had been pursued, and also the extravagant expenditure that had taken place on public works. His moral was that it might have been written in respect to New Zealand, and he urged hon. members to throw out tho Bill that was under consideration. We say that the quotations as given in Hansard are unfair, and that there is literally no comparison to tho circumstances in Canada that called forth the strictures of the Economist, and those of this Colony. Mr. Buckley is perfectly welcome to the opinion that tho indebtedness of the Colony is as great as it can bear, and that tho railways ought not to be extended, nor should any bo purchased by the General Government, but he should try to quote fairly. Of course, Mr. Waterhouse applauded the hon. gentleman’s speech, and at its conclusion remarked that he was very glad Mr. Buckley had made allusion to the subject. The facts of the case as given by the Economist, were somewhat as follows : Tho confederation of the various States of Canada took place six years ago, and at that time there was a surplus revenue, whilst this year there is a heavy deficit, which will have to bo provided for out of increased taxation. ■ The writer went on to show how this “ splendid position had been converted into one of difficulty if not of imminent danger.” The Canadian Government, when it took over British Columbia, covenanted to make the Canadian Pacific Railway. It is under obligations which compel it to annually expend £2,571,000 on new public works. The railway will stretch over 3000 miles of territory, for tho most part uninhabited, situated iu a much colder latitude than any portion of New Zealand, and when made it can only be worked at great expense and loss. The population will, it is expected, bo burdened with a debt onethird greater in proportion to the number of the people and the rate of interest than tho national debt of Great Britain or that of tho United States. “Such burdens,” said tho Economist, “might be borne for great national objects, but they are formidable ones to be undertaken in times of profound peace.” The logic of this is a little questionable, as railroads must bo of as much utility as war* whether civil or foreign. But wo pass on. Undertakings, said the Economist, had been commenced that were intended to bo reproductive, but they had been a direct cause of loss. This policy “had imposed direct charges for interest on the country, and tho works themselves were worse than unproductive.” If this was the case iu respect to railways which ran through a country that had been settled for fifty or sixty years, how would it be with the great 1 A very fair argu-

ment, but we fail to see that it'applies in any way to New Zealand. Our railways not only promise to be reproductive, butareso. The traffic on the tramway from Fox ton to Palmerston brought in £2030 in eight months. There were 80,507 passengers on the Auckland line in seven months. Between Wellington and the Hutt there were 23,398 passengers in three months. The Canterbury line earned £77,000 in nine months, and the Dunedin one £21,177 during the past year. These are not railways "worse than unproductive,” as the Canadian railways were said to be ; and it is only by a forced and strained application that the article in question could be said to have any reference to the state of things in this Colony. Instead of having a deficit in our revenue, as there was in Canada, we had a largo surplus ; and instead of having public works that were worse than unproductive, we have railways the tariff on which we may expect to be able to lower from time to time because they pay their working expenses, and more than meet the interest of the money expended on their construction. Why Mr. Buckley should thus unnecessarily and unwarrantably attempt to depreciate the prosperity of the Colony in which he lives, we fail to understand.