The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, MAY 10, 1878.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5341, 10 May 1878, Page 2

The New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY.) FRIDAY, MAY 10, 1878.

The political philosophy of the honorable member for Christchurch City, Mr. E. O. J. Stevens is not of that school which may be called “cheerful.” Between the man of Abdera and him of. Ephesus he would we think constitutionally incline to the “ weeping ” side. This disposition, however, if it tinge, does not seriously' warp his judgment on public affairs, and what ha says always commands attention and consideration. . His late speech to his constituents, at the Odd Fellows’ Hall, gained for him that expression of thanks and confidence which its frankness and moderation deserved,

la noticing the events of the session, i Mr. Stevens dwelt largely, as was natural before a Canterbury audience, upon the' operation of certain provisions of the. Land Act as specially; affecting local interests in the provincial district, as well as that interest which is now general in the waste lauds of the Crown; and he showed indisputably, as we think, that that vexed question has been settled . by: the Legislature in a imanner.at once fair.to the runholder and ; to the public. - The power of the Crown over the land as regards its disposal by free selection or on deferred payments,: is preserved in its entirety; until it is so used tho best rent that can be got for it will be obtained from the pastoral tenants. The attempt of the Premier,' of his own motion, against the will of his colleagues, and in open defiance of both 1 Houses of the Legislature, to. obtain the Governor’s veto to the Land Bill, was not left unnoticed by Mr.: Stevens, and will certainly bo heard of again when the Parliament meets. In the consolidation of tho Land Fund Mr Stevens acquiesces, for reasons which are broad and general ; but he thinks that cupidity was the direct motive of that action, and that it was a fiscal revolution of so large a character that the constituencies should have been consulted previously to its being effected. Of the cardinal points of the policy of the Premier the member for Christchurch does not express himself approvingly. Regarding manhood suffrage Mr. Stevens shall speak for himself. Ho says

When we come to this, that wo are going la for ono residential rote, and only ono vote for each person—and that is the policy given by Ministers in their speeches—l will give my view on that. What does' one residential vote moan ? It moans that any ono In; this city who has property in another district by virtue of inheritance, or by having purchased it with ■ the fruit of bis hard work for years, is not to have a vote for snch property unless ho lives upon it. Ido ask you to consider whether you, who are in the enjoy-; raeht of a right lo yoto-it maybe at Akaroa,,or; Timnru, or Ashley—whether you are prepared to give up that right absolutely ? for that is what this policy means—we have it iu black and white. I say X do, not believe that this constituencylegoing loadopt; that. X will not; and rather than dp so I wlllr-as; my friend. Mr. Oluvitsb. used to say—rather reme; into the cooler Bhado of respectability. I have been ft? Liberal all my life, and always understood'that* Liberalism Rave rights to people who before had been ; doprived 'OZ then], but when It comes to depriving; poopio of*rights which they before possessed, it Is a ; most extraordinary imitation of a liberal policy. (Ap- f planso). ~ , ...; !.., , , . 1 •.; The other point, the distribution or 1 .scats, Mr. Stevbmh thinks should bis settled absolutely on the basis of popular

tion ; he sees no ground to fear that the cities will thus obtain an unduly large representation, or that the interests of the country districts will be swamped in such a change. In Parliament, Mr. Stevens is regarded as an authority on finance, and he believes the fiscal proposals of the Government, as they are stated by the Premier, to be impracticable. On this subject, also, wo must allow: him to speak for himself;

I wIU now refer to the Incidence of taxation. The proposal of the present Government on this question so far .as we can gather—a proposal which I take leave to think will have to be modified very considerably. for reasons I shall give you I.teron—-istotake £859,000 eff the customs revenue, mainly off the articles of sugar and tea, and the commonest articles of drapery, such things in fact as may be called the necessaries of life— (Cheers) —and to replace this with an income or property tax. (Cheers.) Now this is a most important question, and I am going to give you my opinion upon the proposal of the Government as the colony is now situated. The state of the finances, as stated by Sir George Grey in the absence of his colleague, was that there was £138,000 deficiency. To this must bo added the votes granted, during the session amounting to £IIO,OOO or thereabouts, which brings it to within a thousand or so of £250,000, or a quarter of a million of money. Now I don't know what the Government have spent during the recess ; we shall not know that until the Parliament again assembles, but. 1 believe wo shall find that there is a very great deficiency. It is as I have said impossible at present to calculate that deficiency, bub suppose it to bo still further added to by taking £359,000, it then becomes a question of addition. Add the deficiency of last year—wiiich, I have shown you, will amount to nearly a qv. iv l er of a million —as nearly as I can get approximate iy —to that of next, caused by the taking this sum, and the deficiency does indeed become a largo one. Now, gentlemen, lam not at all opposed to the taxation of absentees, and of property generally. I advocated this years ago ; but, gentlemen, I wish to point out to you that the finances of the colony have considerably altered since then. If you ask me now if you can put £450.000 on to property with safety to our finance, I say I don’t believe you can. I say more than that; when the Government comes to meet the House# ! say, they they will not, nor will any other Government do it. You wait, gentleman, an I see if they will do it ; that's the best proof. I don’t think they will try.

It is clear to Mr. Stevens that so far from any alteration of the incidence or reduction of taxation being possible, there must be an addition to our burdens in order to sustain the public credit, and he expresses approval of a general property tax. He has glimpses of possible unfairness to Canterbury in the future, from the mode in which the lauds in Otago are affected being practically shut up from sale by the legislation of last year, whilst the land in Canterbury is being rapidly sold ; and he fears that by means of large reservations of land which may be made in Otago for the construction of railways, the West Coast trade may be diverted from Christchurch to Dunedin —a danger the presence of which he accounts for by saying “ that the Govern; “ ment now acts locally and not generally, “and that they do not realise that they “ are now all one.”

It appears to us that the view which Mr. Stevens takes of the policy of the Government is that which is very generally accepted. We think that when the questions of manhood suffrage, redistribution of seats, and change iu the incidence of taxation are removed from the “stump” to the halls of Parliament, they will be made to wear a very different aspect from that in which they are seen at popular meetings under the fervid eloquence of Sir Geoege Geey.