Rangitikei Advocate. FRIDAY, APRIL 23, 1909. EDITORIAL NOTES.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9426, 23 April 1909, Page 4

Rangitikei Advocate. FRIDAY, APRIL 23, 1909. EDITORIAL NOTES.

REFERRING to the mortgage tax. and the question of whether it has driven capital not of New Zealand, the Wairarapa Daily Times remarks: —“The great point, however, is that capital has been driven out, and no one suffers more by its loss than the working man. The policy of the Liberal Government for many years past has been to tread on the toes of bankers, insurance agents, and loan and investment companies. The Liberal Government expected that by unlimited borrowing it could dispense with bankers and loan companies The scheme succeeded for a time, bnt now banks and loan companies stop advances and the Government is morally bound 'to step into the breach and supply all the money that is required. Its socialistic policy has broken down, its own finances will not stand the strkin of further advances, and it is largely responsible for the financial crisis which now exists, for the depression in trade, and for the slackness observable in all business enterprises. Onr Liberal Government has lost the confidence of business men throngnout New Zealand, and if it has not lost the confidence of the workers it is because the said ’workers do not quite grasp the fact that their present troubles arise from the misgovernment which has driven capital out of the land. ’’

THE following little anecdote appears in a contemporary; —“Protection to native industry was the demand of a sturdy settler that the Minister for Labour met at Maburi, “Look at that,” he exclaimed, pointing to a waggon load of glazed earthenware pipes standing on the road “Don't you think theke things ought to pay a duty?” aiked the astonished Minister. “Well, ypu see. they interfere with the sale of'our timber for culverts.” “Ah!” said the Minister, “but don’t you think the [pipe-maker and his workmen have just as good a right to be considered as the settler with his timber. You won’t find me bringing one industry into collision with another if I cau help it.” Unfortunately the Minister has brought industries into collision, and there is a duty of uo less than 20 per cent on”earthenware pipei. The settler who cannot sell his timber for culverts, because earthenware pipes are made in some of the towns ha? to pay the 20 per cent, on the pipes used by the local bodies. Ont of the rates he pays, the 20 per cent, is taken. The settler’s industry cannot be protected, hut directly or indirectly he has to pay for the “protection” of all the other industries.

WHILE Ministers, are exercising their brain power in devising means for throwing more of the general burdens on the shoulders of the ratepayers, it is interesting to note that the financial stringency is compelling representatives of the ratepayers to i can the expenditure more closely. In former days the expense of maintaining hospitals was not borne by the local bodies and there was no call upon them for charitable r. I. The hospitals were maintained by the humane and public spirited and the charitable attended to all cases of genuine poverty and distress. Later on the. Government shirked its duties and threw upon the ratepayers the task of paying for these things. It might have been expected that when old-age pensions were provided the cost to the local bodies for charitable aid would have become less; also that-in proportion as Government escaped expenditure by compelling the local bodies to perform its duties, it would have reduced general taxation. But it has largely increased general taxation, and is hungrily stretching out its hands for more, while the cost of charitable aid is becoming absolutely oppressive to the ratepayers, 'and the money required for it would suffice to do much public work that cannot now be done for lack of funds. We observe that at last meeting of Hawke’s Bay County Council the" chairman, in the course of his remarks on the finances, stated that “the increase in the hospital and charitable aid levies year by year had become a heavy charge on the council’s revenue. This year the amount will he £1154 in each case, or a total of £2308. For the eight years ending March 31st, 1903, the charitable aid levy averaged £3BO a year. It is now £1154, or an increase of 300 per cent. Taking into account the existence of old age pensions, this increase seems excessive.’’ Is it not time the local bodies and all ratepayers interested, demanded some better and more economical scheme for assisting the needy?