South Canterbury Times, SATURDAY, JUNE 25, 1881.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2578, 25 June 1881, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, SATURDAY, JUNE 25, 1881.

The Member for Timaru is a courageous man. He moved in the House of Kepresentatxves yesterday afternoon that all license fees form part of the colonial revenue. Only five members voted for the motion, and fifty-four against it. Mr Turnbull must have taken the House by surprise. The time is certainly not favorable for depriving local bodies of any source of revenue. The great difficulty which the present Parliament will have to solve is to find them additional funds. Although an overwhelming majority might have been expected against Mr Turnbull, it is nevertheless surprising that he had not more supporters. One would have thought the temperance party would have voted for the motipn. The reason of this may not appear clear at the first glance. But it will be perfectly apparent when it is borne

in mind that a clause for elective licensing benches has been introduced. Every year, should the Bill as it now stands become law, the ratepayers will be called upon to elect those who will have it in their power to grant or refuse applications, for renewals or fresh licenses. Now, the fact of the fees being part of the local revenue will materially influence the' decision of the ratepayers. It is obvious that the more money is derived from this source, the less will be the burden on the voters for local improvements. Direct taxation, though sound in principle, is particularly obnoxious to the bulk of colonists. In new countries there is a vast amount of work to be undertaken by the local bodies. Hitherto, in New' Zealand, they have been largely aided by the land fund and voles of the Legislature. Notwithstanding the desire of the present Parliament to give material assistance to local government bodies, it is to be feared that in future they will have to raise their revenue chiefly by rates. There is no help for it. The money is not available from any other source. This was fully recognised on all sides during the debate on Thursday on local government. Mr Ormond is the most bitter opponent of the present system. He is looked upon as the coming leader of the Middle Party, which some people imagine is to assume the reins of power after the next general election. Mr Ormond’s trump card is local government. He even wants Parliament to dissolve almost immediately, so that he may make that a hustings’ cry. During the discussion on Mr Murray’s motion, Mr Ormond said he had no idea what would be the best finance. All he could say was that direct taxation was the proper method. That simply means the levying of rates. Such being the probable state of affairs in the future, is it likely that the ratepayers would deprive themselves of such a large source of revenue as the publican’s licenses ? According to population, there are perhaps as few licensed houses in Timaru as in any town in the colony. Yet, here the publicans’ fees swell the revenue of the Corporation by about £SOO. Does anyone for a moment doubt that such a consideration would not largely influence the votes of burgesses. It is a frequent and true saying that the British taxpayer’s principles are mostly regulated by his pocket. The temperance party made a mistake, from a teetotal point of view, in not voting for Mr Turnbull’s motion.

Our own opinion decidedly is that all license fees should go to the local bodies. Mr Turnbull did not proceed far enough when he said that as the colony pays the cost of police and gaols, which would not be necessary if there were no drinking habits, it is only fair that the colony should receive all revenue from the liquor traffic. The General Government, however, does not bear the full cost of relieving the distress and poverty caused by the consumption of alcohol, though it receives the lion’s share in the shape of Customs duties, of the revenue derived from the sale of spirits. Now, if the Government in its Hospital and Charitable Aid Bill had undertaken the entire cost of relieving the poor and afflicted, there would have been good reasons for the adoption of the course recommended by Mr Turnbull. But the General Government has no intention of doing any such a thing. As the case at present stands, the colonial revenue is most benefitted by the trade in strong drinks. The expense of police and gaols does not nearly amount to so much as the revenue derived. In fact the local bodies receive too little for the responsibility thrown upon them in the way of having to afford relief through improvident habits directly traceable to drink. Looking at the question in all its aspects, the local government bodies are fairly entitled to the license fees. Their transference to the Colonial Treasury would have had an important bearing on local option. That the temperance party did not follow Mr Turnbull shows ‘that even they saw the injustice and inexpediency of depriving the local bodies of their comparatively small proportion of the revenue accruing by the sale of spirits.