South Canterbury Times, SATURDAY, JULY 15, 1882.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2903, 15 July 1882, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, SATURDAY, JULY 15, 1882.

Our morning contemporary is prompt to defend and justify the-proposals of the-Treasurer re National Assurance, It complains that the scheme “ met with very unworthy treatment at the hands of the House ” and it falls particularly foul of Sir George Grey for his deliverances on the subject. We are not blind to the alluring appearance of this scheme. But we cannot allow either the Treasurer or the “ Timaru Herald” to delude the public mind about this matter, without raising a note of protest in the interest of those whom the Bill chiefly concerns. There is at the bottom of this scheme a benevolent intention, we , have no doubt. It is, as we admitted in a previous issue, a bold conception, and the Major has shown considerable ability in putting it forth. But here eulogy ends and criticism fairly begins. Great as the scheme is we do not think it is the best means of meeting and overcoming pauperism. Pauperism is an evil whose existence we all deplore, and whose growth in this new community we all dread. And that tho function of warding it off belongs fairly to the people themselves, we hold to bo indisputable. We also regard excessive drinking as an evil, and the abolition of the custom as the duty of the people themselves. But in both cases we are loth to call in the aid of legislative enactment to take the lead. It is a principle that every succeeding year proves to be a sound one, that legislation to be effective in .the long run must never be in advance of public opinion. A law should be the exposition, the fixing down, of public opinion, it oan never be its leader. Popular feeling will recognise moderate legislation as embodying its own sentiments, it will not submit to be forced by legislation which outruns it. The two cases are distinctly parallel ones. Public feeling has not yet shown itself to have reached the point, from which the Treasurer takes his departure in propounding this scheme of National Insurance. Until it does so, the proposal is premature. So far of the Bill, considered as an abstract piece of legislation. Coming down to a discussion of its particular merits, it may be said :—lt bears a sufficient outward aspect of benevolence, which may possibly win it a large measure of support in the House. The provident principle is highly commendable, and there is no subject within the scope of those who desire to lead beneficially,’ public opinion, more worthy to be taken up, and to be impressed on the popular mind than this. But when it comes to compelling by law everybody to contribute to a fund, out of which’ the destitute, the disabled, and the superannuated shall be relieved and prevented from becoming a burden on the State, it is incumbent upon us to examine narrowly the immediate effects of the enactment, which may, for all we know, be to create a new evil as bad as, or worse than, that it seeks to remedy. There are two objections to this scheme. In tho first place it is another means of replenishing the coffers of tho State at the expense of the people. Now it is a distinguishing characteristic of certain governments in New Zealand to place the burden of taxation unfairly. Heaven knows, the poor man pays enough to the revenue through the Customs. Everything he eats and drinks and wears is taxed. His struggle to live is hard enough, in all conscience. To impose this additional tax upon his earnings is to add' the proverbial last straw. The |,enormous increase of life-policy holders during the last few years, the anxiety of tho persons formerly improvident and in-

different to acquire land, and the comparative prominence which is now held in the popular mind by prudence and economy show, very plainly, that public opinion is coming (possibly by slower steps than those of legislative genius, but surely) to a high appreciation of the necessity for.economy and provision for the future which must eventuate in an entire social regeneration, All that can be done to foster The growth of this new-born characteristic of the society should be done, but let the law keep back and follow it, not rush ahead of it and raise discontent which tends to impede the good growth. And most assuredly this policy of drawing the earnings of the workers of the community into the Treasury will bo a vexatious and troublesome thing. This scheme is the latest instance of it. In the second place, the taxation here proposed is distinctly oppressive ; and, while it reduces the already poor means of the people, it kills that self-reliance which is endeavoring to foster, and which reason approves. For it makes the State do the work which, is the legitimate function of the people themselves. To tax the earnings of say young women, who are but slenderly paid, and who are often the sole support of aged or very young relatives ; to take from their weekly wage of fifteen or twenty shillings, something like an eighth of it to go to this fund; for the Government to have the use of this extorted ready money, has very suspicious flavor of Russian tyranny about it. The State had better dictate the fate of wages next. In short we have had enough of legislative experiments at the expense of the working man, quite enough legalised bushranging. And while all this is going on, pray what is to be done with the capitalists—what with the monopolists who hold the best of the land against the people who are its rightful possessors. It is monstrous that they should repose upon their wealth so easily acquired, and look down in lordly scorn upon the toiling masses whose every shilling is won by hard toil, and, above all-it ismonstrous that a Government should lend itself to the wholesale robbery of these latter while the former enjoy their'luxury untaxed. Had the Government the interests of the people at heart, they would have long ago imposed a land tax the only tax which is.fair and equitable. The miserable objection was of course raised that this would be very hard on the squatter; that he would often have to pay for unproductive land. By all means let him do so, and he would then know something of the hardships of the poor man whose bread' also is not buttered on both sides. With all possible admiration for Major Atkinson and his scheme, we prefer to let the question stand over for some time to come, and to say the truth we* shall not be sorry if we never hear any more about it, for it is a specious and unjust thing.