South Canterbury Times. THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 1882.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2925, 10 August 1882, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 1882.

A very animated debate on the NoConfidence motion arising out of the Loan Sills took place last night in the House. The Treasurer of course drew a moving picture of the condition into which the colony would lapse if his Government’s policy were not carried oat, and constructed as good a case for himself as be could have been expected to do. The Government seems to be smitten with a borrowing mania. There can be no possible objection to farther borrowing, provided only it is carried out under certain distinctly specified and generally approved conditions. The intentions of Government in regard to the allocation of the money about to be raised are not properly defined or generally understood, and the matter of bringing forward the proposals has been anything but creditable. As Mr Montgomery pointed, out, the House had been kept in a fog about the question. In the Financial Statement a Loan Bill was spoken of, but in the Public Works Statement another cat was brought out of the bag, and two Loan Bills were furtively put forward. Was this honest, straightforward conduct on the part of Government 7 Did it not show that while professing allabsorbing interest in the welfare of the colony, they were in reality only feeling their way among members, and gathering supporters 7 We may congratulate Ministers on their tact, their diplomacy, but what shall we say of their manliness and honesty 7 Why all this caution, this ace-concealment 7 Let the Government obtain authority from the country to raise the money, and then let them allocate it as they thought most desirable iu their own interests. That was the sort of thing the Government wanted. But there are those in the House who had no notion of allowing things to be carried out in this autocratic and questionable manner. The North Island line for example, borrowed money was to be spent on that “to carry it southward,” But in what direction, was not said—of course not. Then how about the Picton extension 7 Who was to benefit by the enormous expenditure proposed for that 7 For the East and West Coastlines of the Middle Island no provision had been made. It seems that this bait was not necessary to be laid, in the Ministerial interest.

The House might indeed have been beguiled into allowing the Government to settle the allocation themselves, had it not been for the discreditable manner in which the loan proposals had been pnt forward, the extreme and absorbing solicitude of Government to conserve Ministerial interests, before any others were considered. Their conduct in that has awakened suspicion on all sides and rendered it necessary that their whole action should be challenged. We look upon fresh borrowing as a most important subject, and we must at least have no suspicion of the motives of those who propose to carry out that policy. It must not be forgotten, if we do go in for new loans, that while we circulate money, employ labor, and revive the internal commerce of the country, we saddle ourselves with heavy interest. Now who is, who ought, to pay this—on whose shoulders should the burden of repayment fairly be placed ? Not on the working man, as Government would unhesitatingly place it, but on the big properties directly and primarily benefited by the expenditure. It is idle to say the community at large is benefited and should therefore pay. The community reaps gradual benefit. The property holders are immediate gainers. Let the burden of repayment then be immediately placed on the directly interested. It is to be hoped the country will see this matter in its proper light, now that Mr Montgomery has removed the scales from their eyes, which Government had so carefully placed there.