Te Aroha AND Ohinemuri News SATURDAY, JULY 3, 1909. THE “AUCKLAND STAR” AND TAXATION.

Te Aroha News, Volume XXVII, Issue 4431, 3 July 1909, Page 2

Te Aroha AND Ohinemuri News

SATURDAY, JULY 3,1909. THE “AUCKLAND STAR” AND TAXATION.

this above all—to thine oven self be true, And 1 1 must follow as the night the day Thou canst not then be false to any man Shakespeare.

In its if sue of last Saturday the <l Star 11 had a loader upon “ Too Much Rothschild,” a term used by Mr LloydGeorge in his discussion of the Budget recently, in the House of Commons. In these days, when Socialism, not to say Anarchism, is in the air, it is fashionable, and even popular in gome quarters, to assail capitalists. It is a dangerous game, however, for the Star to play. As well go about laying dynamite as instil into the minds of the masses hatred, suspicion and distrust of the rich. It only requires to be done persistently for a while until the ideas crystaliee into beliefs, and then, becoming predominant, the beliefs will impel men to action that might jeopardise society. We do not for a moment think that the Star would intentionally teach political or gcopomip doptrinps dangerous to Society ; but that is the tendency of such cries as “ Too Much Rothschild.” We dissent in toto from the Star’s dictum that “ the supreme test to which legislation of this type [i.e. the new Budget proposals of taxation] ghould always be subjected ” [is] *‘the gqo4 for the greatest possible punabep” A fc t ft r st sight it seems fair enough, but it is not. The supreme test of all taxation and of all legislation is the greatest good of the whole of the people. That should be the aim of all legislative proposals and efforts. Anything short of it is unfair. All the people have a right to be considered. No class in the community, no individual rich or poor, should be ignored, overlooked or unpared for by legislators, T° say as the Star does, is to open the flood gates of oppression, spoliation and persecution. “ The greatest possible number,” may be a very large majority in a State; but no majority includes the minority to which its in terests are opposed- Majorities have jn past times been guilty of the most glaring cruelty and injustice. It was a majority that vociferously pried out against the Holiest of the Holy, “ Crucify Him, Crucify Him.” Not this Man, but Barabbas!” Now jflnrubbas was a robber. A majority condemned ffalfleo, and a majority condemned Dreyfus. De Tocqueville f ‘ If PF©* liberty is lost in America, the fault will be with the omnipotence of the majority, in driving the minority to despair.” We expect high-class flojly journals like the Star to beware of mi.4eading the working classes into the false belief that wisdom goes by numbers, and that- the pight of a majority, hotfCW great; fe necessarily right. Prophets, apexes, soar* tyrs and others have had to defy ma jorities. Luther, the solitary monk that shook the world, did so, Pius VII., at the beginning of tha nineteenth century, 1800 to 1814, nobly and fearlessly defied Napoleon the Great. The State is, under Divine Providence) the d'sponser of Justice. All are entitled to that, and any legislative measure that ignores or unjustly overrides a minority is wrong. If, for instance, in a Roman Catholic country like Spain, a law were parsed allowing only to Catholics the right to worship God according to their consciences, would that bo a “ supreme test,” or fair to the few Protestants ? Or if in England, where Protestants are in a majority, a law were passed depriving Roman Catholics of religious liberty, would that be just f No ! but it would be the religion of “ the greatest possible number,” because Catholics would submit to die in Smithfield fires rather than deny their faith. Therefore our creed is, u The greatest good of all ('’ That is the goal we aim at. Again, the Star seems to gloat over the prospects of Mr Lloyd-George carrying his measure for the taxation of the u unearned increment ” of land. We believe that land in England has not borne its fair share of taxation in the past, and that it can and should have more. For instance, Mr Goshen stated in Parliament a few years ago, when speaking op Imperial burden and taxation of land, that “ the amount paid by land alone in England is 51- per cent ; in Holland, ; in Austria, |; ip France, 18A ; and in Belgium 20£ per cent ” Hence we would tax land in England much higher; but when the Star feels giad owe* the so-called “ unearned increment” of lapd, it should remember the lf unearned increment ” of interest on mortgage money, through

some financial disturbance in America or London, the borrowers in New Zealand. many of them hard-working: farmers, have to pay 6, 6| and even 7 per cent, instead of 5 per ewt, as tl © have had to do piite lately. Did the mortgagees cause that increment ? Such a rise of about two per cent, has meant that certain small farmers have had to stint their families of des'ral 1 >, if not necessary, things. There are other “unearned increments” besides those of land and interest. There r is the “ unearned increment ” of certain trade monopolies. Let the btar, let all of us, be fair and just, and treat all alike; but not single out land owners as the greatest of offenders. “ Fair play is a jewel.” Lot us have justice though the heavens fall. “If the State is going to absorb the future unmerited increase of rents, it seems hut equity,” says Professor Devas, “ that the State should give a guarantee against all future unmerited decrease.” A State might divert a road or a railway, and thereby ruin many innocent persons. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.