THE BRITISH BUDGET.

Te Aroha News, Volume XXVII, Issue 4439, 22 July 1909, Page 3

THE BRITISH BUDGET.

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—As a result of a fragmentary and one-sided reports and criticisms of the Budget which Mr Lloyd-George is at present piloting through the House of Commons, the impression is current that Mr George’s Income Tax proposals are really an attack upou the rights of property. Such a view or impression is wrong. Here are a few figures in support of my statement. Upon earned incomes the proposed tax is as follows : Under £l6O, free; £l6O to £7OO, from nil to 8d ; £7OO to £2,000, 9d ; £2,000 to £3,000, Is ; £3,000 to £5 000, Is 2d ; £5,000 and above, ls y 2d on the whole! 6d extra on excess of £3,000. Upon unearned incomes the proposed tax is under £l6O, free ; £l6 to £7OO, from nil to Is OU ; £7OO to £2,000. Is 2d • £2,000 to £3,0000, Is 2d ; <£3,000 to £5 000, Is 2d;, £5,000 and ab.ove, Is 2d on the whole, 6d extra on excess of £3,000. A Home writer points out that the bankers and others who protested againßl the Budget proposals represented capital of over £263 millions. He writes “ Nearly all of us are persons of humble means. There are hardly a million of people in the country who enjoy an income of £163 a year. These obscure and poor people, when they see the record of incalculable millions, are naturally inclined' to suppose that the priviledged possessors might do a little iu meeting the needs of the country. They , have a stake in the country; they are protected by the new expenditure ; they are clamouring for it, and why should they not pay a little ?” Mr Asquith has pointed out that Britain, as compared with France and Germany, deals lightly with its rich men. In France the Income Tax upon an income of £4,000 por annum is Is sd. Mr Lloyd George proposes to impose Is 2d ; Prussia levies a tax of 2s upon incomes of £5,000 and over. The writer goes on thus “ The more the subject is discussed, the more clearly will the people of this country see what the fight is about. It is a clear issue between the rich and the poor. The rich wish to shift the bruden on to the people.” “The ordinary business man, struggling with constant difficulties is not burdened. But if the Protectionists have their way they wifi raise the deficit from the additioual sums ( paid by the poor for the necessaries of

life. Hoping that these facts and figures will help to remove misconception.—l am etc.,

(To the Editor)

Observer.

Sir,—Mr Squirrell in yours of the 10th inst. implies that he did not intend to bore your readers with any more Manawaru Co.-op. affairs, except to call “ Vour Own ” a perverter of the truth in regard to the statement about the ■ Chairman’s shares, and yet he has again popped up with nearly a column of 1“ perverted Truth,” which was all thrashed out in the News columns three years ago. Mr Squirrell, some little time since, made an inaccurate statement in ' your columns, and if I remember right his excuse when he subsequently corrected himself was that he had undergone the painful operation of having his leg pulled, which statement, it seems, was accepted as truth as no one was so uncharitable as to call it a ridiculous falsehood. If Mr Squirrell could onlywrench himself away from that m undane, b ltlhavenoidoubt, profitable occupation, ot growing cabbages on the Sabbath and spend a few moments in perusal of the Good Old Book, he might profit by its mai y lessons of charitableness one to another. I think a more up-to-date version of that old proverb Mr Squirrell uses so glibly would suit my purpose better “ let sleeping dogs lie.” I adhere to my former statement regarding the finance ' of the Manawaru Co.-op, the accuracy of which Mr Squirrell has questioned. No error has been made on my part, the figures stand in their Own balance-sheet and are incontrovertible. I again make the statement that no provision has been made in their balancesheet, which they have just issued, for paying a penny interest on the £1,222 18s Id paid up, or a penny written off for depreciation this year. Mr Squirrell knows this; no one better in fact. I notice he does not deny this, ho dare not, but he tries by a q nibble to gull our readers and fool the shareholders by hi’s usual trick of trailing the red herring. Lot me advise him to try something newer, the Smell of the red herring is too well known to have any effect in the desired direction. Then he tries to be J funny and wants to know where I keep my eyes. I can assure him I keep them in the same place as most other folks, and generally use them. I perused the opposite page and noticed the sum of £327 depreciation account, but this has nothing to do with this year’s workings. This is the whole amount written off since the Co.-op. started eight years ago, and should have stood £1,400 instead of a paltry £327. The larger amount is what is usually considered expedient to write off for depreciation in that length of time. No statement of mine could possibly be misconstrued as an accusation of Mr Squirrell, comparing his Company wph any other Company. He knows too well what a comparison would mean. He does m t make, mistakes like that, and I think'it was right down mean of him to suggest that the Editor should put his foot down on a poor fellow, after you managed to get ycur little say in. I thought better of Mr Squirrell,—l am. etc., Manawaruixes.

(To the Editor,)

Sir,-In your issue of tire lath, Mr Squii-" rell asked you to put your foot down on some' correspondence now appearing in .the News re butter factories. I respectfully implore you to do nothing of the sort. Many a lau-di we have reading over the paper for pater who intends to milk about 50 cows duriiW the approaching season. We don’t quite understand Mr Squirrell who wrote the first letter and then turns tail and wants to run away! Stick to your guns, Mr Squirrell, you have our sympathy.' You write a good letter for a £l mse and, Mr Editor, you will, by keeping the .News columns open.for us to ventilate our grievances, and assist in righting wrongs the circulation of your paper. The News., as we are all aware,' is not tied to any set of individuals, so that vested interests wifi not stand in the light of fair play.—l am, New Chum. Manawaru, July 19th, 1909.