POLITICAL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVII, Issue 115, 8 October 1914, Page 3

POLITICAL.

TH fc S'HUTPORD fiEAT. MB. W. 11. HAWKINS OPENS HLS CAMPAIGN. (By Telfigr.ipfl.—Special Reporter). Stratford, lAflt Night At the Stratford Town Hall last night tbero was a large attendance of electors to hear the opening speech of the liberal candidate, Mr. W. H. Hawkins, who formerly represented Pallia tnia. His ■Worship tho. Mayor (Mr. W. P. Kirkwood) presided and briefly introduced Hie speaker, and read a telegram from Sir Joserph Ward, Loader of the Opposition, wishing the candidato succoss. Mr. Hawkins, on rising, met with a 'very good reception. He k«pt the largt audience thoroughly interested, provin? himself to be a forceful speaker, gifted with the power of trenchant criticism and a past-master in the art of political \oastigation.

REVENL'B. Mr Hawkins compared the increace of revenue in Sir Joseph Ward's last two years and Mr Massey's last two years. The total increase of revenue for the two years 1910-11 and 1911-12 was £1,822,000 under Sir Joseph Ward. The total'increases for the two years 1912-13 and .1913-14 was £1,16?,000 under Mr Massey. So that the increase was in Sir Joßeph Ward's favor by £639,000. It must not be forgotten that the population increased by 94,000 Irom 1910 to 1914.

With the revenue in tlie Consolidated Fund, plus the balance of £807,000 left over from Sir Josoph Ward's last year, 1911-12, it was found on the public records that Mr Massey had for expenditure during his two years of office ending 31st March, 1914, £12,385,000 per annum. Sir Joseph Ward for his last year of bffiee, plus the balance from the previous year, £586,000, had only £11,647,000 to expend. So that Mr Massey had £737,000 per annum more than his predecessor. Mr Massey's two years' expenditure, compared with Sir Joseph Ward's expenditure in Ms last two years increased by £3,224,000. If that statement was not correct he was prepared to withdraw from the contest, Mr Hine undertaking to retire in Mr Hawkins' favor if this statement of the position was accurate. It had been stated by party hacks and in the subsidised Tory papers that the financial position of the Dominion proved by the position of the Consolidated Fund, was in an infinitely stronger position on 31st March last than on 31st March, 1912, when Sir Joseph Ward left offioe. Let us look at the actual figures, quoted from Hansard, No. 12, page, 489, Hon. Jas. Allen's own Budget. The net credit balance on the 31st March, 1912, in the Consolidated Fund, after all liabilities were paid, was £513,535. On the 31st March, 1913, the balance was £420,385. On 3Ut March last it had dwindled to £141,704. So that the net credit balance of the Consolidated Fund was better off bj £371,771 at the 31st March, 1912, than on the 31st March- last, under the Tories. MiHawkins again challenged anyone to disprove those figures, offering to retire from the contest if they wore found to be incorrect.

Sir Joseph Ward's average expenditure for six years from 1906-7 to 1911-12, inclusive, v;is per annum £8,908,134. Mr Massey's average was £11,453,951, an average expenditure of £2,545,817 more than the previous Liberal Administration. The party hack would say, "It ie not fair to compare a- six years' period with a two years' period." Very well, let us take Sir Joseph Ward's last two years and Mr Massey's last two, which proved that Mr Massey expended £8,224, 428 more than Sir Joseph Ward in the two years. Or, take one year; and the result was, Mr Massey expended £1,485, 490 more than Sir Joseph Ward. Coming to the Public Works Fund, which was the borrowing fund, it had been stated over and over again, until a large number of people actually believed it, that tho Public Works Fund was left by Sir Joseph Ward in a practically bankrupt condition, when, as a matter of fact, Mr Allen, in his own lludget, shows that on 31st March, 1912, there was a net credit balance in the Public Works Fund, after all liabilities had been paid, of £ 1,520,000, over a million and a half! INCRKAS): 0," BORROWED MONEY.

The Tory Party hid asked the electors to place Cam in power, amongst other things, to reduce borrowing. How had they reduced borrowing? As a matter of fact, in the two years they had been in power, up to 31st March last, the public debt had increased by £lO, 390,914, whioh was not bad, was it, for a loan-rcduciDg Government? This increase was apart altogether from the money borrowed for the redemption of loans. It was a great record for the party that screamed for place and power to reduce borrowing and expenditure! From 1892 to 1912, 21 years of Liberal Government, the gross public debt increased by an average of £2,147,432. The Tory average per annum was £5,199,957. The loans raised and the money handlad by the Tory Party since they came into power, exclusive of the Myers loan raised in 1912, and also exclusive of loans raised for redemption of loans, was:— February, 1918, three millions; January, 1914, four and a-half millions; borrowed secretly, that is, not by public flotation, £1,223,00*; borrowed from the Post Office Savings Bank, £1,361,000; from the Loan and Mercantile Company, of which Mr Fraser, the Minister for Public Works, U a director, £50,000; total, £10,134,000.

Mr Hawkins said the financial position of the Dominion could lie clearly Been from the following eloquent figures, taken from the Hon. Ja.6. Allen's own Budget. The Torj leaders and papers had been careful and anxious for the past two years to foster in the public mind the idea that Sir Joseph Ward had left the country's finances in a mess. They never, of course, gave any authentic evidence, but merely made tlie general statement. Would they believe it that on the 31st March, 1!>14, after the great •IPandanjanarum of Finance" liftd been at the <helm for nearly two years, the finances were not in as good a position as on 31 et March, 1914. The position was that the net credit balances in the combined Consolidated and Public Works Funds, and loan money to receive, after all liabilities wore provided for, were: Ob 31st March, 1916, over a quarter of a million better thaa on 31st March, 1914, under the Tories. He had deducted £825,0W which had been wrongly added to the liability in connection with the Midland Kailway contract against Sir Joseph Ward, and written off during the yeai.

UNAUTHORISED EXPENDITURE. The Tories raved and tore their hair for years about the unauthorised expenditure trader the successive Liberal administrations. Sow the largest aueas ever recorded for any year in the history of the Dominion were recorded under the JJassey Administration. Sir Joseph Ward's average over his aix years of office was £83,000 per ansitm; the Massi'v-Allen average £140,585, Jn

the last two years of Sir Joseph Ward's term the unauthorised expenditure was £142,689; in the two Tory years £296,000.

To show the political trickery tliat had been resorted to even by the Premier himself, he would refer them to Hansard No. 6, page 489, in the year 1913. In reply to criticism concerning the extravagance of the Tory Party, Mr Massey said that the revenue had increased to a much greater degree than the expenditure. The expenditure had increased, Mr Massey said, by £576,103, and the revenue by £701,478. That was to say, the revenue increased more than the expenditure by £125,375. This was absolutely untrue. The word "incorrect" was not strong enough. His own Finance Minister's balance-sheet proved that the expenditure for the year mentioned had increased by £741,000, and the revenue for the Bame year by £073,000, so that the expenditure had- increased by £68,000 more than the revenue. A little mistake on the part of the Premier of £193,000. Mr Hawkins ra quite satisfied that these figures wore put into Hansard for an ulterior purpose, and.the party hacks were now using them. The comparison of revenue and expenditure for the year 191314, to March 31st, showed an increase of expenditure orer revenue by £248,000.

Mr. Hawkins dealt exhaustively with misstatements and trickery ot the Tory l'arty when quoting figures in connection with the savings bank; and gave some interesting figures in connection with the State Guaranteed Advances' Office, rnd then passed on to the LAND QUESTION.

The candidate spoke at the length on the land question, and dealt particularly with the actual settlement conditions effeced by the Tory Government sonce eomingi into powor, and proved his statements from Mr. iMasscy's 1014 Land Report, page 70, table 33. The Tory papers and the Tory leaders all over the Dominion had been boasting of the extensive land settlement that had Ibten effected by Mr. Massey, but iMr. Massey's own Land Report contradicted absolutely the claims Chug made. Cornfared with Sir Joseph Ward's last year. Mr. Massey had settled 118,285 acres less, and had planed 98 selectors lets on the.land. His record for 1913 was practically as bad. This was the result of the big drum, "settlement, more settlement, and still anore settlement." The forfeitures and surrenders for Sir Joseph Ward's lost year were 383, and undr Mr. Massey's last year 463. That proved that the settlers were not satisfied.

Dealing with the high priea of money in the last two years, Mr. Hawkins Bai/l (hat thd registered mortgages showed that in Sir Joseph Ward's lust year of office the total amount, hint was £17,(>OO,OOO, and of that wag at 5 per cant, and under; the balance at from BV 4 to 10 per cent, by the "sharks." In 1912-13 under Mr. Msissey, the total amount lont was £2'2,000,000. The 'sharks" got £14.000,000 of that, only eight millions being lent at undp.r 5 per «nt. The "sharks" got th<v balance. The candidato replied satisfactorily to gcTeral questions. 'Mr. N. J. King, in moving a vote i'-f tharikß' and confidence in ilr. Hawkins as th« Liberal candidato for the district, expressed the opinion that "he address just delivered was one of t'n finest political speeches heard in Stratford for many years. Enthusiastic applause greeted this remark. The motion was seconded by Mr. E. A. Osmond l , and carried with great cheering.