POINTS EXPLAINED.

Taranaki Daily News, 11 October 1918, Page 2

POINTS EXPLAINED.

To the Editor. f re f'y John Lyon', the tact that the Land and Income Tax has increased to nearly five millions has nothing to do with my contention that fifty millions is paying no tax. Would it have been necessary to even put the lew additional shillings per head custom duties on, if it had paid its fair share ? In regard to getting the money lor war purposes, when Sir Joseph Ward brought down his borrowing Bill he used exactly Vhe same lino of argument aa your correspondent, that people would not lend if it was subject to a tax. Next session a compulsory lending clause was added—quite a. climb down, because the fact remains if the Government can compel a man to lend free of tax it can make him lend and pay a tax. Your correspondent ignores the fact that money was lent before the war to local bodies at four and a half per cent, and there is no justification for interest to increase, which it has. The attitude taken up by tho National Government is: We will take your boy but we won't take our money. It looks as if tJhey place a higher value on the money than the boy, which our correspondent quite agrees. I never stated that the man with a large -family would have to pay an additional four or five pounds per annum. Your correspondent says my statement in. regard to ephos phosphate is about as truthful as the rest of my letter. Kindly look up the May nineteen ihundred aud seventeen issue of the Journal of Agriculture and the official figures quoted is three pounds seventeen shillings landed cost. He thinks the price quoted to me by the merchant of seven pounds ten shillings per ton on the truck Wellington was a pound or two less. I don't think I know, as the National Government allows shipping companies to increase freights from one ihundred to nearly six hundred per cent. It is impossible to get cheap manure. One can get plenty of manure at a price. It is the price lam objecting to. It might be news to Mr Lyon to know when the discussion took place in the House I think every Labor member condemned it. Mr McCombs, who is what we are told is an 1.W.W., Red Fed, etc., called it one of the most unjust class taxes ever levied on one section of the fanning community, sad that the hardest-work-ing section. If it is true that the Labor forced that on the Government it shows the courage and their idea of justice. When we consider that in a House we have about forty-five members out of eighty, who are fanners, it is useless for us to lpok to then! to protect lis. As for proihibition, considering that for the last twenty or twentyfiv» years they have been trying to get the bare majority, now a candidate offers that they don't want it. J.„don't quitef understand their attitude. The prohibition party have nothing to thank either Wie Liberal, Reform, or National Governments, for the last-named, during the war, have done nothing.—l am, etc., LEONARD HILL, Hurw'orth', 9th October.