The Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1885. THE PROPERTY TAX.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1388, 5 September 1885, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1885. THE PROPERTY TAX.

We have hitherto advocated a property lax in preference to a land and income tax, not because we believed it just, but because it is, in our opinion, the tax that best anils the circumstances ot the colony. Under the property tax only people who have property must payunder a land tax people who have no pioperty, as well as those who hare it, would have to pay. For instance, if a farmer is mortgaged to the full value of his land, as is often the case, the land does not in reality belong to him. It belongs to the mortgagee, to whom it must go if the farmer cannot pay the interest on the sum he has borrowed. Under the land tax this fanner, who in reality owns no land, would have to pay a tax—under the property tax the mortgagee would have to pay it. On the ground that it would be a terrible injustice to man who owns no land to pay a land tax, and that the mortgagee was the man who ought to pay, we have hitherto advocated the property tax. We condemned all proposals to abolish it, but we fully approved of the exemptions which the present Government proposed to make. The Property Tax Assessment Bill, which on last Thurs day night was read a third time, contained a provision to exempt from taxation £3OOO worth of agricultural improvements and implements, and also £3OOO worth of machinery employed in industrial works, Ihe object of this was to relieve improvement made by farmers as well as their agricultural implements from taxation, and also the machinery employed in factories, and if carried into effect it would undoubtedly hare (ended to satisfy the advocates of a land tax. The industrial classes hold, and not without reason, that it is not fair to throw the burden of taxation on industry, while land held in large blocks enjoy, comparatively speaking, immunity from contributing its fair share of the taxes. The provision above alluded to would have silenced that argument to a certain extent, and we should cease to hear of a land tax in future. There can be no doubt but that the proposal was honest, just, and liberal, and if allowed to become law would have been of much value in developing our industrial resources. Major Atkinson and his followers, however, opposed it, and thus marked a well-defined line between Liberalism and Conservatism — the clearest we have had yet brought under our notice. It this exemption were allowed it would result in a large deficit in the sum realisable from property, and consequently the impost on large landowners and capitalists would have to be increased to make it up. Here then the poisonous fang of Conservatism thrust in its narrowsminded selfishness. Tax industry—the means of employing labor, the means of developing our industrial resources ; tax the farmer’s ploughs, harrows, and fences—the result of weary toil ; but do not increase the tux on those to whom an unjust monopoly of the surface of the land—God’s own gift to man—has been given, nor companies whose profits go to foreign countries, nor usurers who live in luxurious extravagance by exacting from overburdened farmers a ruinously high rate of interest. That is the meaning of Major Atkinson’s too successful opposition to the liberal provision alluded to. He wanted to save the land monopolists and capitalists from contributing to the revenue in proportion to the privileges they gain. Henceforth we must look with doubt on the gallant Major’s Liberalism and advanced views on the land question. We are afraid his professions have more of the “ make-believe ” than of reality about them. One thing we warn him of, however. It is possible he may carry this too far. The question of a land tax is gaining ground in this colony, and unless great care is hken it will eventually come to effect being given to it, If the concessions asked for had been granted the danger would hate been to a great extent removed, and the people would cease to object to the property tax, but as it has not been a day may come when the miserable, paltry advantage gained by Major Atkinson now may recoil on the heads of the class of whose cause he is the champion.

THE COUNTIES aCT,

Ihk Counties Act Amendment Bill, which has passed its third reading, contains provisions of interest to this district. Clause 2 reads as follows : “ From and after the passing of this Act no new County shall be constituted except under a special Act of the General Assembly, but nothing herein contained shall he constructed to prevent any union of existing or future Counties. No alteration in the boundaries of Counties shall be made except under a special Act of the Genetal Assembly.” The movement on foot to dissever the Levels District from the Geraldine County will therefore by this clause be prevented, and we are heartily glad of i*. A more selfiih and unfair effort to shirk just liability it would be difficult to imagine than that of the Levela District. The admitted reason for separation is to avoid being rated for the maintenance of the Bangitata Bridge and other large works ia the County. It has been frequently shown that these works were as useful to people living in the Levels and Mackenzie Country Districts us to persons who happen to reside at a nearer distance to them, and it would be maui-

festly unfair that they should he allowed to escape pajing their due proportion of the rates for them. If the separation of the Levels District had been carried out, the result would be that the Temuka, Geraldine, and Mount Peel Road Boards would separate also, and the County would be abolished altogether. The Mount Pee! Road District would then have to maintain the Rangitata Bridge, the Temuka Board the Opihi, Winchester, and other bridges, and the Geraldine Board the bridges within its own district. This would not be fair, as such works are as much a necessity to the whole County as to the districts in which they are situated, and consequently we hold they ought to be maintained by the County out of the County’s funds. What has spoiled County government so far is the permissive clauses which the Act contained. Under the Counties Act people could bring it into force or leave it alone ; districts could separate, and the Act could be suspended altogether. In fact it gave too much liberty ; it was a “ please yourselves ” sort of a law. We hold that laws should not be made on the “ please yourself” principle, A law must be either desirable or undesirable. If desirable, it should not be passed in a manner that would enable a few to render it inoperative ; if undesirable, it should not bo passed at all. It is this “ please yourself” part of the Act which rendered the County Council of Geraldine, comparatively speaking, a useless body. Only for it the Act would have been brought into force in the beginning; and the Mount Cook District would never have separated, and would be paying its honest and fair share of rates to maintain works which are as useful to people living there as to those down here. We are therefore glad that this facility for separation ha# been knocked on the head, and that our neighbors of tho Levels District will not be allowed to shirk responsibilities which justly and honestly they ought to bear. Clause 5 also provides that the operations of the Act shall not be capable of being suspended. The Geraldine County must therefore remain as it ia at present, and, as irrigation and other works are necessary, we think our readers will be glad that this lias passed.

TOWN DISTRICTS.

One of the great drawbacks to Town Districts is that while they possess local government of their own, they still remain a part of the County in which they are situated, and are liable to County rates. Wo expected that the Counties Act which has just passed its second reading would have remedied this but it has not. Clause 3of the Bill reads : “ Every Town Diitrict within a County shall form a separate riding thereof ; and when any County has been divided into the maximum number of ridings allowed by the Act the County Council shall by special order from time to time alter such ridings as provided in section 26 of the Counties Act 1876 Amendment Act 1882 so that each Town District may be constituted a separate riding aforesaid.” Clause 4 reads: “ Every County Council shall, as soon as may be after the commencement of this Act, alter the ridings of the County under their jurisdiction where necessary to gne effect to the provisions of the last preceding section.” According to the report of the proceedings of Parliament which have reached us both these clauses have passed, and Town Districts are to remain part and parcel of the Counties as heretofore, The only privilege they seem to get by the new law is that they are to constitute separate ridings and are to have representatives of their own on the Council. As soon ps the /-ct becomes law therefore, if we understand the subject rightly, llieTcmnka and Geraldine Town Districts will be constituted ridings of the County, and representatives will be elected. If the Municipal Corporations Act which has been shelved had passed this would have been obviated, as under it the Temuka and Geraldine Town districts would have been constituted boroughs. This, however, has been discharged from the Order Paper, and consequently both Town Districts must submit to the inevitable, and continue a part of the County for the present, unless the Upper House makes any alteration in the Counties Act Amendment Bill.