The Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, MAY 19, 1888. LIBERAL POLICY.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1739, 19 May 1888, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, MAY 19, 1888. LIBERAL POLICY.

Mb Ballance has (according to the N.Z. Times) “specially written” for a Napier contemporary an article setting forth the political programme which he advocates for adoption. Its “ planks ” include a Land Tax and a “Land Bank,” together with the following:—“The abolition of plural voting; the reduction of taxation on the necessaries of life, such as tea and sugar; the establishment of technical school as part of the national system of education; to operi the doors of the University to everyone without the condition of residence ; to bring the Legislative Council into harmony with manhood suffrage; to give all taxpayers, including householders and lodgers, a voice in municipal government ; to make the Commission of the Peace elective; to give municipalities the right to hold land for industrial purposes.” We have not seen the “ specially written ” article of Mr Ballance, but we are inclined to think that the quotation made by the N.Z Times is a kind of parody on it. “ All taxpayers or ratepayers, as they ought to be called, including householders and lodgers,” have “ a voice in Municipal Government” at present, and for Mr Ballance to say that ho would extend such a priviledge to them is an absurdity on the face of it, of which he could not be guilty. What he said in all probability is that he would extend it to “ householders and lodgers ” who are not ratepayers, and that would, we think, be carrying Liberalism further than there is any need for. As for a land or national bank, we have come to the conclusion that it is useless to speak about it, although we know that Mr Ballance has always been in favor of it. Our experience now is that every selfish little usurer who has twopence halfpenny to lend would be up in arms against it, while not one farmer in twenty would support it. Farmers always support those who pick their pockets, but never those desirous of befriending them. They are as easily fleeced as their own sheep, and for anyone to try to do them any good as a class is labor in vain. The late election in this district gave people a good opportunity of forming an opinion as to whether the people were in favor of a National Bank or not. On one side was a most enthusiastic supporter of the National Bank, on the other a king amongst moneylenders. 1 he latter won, and the conclusion we came to is that the National Bank had a good deal to do with it. From beginning to end it was almost the only subject on which questions were asked of the candidate who supported it; it appeared to be the weak point in his armor, for everyone attacked it, and many persons exhibited a good deal of feeling in their questions. The fact that it was the first article in his creed irritated a good many, and made them work more energetically against him, while we honestly believe that it did not secure for him one vote. It is, therefore, useless to pursue the subject any further, although there is not the slightest doubt but that it would be the means of making this colony rich and prosperous. Sir Robert Stout, at the time he was Premier of the colony, said that to nationalise the note issue would be equal to a loan of £1,000,000 a year without interest, Here we are at our wits’ end to raise revenue, and there is £1,000,000 a year for u« in a National Bank ! This, however, is only a very small part of the advantages it would yield, but, as we have said, it is useless to discuss it. So long as farmers tremble for fear of doing anything which would frighten capital away; so long as they cannot see that it is impossible for one per cent, of the capital invested here to leave the country,solongasthey are willing to vote for money-lenders, it is useless to talk about it, and consequently we have given the matter up. The National Bank may possibly come in handy hy-and-by. just to ward off national bankruptcy, but it will not be adopted so long as we can beg, borrow, or steal, a penny in any other way. Then a villainous, scoundrelly paper money scheme will be adopted —that is, if capitalists find it impossible to do without it —and under this scheme the money-lenders will rob the people in a manner ten times worse than at present. Paper money with gold at its hack, and, issued on sound principles, is the money of civilisation; paper money issued in a time of panic, as in America, and made a legal tender, could only prove a great curse to any country. But capitalists would make their money out of such paper by discounting it; they would in this way rob the people, as they did in America, and, unless we are mistaken, it will come to it yet in this colony. If our products remain at the present low prices for a few years, it is impossible to conjecture what will happen. The tide may turn any day i

—although there is no indication of it—and we may yet float on. But it is useless for us to hide from ourselves that we are sinking deeper yearly, and that we have ourselves to blame for it. We allow ourselves to be made fools of by capitalists; we consent to be their puppets, and we dance to any tune they like to play for us. In their greed and avarice they have ruined the colony, and, in our stupidity, we have allowed them to do it. There is nothing now for it but to bear it.

POLITICS. On Thursday, the 10th inst.. Parliament met, and we were told that business would go on at once, that the Address-in-Eeply would, contrary to custom, be taken next day, that the Electoral Bill, the Chinese Bill, and policy Bills would be brought down at once, and the business pushed forward with all possible speed. So as to expedite business new rules were to be introduced under which representatives would be gagged. Josh Billings used to say that a hen was the most sensible of living creatures, because she never cackled until she bad laid her egg. It would have been well for the Ministry had they acted on the same principle as. the hen. They cackled a great deal, and this makes their position more humiliating now when they have actually nothing before the House. On Friday, the llth, the House met to discuss the Address-in-Eeply, but so contemptibly silly was the Governor’s Speech that no one thought it worth raising a discussion on, and there being nothing else to do the House had to adjourn. On Tuesday there was nothing to discuss but the Chinese Bill, and both sides being pretty well agreed on that it was disposed of in a few minutes. On Wednesday private members introduced suflieient to keep things going. On Thursday there was nothing for the House to discuss, except to amend the errors of last year. The Loan Bill was brought iu last year when some of the members had left, and it was passed in an unworkable manner, resulting, it is said, in a loss of £60,000 or £70,000. What we desire to point out is the waste of time that has thus taken place through the weakness of the Government. We have not the slightest doubt but that towards the end of the session, when members are tired and weary and desirous of getting home, the Government will pour in upon them Bill after Bill in quick succession, and that if anyone then wishes to discuss them he will be denounced as an obstructionist. This was the way last session. No one could open his mouth without having Sir H. Atkinson accusing him of obstruction, aud it will be found that history will repeat itself before the end of this session. One virtue the Stout-Yogel Ministry had, and that was to lay bare their policy early in the session. Sir Harry Atkinson’s system has always been not to show his hand until the eleventh hour, aud he still adheres to it. Hie is Government by trickery and fraud, and it is time the country had enough of him. But the country is young, and it is said everything that is young is foolish. It is doubtless youthful foolishness which makes the country tolerate Sir Harry Atkinson. BORROWING. In his speech in Temuka Mr Ehodes said, “We must congratulate ourselves that wo succeeded in getting a pledge inserted in the Loan Act preventing further borrowing for the next three years.” This he said after having made a very lame excuse for having sanctioned further borrowing to the tune of £2,400,000. But it so happened that this very provision has been a most mischievous one. It has prevented the Government from placing the loan on the English market ever since, and now it is positively asserted the loss to the country amounts to £60,000 or £70,000. Is it on having been instrumental in doing this Mr Rhodes congratulated himself? The Act of last session is now repealed, and in the new Act the provision to prevent further borrowing for three years has been expunged. The mistake has, it is supposed, resulted in swallowing up the greater part of the £79,000 which Major Steward desires to have set apart for promoting homes on the land for agricultural laborers. Perhaps Mr Ehodes will congratulate the country on this fact. According to Sir Harry Atkinson, he has borrowed £400,000 for three years at 5 per cent, and half a million has been raised in some sort of way by the Agent-General in London, The million loan has therefore been very nearly eaten up beforehand. It is remarkable, too, that Sir Harry Atkinson had to go out of the usual groove to raise the wind. The Bank of New Zealand has hitherto done all the Government business, but now, when the Government found themselves in straitened circumstances, it was to the Colonial Bank they had to go. This does not look well for the Bank of New Zealand.

ABO W HEN U A TOWN BOARD. Thjeue can be no doubt but that the ratepayers of Arowhenua made just complaints against their Board last Wednesday evening. They had certainly some cause for complaint. With regard to the tendering, it appears that three persons tendered for the same job, and of course only one of them could get it. One tendered

at one shilling, and the other two at ninepence per yard for shingle, and consequently the contest lay between the lowest tenderers. One of these lived in the town, and was one of its ratepayers, the other was an outsider, and ho got the contract. And the Board consider they acted in the interest of the ratepayers. We should like to know the process of reasoning by which they have come to this conclusion. There was one ratepayer, at any rate, in whose interest they did not act, and that was the ratepayer who did not get the job. They thus injured one of their ratepayers, and perhaps others who would have worked for him, but they did not the slightest good to any of the other ratepayers, because the local man was ready to do the work as cheaply as the outsider. If the outsider’s tender had been lower than the local man’s tender, they would have acted right and proper in giving it to the lowest tenderer, but the two tenders being equal they ought without hesitation to have given the contract to the man who would pay a part of the money back in rates. It is absurd to say that this deter outsiders from tendering in future. Why should it ? It is enough for the outsiders to know that they will get the work if they tender at a lower rate than the local men, and it is neither a wrong nor an injustice to them not to get it when they are not lower. In the case referred to, when both the local man and the outsider tendered at ninepence per yard, what right bad the outsider to get it any more than the local man? None whatever. They both stood on equal terms, aud every j sensible man would have said the Board had done right had they given the preference to the man who was paying them rates. They drew lots for it, they said, in order to give all fair play, and to encourage outsiders. Has it not occurred to them that it is possible such treatment might discourage “ insiders ” tendering, Mr Fletcher, who was the local tenderer, was well-known to them, he had worked for them before, and given satisfaction, and certainly it was an extraordinary thing not to have given him the contract.