The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1890. MR BALLANCE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2115, 23 October 1890, Page 2

The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1890. MR BALLANCE.

A Pbess telegram informs us that Mr Bailance will have to fight the toughest battle ever fought in Wanganui to get elected. We cannot believe that there is any danger of Mr Bailance being defeated, and yet we should not be surprised at anything electors may do. Sir Robert Stout was defeated last election, and not only the constituency which rejected him, but also two-thirds of the whole colony have been regretting it, aod have bad reason to regret it,ever since, Mr Bailance has been guilty of the same crime as that for which Sir Robert Stout was defeated. Both have tried to shift the burden of taxation from the shoulders of farmers, artisans, and working-men to the shoulders of banks, money-rings, mortgagees, absentees, and monopolists generally. In 1885 they brought in a Bill to exempt from taxation £3OOO worth of agricultural improvements and implements, and £3OOO worth of machinery employed in industrial pursuits. The effect of this Bill would have been that farmers would not have been taxed for all their fences, out-houses, implements, and improvements generally, and local industries would have been relieved of taxation in the same way. < he Atkinsonians threw out this Bill and increased the taxes on these very classes, yet these very classes have invariably voted for Atkinsonian candidates ever since. We have never been able to understand, and never can, how any farmer could vote against Mr Bailance or Sir Robert Stout. A horse, a dog, or any other animal knows the person who is kind to it, but a New Zealand elector seems to prefer to kiss the hand which strikes him. Here is a plain instance of it: Sir Robert Stout and Mr Bailance hare all along been trying to lessen taxation on farmers and local industries, and increase it on wealth. Sir Harry Atkinson has done the very opposite. He increased taxation on those least able to bear it by between 25 and 30 per cent. There are in this colony 121 persons who own 7,283,102 acres valued, for property tax purposes, at £2 4s 5d per acre, 34 companies who own 2,247,489 acres valued at £1 18s 9d per acre. Thus millions of seres held in blocks of 10,000 acres and upwards escape with a tax of only about two pence per acre, while farmers who have improved their lands pay between tenpence and one shilling and eightpence per acre. Anyone who doubts this can see that it is true by referring to the report of the Property Tax Commissioners which tells such people that they are “ defrauding their neighbors ” by not contributing to the revenue in proportion to their wealth. Now that is bow the Atkinsonian style of taxation pans out, yet Sir Robert Stout, who tried to change it, was defeated at the last election, and if Mr Bailance is now defeated who will ever again have the courage of attempting to rectify this cruel wrong ? These facts do not come to light at election times. The Tories know better than to tell the people that this is the reason they oppose Mr Bailance and Sir Robert Stout. They know it would not do. Instead of telling the truth they manage to get up some cry that has nothing whatsoever to do withJ politics. For instance, the principal cause of Sir Robert Stout’s defeat last election was that he accepted a title. The cry was raised that he had thus become an aristocrat, and that he ought to be put down, and so he was put down. How has he behaved ever since. Simply that be is more democratic than ever. The other day be was the only man of note in N ew Zealand who bad the courage of going on the public platform with the unionists of Dunedin and attacking the H.S.S. Company. We have not the slightest idea as to the cry which is doing duty for weakening confidence in Mr Bailance in Wanganui at the present time, but we know the Tories will not fail to raise some cry. We notice that Mr Carson, his opponent, says that it is the duty of representatives to perform their functions in 1 Parliament as expeditiously as pos-1 sible, and from this we infer that I

possibly the charge against him is that too much time was wasted over the estimates last session. If this is the objection to Mr Ballance we must say no men ever did better work in Parliament than the For instance, Judge or Commissioner Edwards was appointed at a salary of £ISOO a year and £IOOO travelling expenses, making £2500 iu all. It 'was good work to cut that down. A bonus of £IOO was added to the salary of £750 of the Surveyor- General, and a bonus of £l5O to the salary of £6OO of the Property Tax Commissioner. Was it reasonable to cut these down P The Honorable-. Mr Stevens spent between £l4O and £l6O in picnicking with his wife and another lady in Otago, and that had to be exposed. Most of the principal officers in the Civil Service had bonuses or an increase of some kind added to their salaries, with the exception of those who were receiving under £2OO a year, and they got not a single penny. Very possibly Mr Carson would let these things pass in order to make haste home. Mr Carson does not seem to know the A.B.C. of politics. Now, in our humble opinion it was good work to cut down expenditure of this kind, and the fact that between £40,000 and £50,000 was cut down in this way, ought to secure for Mr Ballance and those who followed him the gratitude of the whole colony. It will not secure for him the gratitude of the very mea who were screaming retrenchment three years ago. That is not what they want. They see that it is probable a large majority of Liberal members will be elected this year, and they want to counteract such an influence by depriving them of their leader. This is as mad a thing as they could do. The result must be that the lead will be taken by someone less competent and less experienced, who will probably do mischief instead of adopting a reasonable and sensible policy such as Mr Ballance has enunciated. If we had any means of communicating with the electors of Wanganui we should like to remind them that it is a dangerous thing to cut off the best men, and leave the rank and file without leaders. Mr Ballance is undoubtedly one of the most successful politicians in New Zealand. He was only two or three years in Parliament when he became Colnnial Treasurer. It is universally admitted that this is the most difficult of all portfolios to fill, yet Mr Ballance acquitted himself creditably, and friend and foe admitted that he produced the clearest, the most intelligible, and most cobcise Financial Statement that had hitherto been presented to Parliament. He was Minister of Lands, and certainly no one managed that department so successfully, or did more good in settling people on the land, His character, too, is stainless. Of course we know nothing of his private character, but there is not a speck on his political career. He has the cleanest hands of any politician in New Zealand, and consequently we cannot believe that Wanganui, the heme of Radicalism, will destroy the chances of the Liberal party at the present time by keeping their chief out of Parliament. If they do they will live to regret it. There is not a constituency in the South Island that would not be proud to elect Mr Ballance.