PRE-SESSIONAL ADDRESS.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2514, 10 June 1893, Page 2

PRE-SESSIONAL ADDRESS.

MR A. E. G. RHODES AT TEMUEA. Mr A. E. G. Rhodes, M.H.R., addressed a meeting of his constituents in the Volunteer Hall, Temuka, on Thursday eveuing. There was a large and representative attendance. The chair was taken by Mr James Blyth, chairman of the Town Board, who in opening the meeting said it was a customary thing for members to address their constituents prior to the opening of Parliament, and they were met there that evening at Mr Rhodes's invitation to hear some account of the position of politics. He had no need to ask for him a courteous hearing. He had represented them now for some years and provad himself a good member, and a careful and keen watcher from his side of the House. Since their last meeting he regretted that the country had lost such valuable statesmen as Sir Harry Atkinson and Mr Ballanco. There were certain changes, too, in the condition of things. In place of the Government selling land, they now found them buying in large areas. About this policy there was a diversity of opinion, but doubtless their member would enlighten them upon the subject. He should not detain them, but ask their attention for Mr Rhodes. (Applause.) Mr Rhodes, who on rising was applauded, said according to my usual custom I have asked you to meet me in this hall to give an account of my stewardship. 1 was coming down a little earlier, when the lamented death of Mr Ballance made me alter my plans, and I then thought it better to wait until the eve of the session. It is very sad to see leaders of the people like the late Sir Harry Atkinson and the Hon. J. Ballance sacrificing their lives by their devotion to the public service, when, in both cases, rest might have saved them, but they kept at their posts and died in harness. And I am certain that both will be long remembered by the people of New Zealand. And in speaking of public men who have recently died, I should like to take this opportunity of referring to Sir F. Whitaker. Last election charges were made against him with reference to the Bank of JS'ew Zealand; well, when Mr Ballance came into power and had access to the Government papers he publicly stated there were no foundations for these charges. The FINANCIAL STATEMENT last session was brought down at a very early stage of the session, and showed the finances for the year ending Marcb, 1892, were in a vory sound condition. This, of course, was entirely due to the administration of the previous Government, who had increased taxation and reduced expenditure, and we are now getting the benefit of the finances being put on a good footing. The present Ministry have made no material alteration of the tax j s, except collecting the same amount as had previously been received under the property tax from a rather different class, and although they deserve a ■ certain amount of credit for not increasing the expenditure, they have not merely decreased the expenditure, and our surplus is really due to the better condition of the people, who are paying more through the customs, railways, etc. The present Minister inherited a surplus of £143,965, and that has gradually increased, and we are now informed that there is a surplus for the year just ended (after transferring £200,000 to the Public Works Fund, and paying Land Fund deficit of £28,502) of £283,779. If so this is a splendid achievement of the readjustment of the colony's finances by Sir H. Atkinson. I voted against the high protective duties, but supported the late Government in their retrenchment schemes ; and it i? amusing to find the present Premier denouncing Sir H. Atkinson for increasing the taxation through the customs, when he himself supported the increase. Great credit was taken in the Financial Statement for the state of the public debt, which the Premier claimed to have reduced by £117,282, and I notice that many Government supporters keep reiterating this portion of the Statement through the colony, and no doubt it was put in the Statement for electioneering purposes. But unfortunately it is not true. The gross debt of +he colony on the 31st March, 1891, was £33,830,350; and on the 31st March, 1892, £38,713,068; an apparent decrease of £117,282. Anybody who knows anything of the Colony's finances understands that this is not a true statement of the real debt, as there are sinking funds accumulated for the purpose of paying off this debt. Theso accumulations were large on the 31st March, 1891, and as these had been col* lected for the purpose of paying off this debt, the real debt of the colony was the gross debt le3s this amount of accumulated sinking funds. j\ very considerable amount of these funds were used during the year for various purposes, and at the end of March, 1892, if we take the gi'oss debt, less the accumulated sinking funds that are left, we find the actual net debt to have been increased by £318,000. For instance, if you borrow, say, £SOO from anybody, undertaking to pay a certain sum a year into a savings bank to accumulate to pay it off, and then, say, when you have accumulated £3OO, although your gross d*;»bt is £SOO, your not debt is only £2OO. If you now get authority from your creditor to release the £3OO in the savings bank, and you pay him £IOO of this and waste the other £2OO, you certainly reduced your gross debt by £IOO, that is to £4OO, but as a matter of fact you have increased your net debt from £2OO to £4OO. The colony has done this, and if they have not wasted the money they have spent it as part of the revenue of the colony. Taking the two fiusneial statements, we find tli9 actual net debt, that is, the whole debt less accumulated sinking funds, to have actually increased by £318,000. TAXATION. As I said before, the Government inherited a grand surplus—£l43,96s— and this has gradually increased, as the Government have marie no material alteration in the taxation, except the Land and Income Tax Aot, and this produces £368,000, being a little more than the old property tax did in the last year of its oxistence, viz,, £356,741. The value of the land in the colony had increased by £L1,000,000, and nearly £8,000,000 of this increase was in the North Island; and this is the principal reason that the same amount was realised by the new tax. I went very fully into the new system of taxation when in Temuka before the last session, and am glad to say that the Goyernnient had to give way to a very large extent over the question, of debentures. It was a great pity that the Governmentj when they found they were going to tax companies so unjustly, did not make public earlier their intention of remitting the duplicate taxation. We found the Agent-General stating in England that the duplicate taxation would not be imposed, and still the Government would give us no information ty the House until very late in the session. This caused a great uneasiness in the money market. The question is nqt dearly settled yet, as there hag recently

been iitigation over the amount due by the Wellington and Manawatu Railway Company. 1 understand that this companyjhavealarge amount of debenture, and have mortgaged lan d to secure them, but the land is not worth more than a small proportion of the debentures. The Government triad to tax all these debentures a.* if t\ey were mortgaged fully secured. The Supreme Court has, I understand, held that the debentures are only to be taxed as mortgage up to the amount they are really secured by mortgage over land. Now that this blot has been to a certain extent put right, the main objection to the present system is that it gives an advantage to the banks and certain so-' cieticn ov<*r other money-lenders. The Premier time after time stated that the bank* did not lend money out on fixed loans (mortgages), but as a matter of fact they do, and one of the main causes of the trouble on the other side at present is that the banks have too much lent on permanent loan. Well, banks and building societies can take deposits, lend out on mortgage, and pay no mortgage tax. These only pay a small income tax on the profits. If a private individual takes small deposits, and lends it out on mortgage, he has to pay 6s 8d for every £IOO bo dealt with. It is a great drawback on the private individual, and a groat inducement to people to put their money on deposit in banks. You can have almost £6OOO on deposit in a bank at 5 per cent, and escape taxation altogether, and the bank will only pay taxation on the profit it makes on this money. Another great objection is that where several men are working a property together they only get one exemption for improvements, although they individually own a very small interest in the property. Also in trust estates beneficiaries are graduated, although their individual interests may be very small, and they will probably divide when they come of ago ; but, of course, persons have to be very large proprietors before they get any material graduation—in fact, there are very few cases where a man owning up to £20,000 worth of land pay more than ' under the old system. The person who suffers most severely is the large encumbered owner, who formerly paid no tax at all, as the property practically belonged to the mortgagee, but under the new system the nominal owner pays the whole of the graduation if he has any income from it at all to pay taxation with. When the Act was first introduced in the House, I at once said that it would not ruin the country, and the public would see that the various inequalities wore gradually put right, and last session as, I have already stated, we commenced this process. I also stated when the Act was introduced that the small farmers would get relief for the present and I am glad they do, and it is our duty to see that the burdens are not gradually shunted off the towns on to the country as if so, of course all the land owners, both small and large, will ultimately get their taxation increased. Under the old property tax, nearly £75,000,000 worth of personal property was returned, and of this only £26,000,000 would be mortgages, and the bulk of the balance that was taxable would get relief under the new system, so a very large amount of personal property is being relived and of this large amount only £8,634,188 was live stocK, so a large proportion of the exempted property does not belong to the farmers. Some of the statements one sees are very amusing. I notice in the Lyttelton Times, report of Mr Meredith's speech the other day the following parragraph : "By the change to the land act, nearly 20,000 small farms would be exempted from taxation and 17,536 holding from 100 to 1000 acres would be considerably relieved." (Applause). As a mataer of fact, under tlie property tax, the total number of tax payers under the 1886-87 assessment was 27 826, and under the 1880-90 assessment 26^337. A very large proportion of those, perhaps not a half would be paying on their mortgages, stock-in-trade etc., so personally 1 don't believe there were many more landowners than 17,000 paying under the old Act, but there certainly we're not within 10,000 of every class of the community paying under the property tax as Mr Meredith claims there were small farmers that got relief through the • change of taxation. As a matter fact, •when the property tax was abandoned, there were only a little over 26,000 peoplo paying ou all classes of property, aiid now there are 11,407 paying the luid tax of whom 1319 pay graduated taxation, while 3250 pay income tax. So about 11,680 fewer people pay direct taxation under the new system and only 1319 pay graduated land tax brt of these I believe not more than 521 (those owning more thau £20,000 worth of land) can pay increased taxation. Besides these there are a few paying increased taxation on income. The Premier is reported to htve said that 14 persons owned over 200,000 acres each. LAND .FOR SBXTIEMENT. 1 am very pleased that the Land for Settlements Act is at last placed on the Statute Book, and I hope that the Minister of Lands will be careful in administering it, as if properly administered, it ought to be the means of settling a number of people on the land. During this Parliament 1 have given this measure my best support. I regret that the Government were not prepared to ' let these settlers have their money at 4 per cent., like settlers ou Crown lands. Since the rate of interest at which the xental of Crown lands is calculated ha 9 been reduced to 4 per cent., 1" supported a similar reduction for these settlers. There is also no choice of tenure for these settlers; they must take leases hi perpetuity. I don't see any objection to giving these men a choice of tenure, and also allowing them to buy their freeholds if they save sufficient money. Somosettlers would value this privilege, and as the land would have to be sold for what it costs the Government, when land was paid for the Government could make use of the money in buying and cutting up more land, and so promote settlement. Under the present Act all iaud bought for the purpose ha 3 to be land nationalised, and to enable very znuch to be dealt with we must incur a fearful increase in our public debt. For my part, if land can be cut up without loss I think we should encourage men to buy the freehold of their Eeetions and then use the money to promote further settlement. Canterbury is not getting the benefit of any considerable expenditure of public money at present, so we must demand that sufficient money shall be spent to give this Act a fair trial, and I trust that the purchase of Cheyiot will not be made usp 'of as an excuse for fiQt buying land here under this Act. I iinderstand several blocks are to bo bought in South Canterbury. I believe the Government have bought 620 acres of the Pareora Estate, and 130 from the Waimate Estate, but none in this electorate. I am very sorry that none h?.s been bought in this electorate, as it is undoubtedly Cheviot. ri'he Government had no legal right to buy Cheviot for settlement purposes. The only right they had to buy it was to protect the revenue, and as 1 understand all \{m vendors were anxious, to sell for the

price given I don't think the country has got the best of the bargain. I understand that the bulk of Cheviot is not lit b>r small or close settlement, and that the land on it fit for growing wheat is nearly 40 miles from a railway, but until th>> papers connected with the sale are mane public, it is difficult to form an ojiini>»o. Under the Land and Income Amendment Act Assessment Act, the Government has power to sell and dispose of this land, mid so there can be no necessity to get fresh legislative power. If the Government can show that they were forced to buy Cheviot to protect the revenue they were justified to buying it, but no other reason can justify the purchase, as the land is too far away for settlement purposes, and as there is no authority of Parliament to buy such a property for this purpose. If the money has been found to protect the revenue, the land should be sold at a profit as soon as possible, and the money refunded to the Consolidated Revenue. The Hon. the Minister of Lands claims that Cheviot is paying 4 per cent, per annum at present. It is difficult to deny this until we get all the figures, but unless the dwelling house and 1200 acres adjoining is fetching a tremendous rental, the place is not bringing in 4 per cent. I have worked out the percentage of all the other rentals, and in addition to this the Government lose over £3OOO of taxation. The Government are, I understand, paying 4J per cent for £200,000 of the money, aud they will require a considerable sum of money to make roads before the place cau be sold in small lots. EDUCATIONAL RESERVES. When the Laud Bill was be f ore the Waste Lands Committee kst sessi n, some fresh proposals were made about educational reserves. Well, I object to handing over our endowments to the Government, or to any legislation tending in that direction. Our endowments were made in the early days, and we are dependent on them for secondary and technical education, and we ought nol to part with the control of them. In the debate on the Land Bill I asked the Minister of Lands if ha would introduce legislation giving the trustees of these reserves more extended powers of dealing with the reserves, and he promised to introduce legislation next session. They should all have power to give valuation for necessary improvements. At present some of the trustees have no power to give valuations for improvements as are allowed by the commissioners of primary school endovments. I presented a petition to the Timaru High School Board of Governors to get on of their reserves cut up, and I am glad it was cut up, although not quite on the lines suggested by the petition. BORROWING. From the first time I went into politics I have refused to sanation any scheme of borrowing for public works, and I refused to vote for the late Government when they borrowed £1,000,000, half of which was to be spent principally on railways, but the present Government during their first year of office increased the amount of loan money spent on i>ublic works from £335,000 to £391,000, and although they are continually making protestations to the country that they are a nonborrowing Government, they have really made the transfer of a portion of their surplus to the public works fund a sort of whitewashing for th* several borrowing bills they have brought forward. As a matter of fact, they have taken power to increase their borrowing powers by the following, namely : —(1). The right to borrow £60,000 a year for roads to open up unsold lands. My objection to this system is that it enables the Government to spend £50,000 a year for Public Works without that amount beiug specially appropriated by Parliament to ihe Special work. (2). The right to borrow £50,000 a year to buy Native Lauds. (3). The right to borrow £50,000 a year to buy land for Settlement. For my own part, I of course supported the right to borrow £50,0u0 for the latter purpose, but my only objection is that I don't think that they should be cumulative, but the House should settle each year how much should be borrowed for the purpose. (4). The Public Revenue's Act of last Sossion gave power to the Treasury to issue £IOO,OOO worth more of Treasury Bills in aid of the Consolidated Fund, and £450,000 for the purpose of redeeming certain other guaranteed debentures. The excuse for this was to effect a proposed saving of £I,OOO a year, but the real bearing is that the Government wanted £550,000 more of Treasury Bills to finauoe with. (5). Of course there are numerous increases of the debt for Sinking Fund purposes. The Government also proposed legislation to compel Insurance Companies to deepo3it large nums in the Public Trust office, but the House would not hear of this. It seems likely that we shall have to add materially to our public debt next session to pay for Cheviot; if so, I think the money could be very much better spent iu buying land nearer to centres of population for settlement purposes. (6). Loansto Local Bodies. There is no provision for the repayment of the v.hole of this. The Luudon case was a gopd deal talked of last session, and if the Government are acquiring native land without taking proper means of preventing the public purse being defrauded, it js'batter they should not acquire very much. This question is so fully discussed in Hansard that I will not go into it further than *o quote from a recent speech of Mr R. Thompson, the member for Marsden, who usually votes with the Government and knows the Hp says ;—« An immense quantity has been purchased by the Government for the sum of 7s Od an acre, two thirds of it being mountain top 3, and unfit for settlement. The remainder w?yi of inferior quality, and ma*' ' sell for 5s an acre, Tty« tynd as b eeu in the market a |<?jig time at 2s 6d an acre." Well-, th- B looks a good speculation, the best may fetch os an acre. The Government pays 7s Gd, and the natives only receive 4s 6d, It is to be hoped that the Government will be more careful in the future. LAND BILL. 1 think the Land Act of last session was on the whole a very satisfactory one, aand is a very different measure from the Act introduced by the Government in the previous session. The Minister of Lands during the last recess talked a great deal of not selling any more land, and his intention to fight with the Upper House over the freehold tenure, in fact, ho \oc\ the people to believe he would, not part with the freehold o| another acre, but finally, when, he finds such legislation would hot be favorably received, he gives way, and helps to pass an Act which in three main tenures gives the settler the right to the whole unearned increment. There is no land nationalisation under, the present Act; the settler can, get the benefit of any improvement effected by his own labor. This is what I have always urid fortunately some of the Government supporters put pressure on the Government, and the Minister gave, way. The three main tenures rmdw" the Acbare :—(1) Sales for caah,. Under this tenure, titles aso. withhold until substantial improvements are effected. I strongly supported this as the bc>t means of chocking dummyism, ty Lwte £,$V

occupation with right of purchase. Practically a for 25 years, rent 5 per cent ou the value, with option to purchase the freehold after 10 years, or to convert to a lease in perpetuity. 'Vhv\ corresponds more or less with the old deferred payment. (3) Lease in perpetuity. This is a lease lor 909 yea)*, and the rent is at the rate of 4 per cent, on the capital value. I am very pleased if the Government can finance thew tenants at 4 per cent, but I wish they could see their way to put all in the same positiou. We have very little land left in Canterbury, and as all rentals are not reduced to the 4 per cent, this will not benefit our settlers. It seems to be unfair to charge settlers under the Land for Settlement 5 per cent., and others 4 per cent. If the Government can finance at 4 per cent., all should have the benefit of it. I tried to get the rentals under the Land for Settlement reduced, but the , Government would not agree to it. During the previous session, when the lease for 50 years was before the House, all the Ministers in the House voted against Sir George Grey's amendment to strike out the 50 years and make it a lease in perpetuity. I preferred the lease in perpetuity to a revaluation every 50 years, and voted with Sir George Grey, aud am glad that the Ministors have since altered their opinions and reversed the policy. I consider this tenure the best yet introduced, and am sorry all the Ministers in our House and most of their followers voted against it when Sir G. Grey moved in this direction. One hardship in the Bill as introduced was the disqualification of married women. In the 1891 session it was moved that where a married woman's husband had got 2,000 acre* of second class land, or 640 acres of first class land she should be allowed to take up land, but the Government opposed it. We moved again this session to prevent the iujustice to married women, and were again defeated. It was altered by the Upper House, as I thought, to allow a married woman to take up 340 acre.> hut :ha Canterbury Land Board had doubt* alumt it, and refused the application i»i a married woman where her husband does not own a single acre of freehold, aud the whole family only occupy about 200 acres of leasehold. I was glad to hear they afterwards reversed their decision. A married woman should have equal rights with other citizens. I have heard of taxing bachelors, but not of penalising married women before. Say if you like that if either husband or wife have 640 acres neither are to take up, but do not allow a man whose wife has a large area to take up land and refuse to allow the wife to take up where the husband has none. The Minister opposed allowing lessees or licensees to mortgage. It is almost necessary to allow persons going on to bush country to borrow money — unless they possess more capital than most settlers—aud we were fortunate in getting the Act amended so that they can borrow under clause 83, but the mortgagee cannot foreclose unless he cau take the necessary declaration that he has not 640 acres of first-class land or 2000 acres of second-class. This will prevent a mortgagee getting possession of a large area by foreclosure. Clause 85 makes the interest of the lessee or licensee liable for his debt after 12 months' occupation. There is a mistake in this section ; it is made subject to section 76, but should be 83. This does not apply to village settlers or pastoral tenants. 1 have been on the Waste Lands Committee for a good many years, and am very pleased to be able to say that the present Minister has now got a much better and more liberal Land Act to .vork with than he would have had if Parliament had passed his proposed Bill. The two Christchurch papers in reporting the Hon. Mr McKenzie's answers to questions, reported that he said that the lessee of land from a private individual could take up a lease in perpetuity. I think there must be some mistake, as 1 hardly think the Minister would make such a rash statement. As a matter of fact the applicant is required to take this declaration, viz.:—" That including the lands now applied for I am not the owner, tenant, or occupier, directly or in.dii'*ctly, settled by myself or jointly with any other person or persons, of any land any where." THE ELECTORAL BILL. The Electoral Bill was passed through our'House, including the female franchise. I have always opposed female franchise, but was rather surprised that those who professed to be so strongly in favor of it should reject the whole Electoral Bill because the Upper House gave females the privilege of electors' rights. We were giving seamen, shearers, and commercial travellers electors' rights, so there can be nothing so dreadful in the proposed system, and it seemed as if this was made a pretence for shelving an awkward question. Speaking of electors rights, I don't see how we can stop «t one or two classes of the community; if we once recognise that electors' right are admissible, as we have already done, we must extend the privilege to harvest hands, contractors and all who have to work away from their homes. We want to allow every man to give his vote, and I don't see why seamen should have the privilege of electors' rights, unless everybody whose work takes him away from home should be put on the same footing. "HONORARIUM. Under the late Government th.Q uww»bers cut down the amount of thai** v \ arium, hut the present Vlirnm^t session put through nu Act increaaing the payment of members of tho House of Repvosentatives from £l5O to £240, making it £3Q per annum higher than it was before the reduction. I voted against I the increase, but no doubt" a great deal oan be said in favor of putting the honorarium back to £2lO, from which the bad stato of the finances necessitated a sacrifice whilst everybody was being retrenched, but I don'tithink there was any necessity for raising the honorarium to £240. The general cost of living has not been so increased as to make this rise a necessity, LOCAL M&TTERS. There have been several local matters one of which is the Temuka Park Board I received a large petition, which 1 presented to the Hon. the Minister for Lands, and I understand that tho Chief Coinmissionor of Crown Lands has been instructed to make enPersonally I believe in U;o members of these boards being elected; tho only difficulty is to deside on the electorate, and the expense that would be incurred in tho election. For my own part, I think it might simplify matters if tho chairmen of the various local bodies (i.e., tho Temuka and Arowheima Town Boards and Temuka Road , Board) should be ax officio members of the board. I was speaking to Mr Marchant a short time ago, and advised him not to lake any evidence second-hand, but to come down, and make enquiries, and I understand he will shortly do so. Your rOLICE BARRACKS required something being done, and certain, of my friends mentioned this to me, and the Temoka Lrader also drew attention to it. When I asked tho Minister about it in tho yOvUV local papw was up iu.

arms against me for interfering in the '. matter because it had also written i about it 1 wis unaware before this that, i the local member was not allowed to take up ary reforms which happened to bo advocated by the local p'iper as well as < other peoulu, but a-, loan :n I am a member, [wili advocate wii>t ! t Im.u i., necessary, whether the Temuka Leader does the same or not. Whether the delay in making the necessary improvements has occurred through the Temuka Leader objecting to things being done when I ask for them, or because the Government wished to keep the expenditure down during the year before the election, I kuow not. By delaying the expenditure until after the 31st March it does not come into this year's accounts. (Laughter.) Ever since I have been in the House I have always found the South Canterbnry members, although mostly opposed to me iu politics, have been only too willing to join with me in getting anything done for the district, and I never mind what papers say about me personally, but I felt somewhat hurt that pressure should be tried to be put on me by the local paper to try and prevent my getting any kudos, wheu the ouly result could be that the district might be injured. VOLUNTEERS. A question which is of interest to a good many volunteers here is the question of land grauts. Personally I have always understood that the volunteers who served in Canterbury during the Maori War trouble were not entitled to land grants, but we find that certain Canterbury, men who have never served in any corps outside the province, but happen to send in their applications iu other districts, get their grants, while our volunteers cannot get their papers passed at the Christchurch Land Office. I intend to bring this question before the Premier and find out what volunteers are really entitled to under the Act. PARK AT ORARI. I have to thank the Hon. the Minister of Lands for granting a small piece of land at Orari for a public park. It is not so large as I should have liked, but it was the only available land ; and I hope it will be found large enough to enablo the younger generation at Orari to play football and other games. There has a good deal of trouble in arranging matters, and I have to thank the several friends at Orari who have supplied me with every information ; and especially Mr W. Hawke and Mr Mason, who have been especially energetic. CONCLUSION. I have always felt confident that the colony would get through its financial troubles, although things did at one, t\"aie look very unfavorable. But I am thankful to say tho future looks hopeful for the colony as a whole. Unfortunately for this part of the colony, the wheat market has been very depressed. If it were not for that, we might all be having a chance of improving our position. It is impossible yet to tell how the financial troubles in Australia will affect us, but there seems little doubt but that it will mean a large increase to our population, as it will be some time before confidence is restored in financial circles there sufficiently to enable new enterprises to be put iu hand. And if wo receive population, it is absolutely necessary for the Government not only to open up the remaining Crown lauds in the North Island, but to legislate ou native matters, so as to open up all uuoccupied native lands for settlement for the mutual benefit of the native owners and Europeans. If this is done we will be able to absorb all the population that is likely to come, but if vigorous steps are not taken iu this direction we will probably have a very large number of unemployed in our midst. Mr Rhodes, who had been frequently applauded, concluded by thanking his hearers for the attention they had given hiin, expressed his willingness to answer any questions that might bs put to him, aud sat down applause. QUBS riONS, The following questions were asked : Is it a fact that Mr Rhodes pledged himself to support any measure of prohibition that comes before Parliament t Is Mr Rhodes in favor of the direct veto without compensation to publicans ? Will you iu next se3sion of Parliament vote for giviug the control of the liquor traffic into the hands of the people by tho direct veto, and without compensation ? These questions were put separately, but the answer to each was practically the same. Mr Rhodes would adhere steadfastly to promises given at last election, but would not now bind himself to giving fresh promises where new legislation might be involved. He had pledged himself against compensation to publicans, and also against the direct veto. Would Mr Rhodes explain his reason for voting with Major Atkinson and hia party for further borrowing of two millions sterling, wheu at his first election he pledged himself to oppose more borrowing ?—Mr Rhodes said as a matter of fact no such sum as two millions a borrowed, and further he did nc& \ox% fo^ .' any borrowin <j. He had, again** Loan Bill of " . 'JJ e m,eaisur^.b l a i dib^e J «aj«i i eef' J -when e hj fei* ' • jeou already hypothecated, . oound to support the measure. In the next session will you support ' the extension of the franchise to women 1 —Mr Rhodes was already pledged against this measure. Is Mr Rhodes still of opinion that debenture-holders are doubly taxed under the present system of taxation ?—The main question of debentures had already been settled. Broadly speaking, the Government gave way ou the question of' duplicate taxation. An elector: Did they intend it ? Well, he believed they did. It was partly ignorance and partly intention. You say the surplus is due to the late Sir H. Atkinson, How long are we to expect Sir Harry Atkinson's ghost to preside over our finances ?—Mr Rhodes objected to the question. He felt Sir H. Atkinson's death deeply, and declined to answer. Should this colony get the Women s Franchise, and the other colonies not, doesn't Mr Rhodes think that there would be a great rush of mothers-in-law into this country, and is not legislation required to stop it >— Mr Rhodes could not say. It was possible that women electors would vote against mothers-in-law. Would a pWson taking up land on the 999 years tenure be allowed a renewal of his lease at the expiration of his term ?—- Mr Rhodes was of opinion that he would certainly deserve it. You say that ouly 020 people pay graduated taxation. Don't you think these peoplo make too much noise for their numbers !— Under the graduated system only about 1300 people paid a Graduated tax, and only about ,'>2oactually more than they would have done under the old measure. As to whether they made too much noise it was only a matter of opinion. He did not kuow that thay Would Mr Rhodes explain to the meeting how ho came to be mixed up in the purchase of land scrip, which was tho I Bubjwt o{ hiquiry in I'wriwuuQut .'-Mr

Rhodes said he was glad the quentiuii was asked, although it hnd been well thrashed out in the House. Me was offered certain land scrip that was for sale, and which was supposed to be good. He declined to purchase at once, but it was forwarded to him and drawn against. He submitted if, to Mr Baker viie Crown Lands Commissioner, who advised him after some days that it was good for its face value. He purchased it and used it afterwards in the purchase of land. About twelve months afterwards Mr O'Hara Smith, the Government auditor for the laud department, came to Christ - church and instituted enquiries concerning it, and he, Mr Rhodes, instructed his clerks to give him every opportunity for going into the matter, and when he left he told him (the speaker) that he intended to report that he was quite satisfied. It was ultimately brought before the House in a rather nasty manner. A member put a notice on the order paper affecting his (Mr Rhodes's) public character and then left Wellington. When an enquiry was instiuted he, Mr Rhodes, was completely exonerated. He might say that the question of the value of the scrip waß before the committee at the time he purchased. He took it to the Government offices as any man might a cheque to a banker, and finding it good for its purported value purchased it. (An elector: Is it not a fact that the Auditor-General, who is irresponsible to the Government, surcharged the amount, some £400,t0 the Receiver of Land Revenue in Christchurch 1 How then can yon blame the Government 1) Mr Rhodes: I do not want to drag the Government into the matter at all, but the Auditor-General, on due enquiry, wrote to the Government asking them to withdraw the surcharge and they refused. You can see the whole transaction in Hansard, and 1 may say that before 1 left Wellington Mr Seddon himself said that I was perfectly blameless in the matter. Mr W. Hawke then proposed a vote of thanks to Mr Rhodes for his address, and, as an Orari settler, for his services in connection with the recreation ground. Mr W. Davie seconded the motion, but wished also to move—" That this meeting has confidence in the present Government." The chairman said he could not see his way to accept Mr Davie as the seconder of a motion and the mover of another in one breath. Mr J. M. Twomey seconded the motion. Mr Davie then to move, as an amendment-—" T>- iat th i s meeting expresa its full c^; a^euce i n t h e present Govornment." The chairman declined to accept this as an amendment, and Mr Hawke's motion was then put and carried. Mr Rhodes thanked them for their vote. Their confidence in the present Government would be shown later on. He then proposed a hearty vote of thanks to the chairman for presiding, and this having been carried, the meeting terminated at about 9.25. Mr Rhodes addressed a meeting in the Volunteer Hall, Geraldine, last night, a report of which will appear in our next.