Sir George Grey at Dunedin.

Thames Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2842, 25 March 1878, Page 2

Sir George Grey at Dunedin.

We have received a full report (Hersld's) of Sir George Grey's address to the citizens of Dunedin, from which we extract portions referring to "property and income tax " and " the land bill," with his reasons for advising the Governor to disallow the latter :—

PBOFMTT AMD INCOME TAX.

You tare embarked upon a •jutem—a rery expensive system—of public works. You cannot stop j you must go on. You will hare to increase your burdens, and in sonK manner or other before long, to in*

crease your taxation. If you alloir the present system of (r.sition to go on you will be doing this, you wilt be creating in New Zca!and a class enormously wealthy, and whose wc»Uh has been derived by money taken out of the pockets of their fellow-countrymen. On the other hand, you bare already, by the present system of taxation, created a poor class, and every additional burden you put on in the same form will render that class poorer, so that you will aotually be mating a fast pauper population in this OMnrf^ttutNnrhwaif • conduct of their own, and through no wrong done to the Bt«ts. ThO sfce children,,of 1V J-be^, laboring . man would be v renderedl poor, and become* wwrerTfiflla ' the next generation, and,beeome serfs to a certain extent, while a Jbody of men, would hare been rendered enormously .wealthy without' any efforts of their own. Some " perhaps; mere speed* tors, who „would ;simply grasp the land for the pnrpoteHQt, speculation, ito sell it again at enormous profit Ypa cannot blame men for making fortunes' in that way if you let them.^jUugbter.) If they hare done it honestly JT'find M'ntilt with them. Do not let, aae - lead yom astray upon this •abject; among mtP were many men of nome dispositions aad great generosity,,who have told. «c, " What youJsay applies to us ; y we' admit and hare no desire to shirk our **"■ mltoi\ ' If tho l)i.rdoas of the country tmitfSSr ' us, we will support yo*." ;•• Thtrefafe, £ say, do not condemn persons who hswip only done what is natural;: and wmjidt . whom are desirous tt> stfratfe-their dnm* and see that the .very hest is deae ftr the country they can. ' fW sis; wiiwlfcissii that joitiee is doae to foe eowxtryi sail - that a fair system of tiJatiofc-ii established. ■"" If a man Kofli:- siy 60,tito or 100,000 Mreilbrtheptt>p^Mte(fine^ lation, or for sheep grating, Msww'uittti* 1 fere with'its b&M fa~lxtmmi&o&,Tk4trl : would"my limjt its* ana which eaald to heldfofgnusUffpSery. Saehlaatjvmaa < could hold without injury to antboaV. I would put no ta*uptnit,bjtMfcMs*sfr , you pass that put on so much per aartaiir» ally for the good land; sdiisnh sikJalifsW the better land, and so modi pcPStTlb? the best. s Holders o£large properties far the purpose !of speculation would sooa get ! tired of that, ana .would, part with them to their fellow-men. (Cheeks;)''ln asking you to see. that .inch a system if oarriM ont, people will tell you "that I am^ ; Sadical. (I*ugh(er.) iid I hare heard myself called ft Chartiit; (BeMweA Laughter) 'Bit reflect upon this: InBnglaud, e?ery, man who hajda^hwd haa to pay a land tax;.. they^ooght'tb pay more than they do, and th£y v will hare to pay more before long."''Kirthhi than that, in England a maß;who.:drafra sm income from any soaree hkp,to oonnbate something from it! Forifasrulee^T' lire out here and draw mbaey iihoally;from England. WhH do they ••* to;S»e there P " You can leave England if yon Hire, we ; hare no objection to tbaij you can go and lire where you like, bait <we'lttre'-pbHee to protect yorr property «tr Home; judges " to administer- the laws; rW*V.har» the.. cost of the Houses of Parliament to pay, we have to keep an army to i proteet^. the ... property which you have in, England, Md> v a navy for a similar purpose, and though t . you lire in New Zealand yon most par ' so much a year for eveiy. pennjjpu :draw out of England "—(Cheers.) Thertfore, I say, why not .let us have recipreeity in what might be called free, trade P—{ohc4ri ' and laughter.) Let these whb'draw hugis incomes live in EngUad, Irat <thw;m«Mt pay their fair share towardr the burdeas of New Zealand.—(Load cheers.) Then is nothing radical in that notion. All other nations do it, < aid why not weir I will tell you presently why we have sift done so. Let us look a degree farther:; there is an additional reason why that liw\ should be made here." We hsve'sjot iaf enormous land estate which they have notgot in England. It bdosigs to th« ' public. Every little infant haa the same right to it as the wealthiest squatter. These lends are occupied ou ten* ridie«. lously small by a portion of the population of this country, who frosa these bads realise enormous incomes^ the greater part of which, strictly speaking;, ought to go into the pockets of the.people,! aa\l diminish the taxation of the country. However, this.is not the eiae, and many of the occupiers of these great, tracts of land go to England., ana spend their money there. This is an additional reason of the:strongest hind why^Aheee gentlemen should contribnto their^ mir share towards the taxation of the eonntry. I could follow out this question of taxation much further.. I. tell yon plainly, if you do not insist upon a law of this mind '. you will create :a class rolling^in wealth, and create a class steeped in povertjV mm such as never onght to exist in this eova* try,-and: such as those who founded it intended never should exist hers. Therv-

fore I say again,, let at in the next ternon of Parliament acquit ourselves like men, •nd do bar best to get reform n Ike present system of taxation. THI IiHB BUI AHD THI CAimUrblT^ , t BVHt. r You have heard a great deal—well, yoflr hare heard something which jon ought never to have heard—(laughter) '■■tboatf my haringadfitedrthe, Qorenor t» veto tho Land Bill, and haiing heard it, there is no harm in mj saying it was true. <In some way it has leaked oat that I advised the Governor to disallow that Bi<k, I waa said to be an autocrat, and detttSmed to destroy the Constitution in eve*/ way, because the House* of legislature Having passed ri Act, I reebmmeaded the.Croii>t to disallow it. Now there are three brail*

chesof the Legislature, the .Governor, the Legislative Council, and the. House of Bepresentatiret. If the House of B«presentatives make a 'law wbiek is ia favor of one portion of the people, and injurious to the interests of others, the other branch of the Legislature hat power to disallow - it or throw it out. But there is another contingency not provided against.' > Sup* posing the great landed aristooraejrtwbfeli hf>s arisen happens to hare a majority in ' both Houses. First of all the House of Bcpresentalivcs makes a law which goes up to the Legislative Council. They do not like it —> it does not quite meet their views—their own interest, in fact, with many of them—and they alter it a Hale. . They send it hack to. the Bepresentatives, who fiad it even better, and at ones adopt the amendments. It if quite possible for the two Houses jut as much as one to pass a law whioh might injure a large portion of the people of the country and benefit another class. In fact injure one portion of society to greatly enrich (he other. If it did so, the Governor, who has no interest in the country, strictly speaking, should be able to disallow the law, and rectify the thing in that way. You must not imagine that to advise the Governor to' disallow a law

is a thing anyone likes to do. ItrequifM a pretty bold heart to do that, because ye*

havo a majority of both houses against yoti in a moment, and great efforts are made to raise art outcry in the country on the part of all disappointed people But it is no new thing this, and there is one remarkable instance. The Legislature of New Zealand wanted to reduce, and wisely, I think, the public expenditure. They said, "We will begin with the Governor. There is no Gover* nor in the country yet. There is a §ood chance now of doing it, and we will oso while there is no one here." And . they passed a law reducing, the salary | Tery much. That law went Home ; but what did tho Ministry there say ? "We hare the power to prevent any of the Queen's subjects being injured by tho Legislature, and we cannot see the poor Governor injured in this way." It is true that only one person was injured l»y that law, yet it was at once disallowed. So, therefore, it was clear that if 'I believed that I could save tho rights of the whole population of New Zealand — by that I do not mean males alone, but men, women, and children—by getting the Bill disallowed, I say that I was q«ito justified in doing so, in order to lave the rights of the whole of the inhabitants of Now Zealand.—(Loud cheers.) The point wai this—the leases or licenses ot tbo Canterbury runholders terminate in ISSgyrTTntil that period of lime they hola' their leases on most favorable terms indeed. The present Parliament expires, if ifc be not dissolved, before those licenses expire. I argued : You have a majority in Parliament at. the present moment, but that majority was returned on a totally different question, and I say as honest men, you should, not prolong the tenure of these runs without consulting the people of New Zealand at large. (Loud cheers;) My idea; was that these enormous runs could be broken up into holdings of 40C3 or 5G30 acres eaeb, and made to produce a fair rental. Therefore I felt and still feel strongly, that the fact that what was accomplished last seisionT of prolonping these leases ten years beyond 188^—that is to 1890—was a fraud on the entire population of New Zealand. (Loud cheers.) I say that every man, woman, and child, in the country is robbed of the surplus sum which is now actually in the pockets of the rich squatters, and that I was right in demanding that an appeal should have been made to the people of New Zealand befegre they consented to let such large sums of money which belonged to the public go into tbe pockets of private individuals. I never hesitated in public in expressing these views, and when spoken to privately, I said'that "I will resist it to the last. And every means which the law gives me to defeat what I think to.bo a wrong, act, I will resort to—(Loud cheers.) I will do nothing unlawful." Then, when the law was carried in spite of me, I had to decide whether I would go out of. office or try to get the law disallowed. It may be said that, having been defeated upon this question, I ought to have gone out of office, but it was not a Government question," and I believe one of my colleagues voted against me upon conviction. Therefore, having allowed the law to be carried, and-tb'retire, would have only made bad worn© I.—(Cheers.) I believed that I should have succeeded in getting an appeal to the country immediately, therefore, thought that I did right in using every effort in my power to.get the Land Act set aside. Now, you will see tliat in trying to get it disallowed I did no harm to those license holders—it would leave them exactly where they were. Had I tried to take their licenses it would have been wrong, and the simple thing I asked for was this.:. Before you confer enormous benefits upon friends of your own in the manner tin .which.you are about to do, making those to whom you are attached persoßally wealthy men for another ten years," isk ttie people of New Zealand, whose money you are going to take from them; whether they will consent to additional taxation to make these men rich— (cheers)—whether from year to year every man and woman in New Zealand will forego some comforts,, will abandon some saving, in order to gin> money to individuals who have rendered no service to their country beyond theirjfellow-citizens, or whether the leases of these runs should be put up for sale by auction.. What I said was: Let full value for these runs be obtained, let people be relieved from burdens, let everything be fairly and openly decided after an appeal to the constituencies—(Cheers). , I have given you that as one instance of the manner in which persons will legislate for their own iutereats if you give them power to do so. They said, for instance—l heard one gentleman specially say this: 'f If you don't give up these runs for another ten years, what will the result be P The xunholders are in debt to tho great English companies, and these money-lending companies will seize the runs and sell them. The result will be a crisis, and everyone will suffer. Therefore you are better to legislate in this way, and let the present licenseholders have the runs for another 10 years. We will agree to an increased rental; we will get a commissioner appointed to assess what the increased rental shall be, but we won't give up these runs." I don't believe you will ever get any commissioner who could do justice. It is very hard, to say—" Mr So»and-so, your land k worth so much." Mr So-and-io fays^^it is riot j you"are mistaken." A private conversation takes place.., lam sure no commissioner will have courage fairly to value the ruus, and the only way to let them go is by auction. The individual cannot complain if the run is submitted to auction when his term is fairly . satisfied. The public entered into a: compact with him — ignbrantly, unwisely, often without being consulted—greatly to their own loss. They have fulfilled their terms to the very letter, and What is there in their looking to their -own inte rests afterwards. Now, I have touched upon what I really believe-to be the principal points to which we should now direct our attention ; but I say this, that if you do not attend to the question of tho franchise, you will achieve nothing. You may get some temporary, remedy applied—unless you-get nower into your own hands, rely upon it, abuses will spring up almost instatitly again. I feel that such must certainly be tbe case, and that the proper settlement of the franchise is the main point to which we must direct our attention.