WELLINGTON NOTES.

Waikato Argus, Volume I, Issue 29, 15 September 1896, Page 3

WELLINGTON NOTES.

[VKOM OUli OWN COHRKSrONDENT I. Wellington, September 4

THE WARD BALANCE-SHEET. The Honorable John George Ward, his sympathisers and the. Ministerial Press have taken upon themselves to question the remarks of Judge Williams on the method adopted in dealing with Bills under discount. Mr Ward, in his evidence said, " It is quite usual for Bills discountecd to bo regarded as sold, and instead of the sum total appearing, the difference between the Bills discounted and Bills receivable to be shown," This contention of Mr Ward's elictited the following remarks from the Judge. " Any person with an elementary knowledge of book keeping must see that this process is an illegitimate one. Bills under discount represent contingent liabilities. If tbey do not appear in the balance-sheet as an item of liability the effect is to suppress the fact that contingent liabilities exist." Among others who questioned this common sense dictum given from the Supreme Court bench, was Mr Win. Watson, and although no efforts have been made to question the righteousness of the Judgo'sscathing remarks relative to the persons who brought about the disastrous loss to the shareholders of the Colonial Bank not being any longer " oermitted to roam at large through the business world," Mr Ward and his friends have selected the opinion regarding Bills receivable, and worked it for all it was worth. However, it is satisfactory to know that the Judge's remarks nre upheld by the London financial papers. 'J heir summiog up of the evidence given regarding our ex-Treasurer's methods of conducting business are sufficiently " base and cowardly," as that gentleman terms it to warn.nt him in making another personal explanation such as is reported in the first issue of Hansard this year. In the Financial Times of July ISth, the Editor comments on Mr Ward's remarks as to his system of treating Bills thus : '• Mr Ward, we trust, is mistaken in stating that this is the usual practice, for it is a thoroughly vicious one. It conceals the very important contingent liability on the Bills re-discounted. For the benefit of readers not versed in intricacies of bookkeeping, let us put a case on exactly analagous lines. A. has a capital of £9O, with which he purchases goods and sells them to two traders, in equals lots, of £'so each, takiugtheir Bills for theauiouut. These Bills he discounts with his bankers in order to replace fthe capital. Now, if he states his position fairly, bis balance-sheet will show on the one side £IOO of capital and profit, and the £IOO of liability to tho'-Bank in case these Bills are dishonoured On the other side the £IOO cash in the Bank, and the £IOO of Bills receivable. According to the principle the exTreasurer of New Zealand slid ought to have been adopted long before by his company the balance-sheet would simply show £IOO of capital on the one side and £IOO of cash on the other. Is the litter a fair statement of our imaginary trader's position ? We do not think so, and, apparently the Now Zealand Court adopted the same view." It is some satisfaction to know that the Judge was light, notwithstanding tbc opposite opinions held by such eminent authorities as the President of tbc Bank and—the Honorable Joseph George Waid. REFUSING INFORMATION. Having as good as got his million, Mr Scddon absolutely refuses to say where the money he has spent went to. Mr George Hutchison this afternoon endeavoured to obtain some knowledge regarding expenditure, and was answered by a very straight "I won't give it" by the Premier. One query related to the amounts received for customs duties on articles of every day consumption, such as cotton piece goods, drapery, drugs, fruits, patent medicines, matches, etc., so us to arrive at the manner in which the tarriit' had acted upon the people. Mr Scddon said it was an opposed return and put the Government in a false position, and would have to be debated. To this Mr Hutchison pointed out that he was quite willing to debate it if the Premier would only give him the opportunity, but that autocrat would neither give the return nor an opportunity of debate. Then the member for Patea put his next teaser. Why a return relating to the printing of the electoral rolls setting forth the names of the persons who printed them and the sum to be paid had been refused. This the Premier said was tantamount to a reflection on the Government, and for want of a nore satisfactory reason he concluded with " The Government won't give it." Still the persevering Hutchison continued with another feeler about the small farm associations, the number of settlers resident, the arrears of rent due, etc, and the Minister for Lands replied that this question was merely another Patea invention anda new way of trying to damage the Government at the elections, and he also refused to satisfy Patea, and so Patea had to be content. So that it is clear that the power of the representatives of the people over the purse is gono now that Democracy is triumphant and all the people have to do is to pay their taxes and allow the demigods to spend the money as they choose, and not give the poor satisfaction to those who find it of telling them what has been done with it. The fact is, we arc fast approaching a condition of slavery. It is al most a heresy to say so in these times, but all socialism involves slavery and we are becoming more socialistic svith every Bill that is passed. That contcntion holds good in older countries, but it is intensified with us, who are replacing our resident owners of landed estates by English capitalists who have their rents guaranteed by the State in the shape of interest. The absurd cry of the "Land for the people," when we see the ownership of the land being transferred to the English bendholder, is about the hollowest sham that was ever raised as a party cry. Let anyone look at the changes rung by the present Government in their financial statements, and he will at once see the Hake's progress to ruin. In the Budget of 1801, the virtuous resolution was stated : " Burrowing in the English market must cease." In 1802, the same idea was expressed in these words : "Thenecessity for weaning the colony from a servile dependence on foreign dealers in money." In that same year Mr Seddon in his Public Works Statement was still more emphatic and flowery. He said : "To live within our means, to gradually improve the condition of the country from the revenues received, to prosecute our business without (he aid of the money-'ender. such a policy places us in an independent position and not, as in times gone by when, cap in hand, money was asked and grudgingly given at rates satisfactory to the

lenders, but ruinous to the taxpayers of the colony." In ISO 3, Mr Ward was Treasurer, and he also announced that " the Government believe that borrowing is not necessary and have decided to conduct the business of the colony without having recourse to it." In ISO 1 the jubilant tone changed, and Mr Ward, without mentioning any word of a loan, said he would "ask the House to assent to legislation authorising a loan of a million and a half to be advanced to settleis; also a quarter of a million to purchase native lands, another quarter of a million for the purchase of private lauds, and still a further quarter of a million for roads and bridges; and on the top of all this the Bank of New Zealand got another two millions. After that it was not at all surprising that in ISOo this versatile financier stating in his Budget "The question of the extinction of our loans has given me much concern," and he proceeded to go bond for another .'3 } millions for the Bank of New Zealand ; to pass the Tariff Bill, which is squeezing £OO,OOO more a year out of the people to t ike authority for raising another three quarters of a million, and then to wind up his financial statement with this sentence. "I feel sum that the accusations of borrowing, using the term in its ordinary sense, must fall to the ground." In this year of grace, JBOG, Mr Seddon became Treasurer, and all the excuses having been used up he threw off the mask and said, " The Govern men t borrows money and makes it a permanent debt for the purpose of constructing railways and roads, and also borrows for the* purpose of enabling the local bodies to construct their roads and bridges," and then he gets his million Loan Bill through which he refuses to call a Loan Bill, and he also takes power for about £400,000 more under other heads. If any one who reads through the above extracts can give one single reason why such patent humbugs should be permitted to squander the revenues of the couutry that reason must bo that he has_ blunt axe with some very large gups in it, which he has an abiding faith that Mr Seddon will grind forbim. There is nothing new in the downward progress we sire making. The rapid multiplication of our paid officials is a state of things that happened in the Roman Empire and led to its fall. France was Ihen a Roman colony, and this is what history tells of its fate. " So numerous were the receivers in comparison with the payers, and so enormous was the burden of taxation, that the labourer broke down, the plains becamo deserts and woods grew where the plough had been." And centuries after that same fair land wont through a similar experience just before the Revolution. The public burdens had become such that one quarter of the soil was lying absolutely waste, and in some districts one half was a heath. Ah, but I fancy I hear some socialist say, " That happened under the rule of Emperors, Kings and Aristocrats." Just so, and what are out rulers now ? Oligarchs, autocrats wdio fatten on the people through their legitimate salaries first, their unauthorised allow* ances next, and their unholy profits and salaries out of foreign syndicates afterwards. Socialism is a very pretty ideal—on paper. The Socialism we are drifting to is slavery of the vilest description, and can only have one end—Ruin.