MR RUSSELL AT HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 2356, 16 August 1887, Page 2

MR RUSSELL AT HAMILTON.

Mlt RtSSri.l. addross.-d the e]'--t ’IS of : Waikato, in l,eQn-sii,-'s Hi;’. Hamilton ; Kii't, evening, Hit W-.r-hii. th- Mav.r I in lli'i chair. Mr Ru-oiil ~n i .;u;n.> f. ; ,- ward complained nf reports as t,-g,, r d- hi> impecuniosity lint whin- lie was not a wealthy man, if he had invested in a farm the capital he had h,-. -t--rf in the Waikato, and mortgaged it f.ir t-.v.i or three tim-s iivaluc as was n- ial, he wnnld now lv ,1 wealthy man. If he left the Waikato hwnnld at mice resign, he was i h--i re n , carpetbagger. .Mr Whyte’s only tw<> plankare Opposition to Government and < ipr- -silion to Mr Russell. The question wa- iwl .l chance of Government hj il the policy ..f the new tho eminent. He Would t.,V for the Government against the Opposition for three reasons, the iir.-t was retrenchment. He quoted Mr Riv-e to support him who said he feared the people had not yet n.-cogni-ei! the urgent need of retrenchment ; iilso Major Atkinson ;ind Mr Whyte recognised the ncees-ity of even further taxation if the people would not five up their present conveniences. The id p--r cent, reduction was an attempt to cut down wayo's. Me wanletl new men—(A voice: Like Russell). He was not in the Governmi'iit. and many men better than he weic not in the Government after lieing ni'.e yours in Parliament. He agreed with Mr Whyte that the question was. Hid ti.e country really want retrenchment? Major Atkinson suggo-led a loan of i’t’O.OPO to a one-horse place like Opnnake. Was he honest for retrenchment? Mr Whyte gave Ministers credit for ability, hut no one could dispute Mr Rallances honesty. (A voice: No; London, £3. r >,000). Whit? A paltry thing like that! We had been disappointed in our reasonable expectation of an increased consumption of alcohol. All leaders saw the necessity of increased taxation. The question between the Government and the Opposition was a question of the property tax and Customs. He was himself in favour of the property tax, and had a strong objection to a land and income tax. A land tax was a class tax ; an income tax was inquisitional, and a tax on industry and ability. Hare followed a lung essay on principles of taxation. Mr Whyte commiserated country settlers for paying l|d per head more for patent medicine and sheep dip, and -Qd on boots. (How about rice, sago and tapioca?) Ti.e Government put 011 taxes to encourage local industries as much as p ossihle. To show the present Ministry was not extravagant, the Governor and Parliament, not Ministers, were responsible for the increases in their allowances and honoraria. In other cases of increased estimates, increased necessities were the cause. For instance, that in the Mining I'ep irlment was well spent, and ho would afford them £103.000 if he thought it would he well spent. i’l'lTA’ir only was the increase from 18801 to 188!i-7, made up by Governor. Legislature, defence and education, which no Government could prevent; on revenue producing services there was a large reduction. He was a sincere friend of retrenchment, and refused to protest against the removal of the Cambridge Clerk of the Court. He agreed with the Government in raising property-tax over £2,500, but disagreed with the removal of exemption. The opposition to Government came from big property owners. 1050 property-tax payers owned £25,000,000 ii: laud ; 33,100 owned £28,030,000. The question of taxation between the Government and Opposition lay between these two classes. Cockatoos had got no benefit from the loans which he and his hearers had to sweat to pay the interest 011. The Property-tax, only \ per cent., could not prevent money coming to them here to earn .3 per cent, instead of 2 per cent. at home, tf they wanted ir -: a-ed taxation and to identify themselves with the big c unpanies. vote for Mr J. R. Whyte—(LouJ cheers. A voice: “Yes, we will)—who was bound to them. (Loud noes and groans). As regards protection, if it were not so late he could read proofs to them that Kngiaml's prosperity had really grown unci era drastic system of protection. Against 11 per cent, of pauperism in New York, Hi per cent, in Free Trade England were in abject iienury. Judicious protection would keep from f our to five millions in the country. He instanced woollen goods, boots and shoes, whisk} - , sugar (for which Waikato was so well suited), and cotton goods. Canada showed that protection made goods cheap-T to the consumer. This was the question of the day, and he would under any circumstances support a Protectionist against a Free Trade Ministry. We could not compete in markets Ki.OOO miles away against America and India, where wages were cheap and appliances scientific. We suffered from want of capital and high interest. Could not the Savings Rank’s and Government Insurance funds be lent at :i to I per cent, to sound companies, such as Hie Cambridge and Waikato Cheese Factories? Our third want was skilled labour. He would encourage Home firms to start branches here by protective duties and bonuses. He would address them again ui the land and railway questions. 1’;;present Legi-dative Council should be wipe ! out and made elective for the future; twenty members to be chosen by the colony at huge and ten by the House; to hold office for seven years, without honoraria. He repeated emphatically he was an independent member, and as regards Mr Whyte’s “ Russell’s hatter party,” he said “So be it.” He would not be tied to the tail of any party. Questions being invited by the chainnan, Mr Parr said he had asked Mr Kns-cll on his last visit if he could tell the price American farmers get for their products. Mr Russell : “ I can’t tell.” Mr Parr: “Or those in Yictoria ?” Mr Russell: “ I can’t tell. I’m not a walking encyclopaedia to answer a question like that on the spur of the moment. (“It was asked two months ago.”)

Mr Parr: “ You said manufactures would make New Zealand prosperous. How (lien lias England 111 >• r cent, of paupers?"

Mr Russell: It would take too long to answer this question, as I should have to go into the tenure of land. In reply to Mr Edmonds, the candidate repeated his recantation on Jthe education question. Mr .Steadman ; I)» you know the amount of money sene out of the colony for paper? Mr Russell: \o; but I believe about L' 120,000 a year. I would be in favour of a protective duty on paper. In reply to questions handed up to the chairman, Mr Russell said that the question of a State Bank of Issue was a very wide one, and he was not prepared to answer on the spur of the moment. A main difficulty was, would the votes remain at par. In his speech he had suggested a means of lowering interest. If (lovernmcnt could get money at reasonable rates he would be in favour of advances to freeholders of under 500 acres.

On the motion of Mr G. Mayes. seconded by Mr J. Caldcrwood, a vote of thanks was accorded to Mr Russell for his able and interesting address. Mr Russell replied in suitable terms, and after the usual compliment to the Mayor the meeting dispersed.