The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE. THURSDAY, JAN. 12, 1893.

Waikato Times, Volume XL, Issue 3206, 12 January 1893, Page 2

The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE.

THURSDAY, JAN. 12, 1893.

Equalandexactiusticetoallmen, Of whatsoever slate or persuasion, religious or political.

The taking over of the Cheviot Estate under the provisions of " The Land and Income Tax Act," being the first transaction of the sort, has naturally led to considerable comment in the columns of our eiouthern contemporaries, both editorially and by correspondence. This lias boen mainly confined to two points: The first, as to whether the transaction is a good one in a purely monetary sense; the second, as to whether j the £260,2130 cou'd not have been applied to more useful purposes, and a larger amount of settlement promoted than is likely to result from the transaction. It appears that the estate was in the hands of the trustees under the will of the late Mr Robinson, who disputed the official estimate, and fixed the value at the sum at which it lifts been taken over. No doubt the official valuators looked upon it as a going concern, and estimated accordingly. The trustees, on the other ban 1, Wt'ie no doubt desirous of themselves of the responsibility of managing so large a property, and we gather from our contemporaries that the terms of the will prohibited their sub-dividing, There was little hope at the present tiir.e that any purchaser other than the Government could have been found. We are of course not in a position to" express an opinion on this point, but it is to be presumed that the official valuators knew what they were doing, and the presumption is reasonable that under, the circumstance's the trustees fixed the sum at which they would sell after giving due consideration to the fact that they could neither find a private purchaser for the whole, and were not entitled to sub-divide. It is, therefore, reasonable to suppose that the Government have bought considerably under value if the estate were cut up into suitable divisions. It is, however, the[utter qu -stion with which we hayp'to deal; but before passing to it may be as well to point out that the Government were in a sense compelled to give evidence that thev could and were determined to take over estates glaringly undervalued, by their owners, otherwise the clause giving the power would have been useless for the purpose at which, it aimed—to prevent innumerable disputes, and in consequence a serious shrinkage in the Land tax returns. The foilfcis in tjifi Act, which' provides i)o means of enforcing the Government valuations, except the latent power to take di'cr their property at the value pUt it by disputes. The option- should have been yostcd in them either, to take the property over at the owner's estimate, or to have tho vajui) fixed by a competent tribunal. I|i the case in point there js littls room to doubt tliat the exer'cise of that power was courted by the trustees, and tho Government in consequence lias had to find £260,230 for a property from which they cannot reap any immediate advantage. The Act provides that the purchase money shall be taken from the Consolidated Fund. It is manifest that more than a quarter of a million of money eonld not lie

thus applied without hampering the public service. The money, in consequence, must be borrowed, and interest paid upon it. There is another bad feature in the system, which in there days of ingenious monetary frauds should be considered. Collusion between the valuators and 'owners might lead to some very bad bargains being made liy the Government. But this is a matter of administration which must bo entrusted to the Government for the time being. We have no desire to blame the Government in the matter, for no other course was open to them if the Land tax in the existing state of the law is to be collected; but we maintain that there should be, as we have pointed out above, a tribunal to settle disputes, presided over by a judge of the Supreme Court, whose decision should he final, the losing party to bear the cost. This would be a check upon those who otherwise would attempt to escape the taxation for which they arc legally liable. The necessity for the amendment of thp Act is, to our mind, pretty clearly demonstrated by the case in point. There seenis to be no room to doubt but that the Cheviot Estate, if it had come into court, would have been assessed considerably over the sum tor which it has been purchased. It would, in consequence, have contributed some £3OOO per annum to the land revenue. There is a largo quantity of land in th# hands of the Government which could bo rendered fit for settlement had the quarter of a million been applied to cutting up and reading. So long as there are suitable waste lands for settlement it is impolitic to expend large sums in the purchase of estates which are already contributing to the revenue and adding to the wealth of. the colony, not perhaps in the same degree as if sub-divided. But we maintain that it is better for the country that those who would occupy the sub-divisions should take up land at present entirely unutilised, and yielding no revenue at all. When 'the Government lands are exhausted it. will be quite time enough to commence the compulsory purchase of private lands with the idea of making them carry larger populations, bear more taxation, and yield more wealth. Large estates, however, act on the present party in power much as a red rag does on a bull. Large land-holders they call "social pests," but we may retort that a Ministry which spends a quarter of a million of money in a wrong direction may be fairly said to have earned the soubriquet of "financial muddlers." It is they who are responsible for the Land Tax Act, so that both the sins of legislation and administration lay at their doer.