New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, JULY 14, 1876. THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT,

New Zealand Tablet, Volume IV, Issue 172, 14 July 1876, Page 10

New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, JULY 14, 1876. THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT,

++ We have read the report of what has been called the Financial Statement. There is certainly something about finance in this elaborate production; but it is less a financial statement than a p >litical manifesto. The Premier was, no doubt free to depart in this instance from general usage, and mix up considerations that have generally been kept apart by Ministers. In the present case, however, there was a good excuse. The question of Abolition is, owing to the strange mode of legislation adopted last session, in an anomalous position. Under the circumstances it was hardly possible to confine the financial statement exclusively to finance. There does not, for all that, appear to have been any necessity for introducing so many political considerations, and

loading the statement with so many details of intended political changes and creations. The multitude of topics introduced is calculated to confuse, blind, and mislead. The Minister, no doubt, sees very clearly what he is driving at; but others will require time and hard study to enable them to master his figures, and arrive at a knowledge of his real intentions. If mistakes are made, he will have only himself to blame. The first thing that strikes us, after having read Sir Julius Vogel's financial statement is, that the finances of the Colony are in a state of confusion ; and that money is really wanted, and can not be easily or economically procured. On this account, we were astonished at the proposal to borrow £800,000, or thereabouts, for tbe purpose of consummating Abolition. Would it not be better to leave th* Provinces alone than hypothecate Government securities, in order to destroy the Provinces, and centralize everything ? Common sense bays, under the circumstances, wait a little longer; allow the finances of the Colony to recover somewhat. From time to time, since the Premier brought down his Abolition resolutions, Ministers have assured the public that the land fund should be strictly localised ; and a clause to this effect was introduced into the Abolition Act of last session. Now, however, it appears from the financial statement, that the clause must he repealed. So it has come to this, which had been so clearly foreseen by many, and by ourselves too, that the professions as to the localisation of the land fnnd have not been able to stand the test of one year and one session of Parliament. Let it be designated as it may, the financial statement makes it manifest to ail, not wilfully blind, that the land fund, if Abolition be consummated, is lost to the Provinces, and will forthwith be absorbed into the general revenue. That this would be tbe end— and, further, that this was the end intended, we never entertained a doubt. It was clear to us from the beginning that, without this absorbtion, there was no meaning, and, in fact, no use in Abolition. We were always of opinion that Ministers, unless they got the land fund into their possession for general purposes, did not want Abolition, did not care, for it, and that it would be a nuisance to them ather than otherwise. It strikes us very forcibly that it would be better policy' on tbe part of the Ministers, boldly and honestly to say so at once, than to endeavour to keep up the delusion of localising the laml fund, which no one now believes, and which, at least to our mind, their own acts prove they can hardly believe themselves. Abolition, and the absorption of the land fund into the general revenue may be b^th wise and necessary measures. In tact, it is quite possible they may be inevitable. This is a question that is fairly open to discussion, and it would certainly be for the interests of all that a party should be formeil which would make these two questions their rallying cry. Were tliis done, the country would then see two well defined political platforms, and then their programme could be discussed on their merits, without the necessity of distraction caused by subterfuges, merely collateral considerations, or hypercritical political professions, never intended to be realised. There is one other matter of which we entertaiu no doubt whatever, and it is this :—U the laud fund of this island is to be saved for general purposes in this island, there must be separation between tbe two islands financially, and politically also, so far as is consistent with the existence of two distinct and independent Provinces under a federal form of Government. This has been our opinion from the very first, and we think such an arrangement would conduce greatly to the harmouy, peace, and well being of all New Zealand. Hut certainly, if this be not effected, the sooner the unreal idea of localisinoland fund under Abolition be abandoned the better for aU parties. The localisation of laud fund and Abolition are incompatible ; they are, in reality, mutually destructive. It is astonishing how any can be found who do not see this ; that is, it is astounding to U3, so manifest is it to ourselves.