The Otago witness.

Otago Witness, Issue 1650, 7 July 1883, Page 17

The Otago witness.

WITH WHICH IS INOOBPOBATBD THB 'BOUTHSBJn MEBOOBY.'

SATURDAY, 7th JULY, 1883

The Public Works Statement has one good quality — it is brief. It does not, indeed, tell us much regarding the past year's operations that we did not know before, though it gives us a few additional details. The expenditure for railways and other undertakings under the immediate control of the Minister of Public Works amounted only to £574,935, but authority had been given to the Agent-general to contract for plant and rolling-stock to the amount of £210,205, and the outstanding liabilities within the Colony amounted on 31st March last to £439,593. Rather over 50 miles of railway have been opened during the year, making the total length of lines open for traffic 1373 miles, and Beveral short sections are on the point of completion, so we may expect a somewhat greater extension of our railway system this year. With rather over a million in hand, about half of which will be available for railways, we ought to be able to push on the works in progress with considerable vigour, so that missing links may be completed with the least possible delay. We can, if we choese, raise another million early next year, and are therefore not crippled for want of money. The one little sop which the Minister gives to the Otago Cerberus is the promise that the Otago Central shall be pushed on with more vigour this year, and it is quite time that a contract should be got out to carry the line :»s far as the entrance to the Strath-Taieri Plain. Canterbury is not to get its West Cnast railway yet, as the Government have no money available for the purpose, and do not Bee their way, consistent with good faith io the public creditor,

to borrow specially for the purpose. The lauds on each side of the possible routes are, however, we are gravely informed, to be reserved from sale : as if anyone would be at all likely to buy land in that barren wilderness. We do not know that more could have been fairly expected by the Canterbury members under the circumstances ; but no doubt they will evince some discontent. As to the East Coast extension of the Northern Main Trunk line, that is to be postponed till a decision is arrived at regarding certain proposals, to which we shall presently refer. The North Island Mam Trunk line to connect Auckland with the present system is to be advanced no further this year than the survey of the rival routes. The Taranaki-Foxton line will be completed, with the exception of a section of six miles, for which a contract is in course of preparation. Meanwhile the private line from Wellington to Foxton will doubtless be pushed forward with vigour, as the Company is in funds, and within two years through communication between Wellington and New Plymouth should be complete. The progress we are making, therefore, is steady and constant, if not quite so rapid as some impatient spirits would desire. As regards working railways, the figures as telegraphed showing the percentage of earnings have evidently been incorrectly transmitted, and we will defer comment on these till the printed Statement is before us. The additional expenditure for the year of £69,722 is accounted for in great part by the increased cost of maintaining and improving the permanent way, fences, <fee. The increase of traffic and running expenses was only £28,360, which is not excessive considering the large increase of traffic. The reduction in the tariff is mainly responsible for the unfavourable ratio between receipts and expenditure on which we have before commented, Mr Johnston tells us that since 1880 the Government have made reductions on agricultural produce amounting fco £100,000. This is a concession, and is, we think, to some extent an unwise concession, to Canterbury interests. It must not be forgotten that in thus favouring a particular industry, however important that industry may be, the taxpayers as a whole necessarily suffer, and have to make up a deficiency which is artificially created at the expense of other industries. We have never been able to endorse the wisdom of this policy, which we do not believe to be necessary in the interests of settlement, and which savours of Protection. Mr Johnston urges the necessity of the tariff being under Ministerial control as one reason for not appointing a i board of management ; but if we take the view that those who use the railways should pay the cost of working them, and at least 5 per cent, interest on the cost of construction, the argument is all the other way, as ifc is evident no Minister can resist political pressure, while an independent board of management probably would. The Government have, howevex-, decided to ask permission of the House to appoint a Minister of Railways, to have full control of the traffic, leaving construction only in the bands of the Minister of Public Works. The portfolio will, we have no doubt, be united with that of Agriculture, and the coming man is understood to be Mr E. G. Weight, who has certainly some qualifications for the post, bub, as a strong Canterbury man, will naturally have a keen eye to the interests of his own Provincial District. The chief point of interest in the Statement was left till the last. From time to time we have had motions before the House affirming the desirability of making landowners whose holdings are adjacent to railway-lines, and are supposed to be greatly improved in value in consequence, pay a part of the cost of these line.«, or of the interest on their cost. Last session a Committee of the House reported in favour of the future application of this system, or rather recommended its consideration to the House. The principle has, however, never thoroughly approved itself to the Legislature, though there is a good deal to be said for it, and at the end of last session it was left an open question. It is far too late now, when the lands have in many cases changed haeds at high values, and other interests have been created, to apply it generally in the case of lines already constructed and in operation, and we suspect there will be great difficulty in applying it to lines in couise of construction or iv future to be constructed, because of the apparent inequality of advantages which will in that case be enjoyed by some

colonists as compared with others who* also pay taxes. The feeling of the Hou.<e is, however, now to be fairly tested. Mr Johnston's proposal applies to the future, and not to the 1 past. It is twofold in its character. He will ask for power either to take a certain area of land adjacent to new lines of railway from the owners, granting compensation at something like 25 per cent, more than the property tax valuation ; or, as a second and more probable alternative, to value the land before and after the railway -is made, and charge it with a parr, s«y one-half, of the increment, subject to interest at 5 per cent, until redeemed. The proposal is not inequitable in itself, only it will now cover very little ground, and affect but few individuals The landowners on the Northern extension of the Canterbury Main Trunk line by the East Coast are those who will be chiefly affected, and those few on the Otago Central line in a far lesser degree, while a few others in scattered localities, along the branch lines in progress or projected, might also come within the scope of the proposal. Ifc ia true that the principle, once adopted, will be applicable to all future extensions ; but we may be quite certain that the very partial operation at present of any such mode of getting at the " unearned increment " will cause the proposal to be looked at with scant favour in the House, and especially among Northern members, notwithstanding the fact that the Northern lines are the greatest drag on the finances of tho Colony. Mr Dargaville, for instancu, speaking last session on the question of local rating for public works, said : " I wish to record my protest against this proposal altogether. I fail to see why persona whose properties are to be made of value in the future should be treated differently from persons whose property has been increased in value in the past. I also protest against the proposal to impose a heavy tax upon persons living in thinly-populated districts, where railways can hardly pay at the outset; while persons in more prosperous districts — where, through the large amount of population, short lines of railway will pay — will gofreo." Mr Conolly, the present Minister of Justice, said in the same debate : " I say it would be a monstrous injustice to say that those who have been benefited in the past should not be taxed, while those to be benefited iv the future should." It may be said that the proposal to rate districts to make up the deficiencies in railway receipts is very different from the present proposals of the Government, as in the case of the latter all turns upon the actual improvement in. value of the land : if there should be no improvement within a given time in consequence of the construction of the railway, the landowner pays nothing ; if there is, he gets a share of it. The same objection will apply, however, as ia embodied in Mr Dargaville's and Mr Conolly's protests above quoted— that it is unfair to make fish of one and flesh of another. There is one answer which may be made to that — viz., that it is absolutely necessary to obtain some assistance from the landowners, or the railways of the future cannot be made, since we are already so heavily indebted. If they will not help themselves the State may refuse to help them, as it is surely not bound to make any particular line merely for the benefit of a few landowners. If the landowners could be consulted as to whether they would have the railway on these conditions or not, there would be no injustice. We nevertheless foresee many practical difficulties in carrying out either plan. If the land were taken over by. the State for re-sale in smaller allotments, the probability is that the State, after finding a large sum of money to re-pur-chase the land, would not make so good a bargain as many suppose. Property tax valuations are by no mean a ♦' •, safest test of value. If it were left ia the hands of the large landowner subject to a charge upon it, then settlement would not be promoted. The Government, nevertheless, deserve credit for making a practical effort to grapple with a difficult problem, though they will not, in all probability, stake their existence on carrying the bill which is to embody their views, and if they do not it will hardly be carried. It would have been well had this point of public policy been settled ten yeai-s ago, but neither party ia the House had the courage to face it. Now, we fear, it is too late.

A number of the mora important items on the Public Works Estimates are telegraphed by our correspondent this week. The amount set down for the ©tago Cenfcmllin© is £130,000.