THE WAKANUI ROAD BOARD.

Ashburton Herald, Volume II, Issue 517, 4 December 1879, Page 2

THE WAKANUI ROAD BOARD.

: The usual monthly meeting was held at the Office to-day. Present—Messrs. H. T. Winter (Chairman), E. Saunders, Hugo Friedlander, and D. Wilson. CORRESPONDENCE. Correspondence was read from residents in Trevorton, asking that both footpaths be formed on the Beach road through Trevorton. Refresh survey of a road near Kennedy’s. The Chief Surveyor wrote that his department could not undertake to re-survey sections where the pegs had been removed through carelessness by owners of sections, and the Secretary was instructed to inform Mrs. Gibson that the pegs required to be put in by an authorised surveyor. From the Bank of New Zealand, stating that the amount of £764 15s 4d had been paid into the credit of the Ashburton Road Board, and had been divided as follows : —Wakanui Road Board, £361 13s Id ; Long Beach Board, £399 2s 3d. A petition was read from Mr. John Lambie and 14 others, asking for a road to be formed from Mr. Murdock Bruce’s gate to the Rakaia boundary road. To be reported on. STORM-WATER.

From the County Council requesting the Board to assist them m preventing obstructions being placed across natural water courses. COUNTY COUNCIL OFFICE. A notice was sent by the County 7 Council that they would not require the Board’s offices after the present month. THE SUBSIDIES. Messrs. Bullock and R. Friedlander waited upon the Board as a deputation from the Borough re their share of the subsidy lately paid by Government, and pointed out that the sum. of £Bl 19s. was due to the Borough from the subsidy. Mr. Hugo Friedlander pointed out that the (lovermnent had only paid half the subsidy and suggested paying the share due by the Board. This was agreed to, and the balance was referred to the Longbeach Board. leadley’s drain.

From John Corbett and others, pointing out that unless the drains on Leadley’s road were let and completed before harvest, should wet weather come on their crops would be irretrievably damaged. It was resolved that John Black’s tender for No. 1 drain at £365 10s be accepted, and for No. 2 section, P. Stewart at £92 Bs. MISSCELLANEOUS. Mr. P. Innes applied for the road leading to his place to be formed. It was pointed out that this road gave access to no one but Mr Innes, and the Board resolved that the surveyor report on the matter. It was resolved that no work be let or business transacted except at ordinary or special meetings of the Board. The Surveyor’s report was read and adopted. TENDERS. The Board resolved to call for tenders for formation of the Seaside road, and a drain on the boundary of Wilson and Fitzgerald’s sections on the Beacli road, and the Overseer was instructed to give notice to land holders re cutting gorse off roads on their frontages. ■ The application for formation of Denihay’s road was refused. Tenders were accepted for—Smith’s road, Arthur O’Neil, formation, ss, per chain ; shingling, Is Id per yard. Collecting rates, James Wi'kie, 5 per cent, also to act as collector of Dog Tax at 10 per cent. NEW SITE FOR OFFICES. The Chairman pointed out that according to la’y they could not hold their annual meeting in tiip township, and proposed that the election take place at the Wakanui school on Wednesday, 7th, 1880, and three new members will have to be elected in place of Messrs. E. Saunders and Joseph Hunt, who retire by rotation, and Mr. David Wilson, who resigns. A number of accounts were passed for payment, and the Board adjourned.

The fallowing" letter gggoars in the ; ‘ f Otago Daily Thjaes's * ■ \ v*; 4 -Sir, —I am fiof, surprised at the Colonial treasurer’s proposals for a property tax. Tile New Zealand Conservatives did not like the land tax. They had no desire to ?ee. t’ie h eap any- benefit,-from the unearned incre:.se" ia-the vaitie of’and Lii 107-8 they strove hard to get’ what, they termed the A merican all-round system of taxation introduced. This, the Liberals -resisted, but; the Tory-party- having obtained the ascendancy, 1 of course'the Land Tax Act must be repealed. This is ostensibly'done in the interests of the “ hard-working.- pioneer settler” and the struggling city*?tradesman!” Now, I wish to point out what this property tax means, and I shall mrst show how it affects the class named by the Treasurer as the

“ HARD-WORDING EIONEER SETTLERS.” At present the settler pays one halfpenny in the pound on the value to sell of his land, minus £SOO, and minus all improvements. In order to encourage him the present Tory Ministry propose to charge him one penny in the pound on the total value to sell of his land, and also one penny on the total value of all his property, minus £3OO worth. Let me take a case. A settler has 300 acres of land worth £5 peracre, excluding improvements —£1,500 in all. Under the Land Tax Act he pays M on £I,OOO, or £2 Is. Bd. Under the proposed property tax, he has to pay at least double that amount for his land ; but that is not all. He has to pay a tax on all his realised personal property as well. Suppose his improvements, including house, barn, stable, and farm buildings (£500), improvements on farm, ploughed a-id sown land, fencing, ditching, &c. (£1,000), are together £1,500 —that would make his land, with improvements, £lO per acre, £3oooin all. But he has other personal property—viz., sheep, cattle, pigs, and farm implements, furniture and machinery, on a low estimate another £SOO worth of property ; and he believes in the 1 auline maxim, “ Owe no man anything,” and has no debts ; then he would have to pay on £3500 minus £3O0 —that is, on £3200, -and this at a penny amounts to £l3 (is. Bd. The net gain (!) to him is an extra tax of £ll ss. ! ! This is the aid the Conservative Government grants to the “ hardworking pioneer settler. ’ ’

Now let me see how it affects the “ STRUGGLING CITY TRADESMEN.”

I first suppose he is the freeholder of his city frontage, and I assume that he has his building in Dunedin in one of the best positions. The result will be that he will have say, 33ft.- frontage,at value of £7O or £IOO per foot. This is, I believe, the highest. Suppose it is £7O, then he pays a halfpenny on £2,310 minus £SOO = £lBlO, which means a tax under the present Land Tax Act of £3 15s. sd. But then the Conservatives are anxious to help the struggling city tradesmen, and therefore lie must pay a tax on all his property. This consists of his lands, his buildings, his furniture, and stock. Suppose his buildings cost him £1,500, his furniture and stock another £1,500. lam taking a struggling city tradesman, hut also one who has obeyed the apostolic maxim of not getting into debt. He will be helped by being asked to pay, insead of £3 15s. 5d., the sum of £2O 17s. Gd. How fervently must he thank the Conservative Government for such help ? And now I leave the two classes who were so grievously burdened under the Land Tax Act —‘ ‘ The hard-working pioneer settler ” and the struggling city tradesman ” —to their cogitations on .the help that is about to be vouchsafed to them ; and I wish to deal with the MANUFACTURER. How stands it with him? Whether we are Protectionists o.i Freetraders we all alike recognize the benefits of diversified interests. The question may well be asked, how can we best obtain them. If they are paying industries, all admit we ought to strive for thefii. How is local industry, then, affected ? I shall take the example of a soapwork. And I again assume the soap manufacturer owns the land on which he has his “ works,” and that he too is employing his own capital, and is not in debt —or if in debt, that the debts due to him equal the debts he owes. I also suppose his land is worth £3500 —a fair, if not high value. On this he pays a tax of a halfpenny on £3OOO, in all £G ss. Now ■what, will he have to pay under the proposed Property Tax? He lias buildings valued at £3OOO. He has also gone to considerable expense to import machinery, on which, perhaps, he lias paid a Customs’ duty, and this he has valed at £2OOO. Then he has other personal property, namely tallow and manufactured soap, worth at least £IOOO more— (in all these estimates lam taking the estimates of a small soap manufacturing concern) — and he has other personal effects, furniture, jewellery, &c., worth £3OO ; in all, property worth £9BOO, and on this he has to pay £39 11s. Bd., so he is aided (?) by a Conservative Government to the extent of £33 6s. Bd. His thanks will be exceedingly expressive. And how fares THE MERCHANT ?

He is a necessity in our present social life. He is the distributing machine. Is lie to be exempt 1 or does the Conservative Government look with a favoring eye on him ? First, lie has to pay for his land. Let me assume he has a store in a good position—the value of the land on which it is built is £3OOO. At present he pays £5 4s. 2d. Under the fostering care of a Conservative Government he is, however, called upon to pay a tax on his buildings, and on all his personal property. This means, on his stock. Again 1 suppose he is free from debts or rather that the debts due him equal what he owes. His stock is valued stock is valued at £IO,OOO, and his buildat. £3500. His contribution to the revenue will therefoae be £63 6s. Bd. He also must be pleased that in the late election he aided to return three gentlemen pledged to turn out Sir George Grey and have fair and equitable taxation !

I have now dealt with the ALL HOUND PROPERTY TAX

as affecting the settlers, the tradesmen, manufacturer, and merchant. How it affects other classes, and what effect deducting the “just debts” due from the value of the property will have, I propose to show in another letter. Meantime, in the cup of bitterness that the classes, I have mentioned have to drink, no doubt the fact that the Auckland district is to have another half a million expended, and that the secrecy of the Telegraph Office has been violated, will be drops of sweetness.—l am, &c., Robert Stoltt.-