POLITICAL POINTS.

Press, Volume L, Issue 15137, 28 November 1914, Page 8

POLITICAL POINTS.

At. Grey Lynn this week, Mr Fowlds supplied a footnote to his famous denunciation of '.he Wardist Party «s a party no longer emit led to be called Liberal. The Auckland "Star' thus reports the wnt ; — In to another inner. Mr Fowlds caM tliat he wi; puitv of r.o breaca o. f,iith with h* ronBU-.iic'nt.i in leaving tn« Cabinet. Ho id not leave the Liberal r ar, >' l>y £O doii;K' H",> more'.y left the Wardist Party, which is another thing altogether. And !n.s audience the point, and agreed

Mr flerdrcan's mooting in Wellington on Wednesday evening was a great success, but tho "New Zealand Times" "luid t-i belittle it. and did so in the following paragraph, with which it con. eluded i:s report :— A vole of thanks ar.ii continued confidence in* Mr Herdiniin van duly -moved asa eccorukrf. but when it \v is put to tho nicetiriL: i". n-.ct with a miscJ inception, _acdtae cheers for Sir Jcsoph V»"ard outvrcisned aleast in volume thote for the o;hcr side. ••At least in volume." But not, apparently, in respect of the numbers engaged. We do not doubt it. The "Liberals' , have had so much practice in howling down tho Reformers that so far as "volume , ' is concerned, one"Liberal ,, or Red Fed can defeat 200 Reformers.

In the same way, no doubt, the "Liberals" will badly beat the Roformors at the polls—at least in the size of the strokes they make on th 2 ballot-papers. They will cast a minority of votes, hut an absolute majority of graphite.

"During recent years tho Liberals of New Zealand have suffered by allowing every wobbler that .came into ParhV ment or stood for election —every opportunist and rail-sitter who came here ■—to tack himself on to tho tail of the Liberal Parly."

When Mr Rusell, or Mr Isitt, after reading this painful remark, starts up to denounce its author, ho must attune his denunciations to the fact that the author is tho Hon. It. McKenzio.

In strutting before the electors tho chivalrous champion of the small farmer, Mr J. D. Mathews sternly denounces land re-aggregation. ... To show that Mr Mather could not be regarded as quite sincere in his protestations, we wero placed under tho necessity tho other day of referring to his own achievements in the matter of re-aggregation, and also to those of his neighbour and nominator. Maugahao, as most people are aware, was originally a small farm settlement, carrying quite a. number of families, but ;t has since been virtually wolied up by two men under the eyos and during tho administration of the good Liberals. . . Tho actual position is that at Mangahao Mr at present holds uo fewer than <S9 acres, representing sis of tho original areas, an educational reserve, and a forest reserve. ... As a capping ceremony to hifc varied achievements, Mr Mathows has practically been brought out by a settler who lias even out-rivalled him in re-aggroga- ; tion at Mangahao; a settler who rovek in tho absorption of approximately 1400 acres of tho original s raall areas designod to help the struggling farmer!— Pahiatua "Herald."

Mr JLathows, of conrse, can plead good company and good precedents:— (1) Sir J. G. Ward, who is so poor and honest that he naturally feoie ior the -worker. (2) Mr Russell, the enemy of the land monopoly that allows him only 6-1,000 acres. (3) Br. McXab, tho enemy of the land speculator and -the terror of the rich. And so on.

On November lHh, WOS (election manifesto), Sir J. G. Ward spoke of "eighteen years ago" : — Wo turned our backs (he said) upon land monopoly, then unrestricted and rampant, aa ■witness "the fact that 58-1 owners held no Ices an area than 10,100,000 acre*. Hβ repeated thus statement on December Oth, 1011, quoting the same figures as evidenco of tho "land monopoly, ' which, ho said, he had "destroyed." Tho Year Book for 1911 (pp 525-6) show- that 490 persons held 16,037,823 acres. Comment appears to be unnecessary. « On Wednesday the local Opposition paper, referring JLo tho State Fire Insurance Office, said: "The slump last year is directly traceable to tho attack the Reformers mado on this Liberal enterprise." Tho extent of "tho slump" is apparent from the follcnving table:--Year emdod Trcmnim Dec. 3let. Income. £ 1010 .. .. •• 40.552 inn .. .. •■ ■'"j 7 ' , - 5 191° •. •• •> , .''W 1313 ." K>.m

. And in just tno. same way every other good thing has "slumped" under Reform. The Post Office Savings Bank, for instance, showed the- following excess of deposits:— ' Kxcese oi Your. dcpoeiU. 101-1 .. .. -~o 000 1013 '. 245,030 13U .(10*inoi>the) •■• 1,020,562

4 The ■■Slump" is terribly plain in tho statistics of land purchased for settlement: — Area acquired x (arrest. £ 1903-10 .. 42,80.". -2C0,79."» 191 MI .. H,3tt) ISS.TTKi 1311-1-2 .. 44,117 SSI.4SS 191'2-ir. .. .V2.00S 4-28,04-J

1913-H .. Uljlfrl 3C0.70S *_ A? for the Public Trust Office, the. Opposition cannot bring themselves to quote tho painful figures which show how the business of tho office "slumped"' under Reform: — >'o. of of Net Kstatts. EeiaVs. I'roSts. £ £ 3010-11 .. 611-2 8.W2&-1 n,3IV 1011-I'-' C6Ol 0.03,353 25,910 1012-1.! .. MD6 11555.3H 27,551 1913-14 .. 02fK 12,283,883 a 222

_ ♦ If it i.s a question of the rise of public indebtedness per head, the case against Reform is just as strong as the | disclosed by the above figures. Here are particular?: — £ c. d. Rise, in debt p*r bead in 1a.. ,, - two 1 ycare of Wardwm ■ ..374 Biso in first two y«ar3 of Reform -.490 It is just the same with taxation per head — I -Cβ. d. Rise in taxation per head ia last two years of VTardism .. • ■ 0!S 4. Kise. in Srei two roars of Reform .. 0 G 2