THE LIBERAL PARTY TO THE EDITOR.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 70, 24 March 1914, Page 8

THE LIBERAL PARTY TO THE EDITOR.

Sir,— Although Mr. Atmore spoke at some length at the Town Hall meeting, like a number of Liberals he did nob disclose the Liberal policy. Perhaps the matter is not very important when wo remember tha.t Mr. Massey promised to carry out a marvellous policy which has failed however to materialise. I3oth parties, Liberal and Conservative, liavo sinned in this respect, and it is time that the public should insist on a little more honesty on the part of the politic cians. The absurd statement made by one of the Liberals, tliat H they disclosed their policy the Conservative would steal it is, in my opinion, si con* fession of rank dishonesty. It implies that the Liberals do iwt want to see good measures passed unless thp.y hava the Ministerial job of piloting them through. It looks also as if the Liberal policy is so very close to the Conservative policy that assimilation will lake place very easily. If the Liberals had a genuine Liberal policy there would not be the slightest danget of Uieiv enemies touching it with a ten«foot pole. Will any Liberal therefore enlighten us as to whether tho Liberals propose ti> increase the ordinary land tax. It is not to the point to talk about the graduated tax. That is already the law of tlie land. Wh&b is the sense in Mr. Atmore's complaint that Mr. Massey'e larttl tax is not big enough, when we know that tho LiberaJs do not intend to increase it. Mr. Massey has allowed the Liberal graduated tax to remain in force. Nay, he has done more, He has slightly increased the tax. Before ahy Liberalß make complaints oa thia heading they must frankly recognise that qualitatively they mx in the aame position as Mr. Maesey. ' If their dif* ference then is merely quantitative, th© essence of the matter is that the Liberals shall slate what increases in the land tax they propose, 'Personally I regard bhe graduated tar its & piece t>i shear humbug adopted to dupe a politically' cretinised mob. If the graduated tax produces the effect intended it will produce no revenue. In that ©vent how a,ro we to reduce tho cost of living? The loss which will result to tho revenue from lowering tb.6 Customs tariff must na made up somehow, Similarly the cheapening of Railway fares, the increase of State activities, and enlargement of tl»e pension scheme must involve a reduced revenue. The Liberals talk a lot of nonsense about humanitarian legislation. How are they going to get revenue if they do nob increase tlie lar-d tax? Further, we know that Sir Joseph Ward proposed to increase the exemption on the ordinary land tax in his windy and Gargantuan "Governor's Speech" in February, 1912. We Liberals of the rank and file ought to have more information about these tilings. The party as at present constituted wants another blank cheque on the bank of political power, and when we remember what happened in 1908 we should hesi* tate before we give it to them. On 20th October, 1908, before the General Election, Sir Joseph Ward at tfeilding epoke against compulsory military trait*ing. He said that "they had to guard against any insidious system of militarism in this country in the shape of compulsory military training being driven down the throats of the people of this Dominion. They should be practical. There was no need, as long as they had the British- Navy, for internal defence." Sir Joseph then advocated an improvement in the Volunteer system to vender it more efficient. We know that in tho face of that solemn, constitutional pledge Sir Joseph Ward's Government after tho General Election brought in compulsory military training, and I believe that his attion in the matter had a good deal to do with his defeat in 3911. That pledges are regarded ton lightly in New Zealand is evidenced by the changes of position by several members of Parliament. One ot the present Ministry promised not to become a member ot any freehold Ministry. 1 suppose likeanother member on the opposite side of the House ho thought that iho promt::* was void for lack of consideration. On looking at the whole position it eeeina desirable that tho people should think very hard before deciding whether they will support either LiWtals or Tories at the i>3M, election.— l am, etc., DEMOS.

At the Supreme Court at Greymouth last week {mys thu cmtespondent of tho LyUelton limes), before Ml. Justice Denniston, Mr. HannAii applied to havo the money found on Wilson, sentenced ,to a term of two years' • imprisonment) tor robbery with violence from Thomas Morrison, paid over to Morrison. The amount found on tho prisoner when he was arrested was £2 6s 6d, consisting of a, one-pound note, a half-sovereign, ami 16s 6d in silver. Tho amount ho w&s convicted of stealing was £7, consisting of a£s note and two £1 notes. Hie prisoner said ho objected to the money being paid to Morrison. His conscieneo would not allow him to consent. His Honour said tho application opened up an important point. It was perfect lycleai? that the money found on the prisoner ftt tho time of arrest was not the actual nioiipy stolon, It was n question whether the section of tlie Act applied to nil moneys found on a person at the time oB arrest or whether the restoration only, of the actual property stolen was meant. Ho would like to order that the £2 6s 6d bo refunded to Morrison, for there was no merit in tho prisoner's objection ; he had been vciy proporly fouiirl guilty of stealing Morris6n s money. lie would order tho money to bo restored if ho eouM. but in the meantime ht would look into tlie legal aspect of lh*« question, an it wsi, a very, important poiut,