A NOTABLE SPEECH.

Evening Star, Issue 7308, 5 September 1887, Page 4

A NOTABLE SPEECH.

We continue the ‘ Advocate’s ’ report of Mr Bruce’s Marton speech :

THE LAND QUESTION,

The Premier told you from this platform that be was a believer in land nationalisation, and that he was about to give practical effect to his views, a statement which has frobably already done this Colony harm, t would be impossible for me to enter into this question, as with all the social and economic issues involved, it is one of the very largest to be found even in the region of abstract principles, where it is, I believe, destined to remain. Aud however possible the adoption of such a scheme at the first settlement of the country, I do not believe that we shall ever see it seriously enter the domain of practical politics. But what does it mean ? The State resuming all the lands of the Colony, and letting them to a State tenantry. Now, let me put the question in a very small compass. Does anyone believe that under such a system the volume of national produce would be greater than under freehold tenure ? It would be presumably less, but we will allow, for argument’s sake, that it would be equal. Where then is the implied gain? Clearly, the gain, if any, resolves itself into a question of distribution, with all which that implies. Aud just fancy, if you can, the costly machinery of such a system, and the power which it would place in the hands of a corrupt Government. Pushed to its logical conclusion, it means Socialism, and 1 am not one of those who wish unduly to extend the functions of the State. I look upon all Governments as mere necessary evils, and the less we have of them the better. Another revolutionary measure of the Premier and Minister of Lands is the seizure of large estates. They propose to give twenty men the power to seize upon any property containing upwards of 1,000 acres, either with or without the owner’s consent. He is to be paid property tax valuation, with 10 per cent, added, the Government finding the money, and letting to each tenant at 5 per cent, on outlay. What a ridiculous and uncalled-for measure, when we have so many millions of acres of wastelands. Men who really want land could obtain it on more favorable terms from Government direct. And if it costs, say, LlO per acre, as it will do where they are clamoring for it in the vicinity of towns, it will really be no boon to those who get it; and the State is certain eventually to be a loser. Twenty men could go, incited by one or two bad men, and practically blackmail one who in years gone by had hewn his property out of the wilderness, round which every fibre of his heart clung, and who might not wish to take ten times the property tax valuation. You have no guarantee that those taking possession are competent men, and in many instances farms would soon be unoccupied, the State being the loser. It would also, in the disposal of properties practically to the Government of the day, give splendid opportunities for jobbery and corruption. And if you give twenty men the power to-day to seize upon 1,000 acres, you will, if you are at all logical or consistent, give two, three, or five men the power to seize 100 acres to-morrow, It strikes at the very root of one of the most fixed principles of AngloSaxon institutions—the right, the security of property; and it repudiates the very existence of that sentiment which such a powerful factor in our every-day lives, and which no statesman worthy of the name, however prosaic his.nature, would ever attempt to ignore. 1 shall just glance at another of - the' land schemes of these theo-

rists. I allude to Mr Ballance's special settlements. This is a device for relieving congestion in centres of population, and looks well enough theoretically considered. But let us cast a flash on] it from the bull’seye lantern of practical common sense. This scheme ,gives to men a perpetual lease of holdings averaging thirty acres each ; also furnishing them with money to build cottages and do some other improvements They are expected to pay 5 per cent, on the capital value of their holdings and the money thus advanced. Now, if you were to select 100 of the best men to be found in Rangitikei, and place them altogether on a block of land away in the bush, do you think they would be successful? You know they would not; but when it is remembered that these people are tal en from the ranks of the unemployed in large towns—out of the slums, as we were told ; that these classes are, as a rule, wanting in those qualities which command success in any occupation; that they have neither knowledge of, nor aptitude for, country pursuits—then wc arc justified in assuming that the whole experiment will prove a costly failure. These people, or a majority of them, will find their way, when Government funds are exhausted, back to the slums with the unerring instinct of carrier pigeons. Let us look at the question from a business point of view. A Minister invests L 70.000 of the people’s money, and he tells us that lie anticipates a return of 3 per cent. Would you expect it from such tenants, settled under such conditions? Would any capitalist in New Zealand invest in such securities ; or would any of you, if you had money to spare ? I think in this matter Mr Ballance’s zeal has outrun his discretion. Now, I will briefly, as before, give you my opinion as to the methods by which wc should dispose of our waste lands. I am opposed to the auction system, as it runs up the price, transferring capital from the pocket of the producer, where it is of most use to the country, to the colters of. the State, where it is, perhaps, of least, and where certainly much of it is wasted. I would cut up land so as to place those who are poor and those comparatively well off in close proximity, as they are useful to each other. If we could, after purchase and survey, dispose of the land without loss at LI per acre, I would give, say 100 acres to a poor man, balloting for it, at L 5 a-year, with a purchasing clause at LI. Then, beside 'him a larger block for a man possessed of some capital. But, before allowing him to ballot for it, I would require him to show that he had a given capital; also binding him to certain improvements and residential regulations ; and I would also have cash sections for rich men, who might otherwise bo balloted out of the field. I will conclude this subject by saying that I am a steadfast believer in freehold tenure, both from a social and economic point of view'. Freehold tenure creates energy and self reliance, self-respect, and dignity. These are the principal methods, which I have already shown yon, whereby the Government propose to recall the prosperity of by-gone years ; quack remedies, calculated to shake confidence and paralyse enterprise. 1 REMEDIES FOR THE COLONY’S CONDITION. Now I will give you my remedies: In the first place, Freetrade—no additional taxation on the necessaries or useful appliances of life. Next, we must nationally, as we would as honest men individually, attempt to set our house in order, with the fixed determination to make both ends meet. Now let there be no mistake about it—l will not consent, if elected, to an additional penny of taxation until it is demonstrated to bo absolutely necessary. We must, in the first place, retrench and economise ; and how is this to be done ? Now I am not so much going to indicate amounts as to show in what direction I would support reductions. I told you, when last a candidate, that I was opposed to so much higher education, I still hold that view for various reasons. Higher education is a luxury which the State is not called upon to provide. If rich people want it for their children, let them pay for it, and private enterprise will supply the want. The secondary schools in towns are mainly used by the people of the towns, only about one child in seven being a boarder ; and no doubt the scholars arc almost entirely the children of well-off people. What use arc these schools to the children of poor country people ? But lam not in favor of meddling with our primary system. I would give all children the opportunity of learning up to the sixth standard, and you have then placed the key of knowledge in their hands. Literature is now cheap and abundant. Now that every man has a vote, we must educate. I would even include elementary political economy, giving axiomatic rudimentary knowledge, which would furnish the basis for discussing problems in after years. It has been said, with great truth, that “ a good education is the best fortune a poor man can give his child, and which no one can take from him.” We arc paying at present LSI,OOO in capitation fees for children under seven, but if we were to exclude those under that age it would practically close many of our outlying schools. But I think it would meet the difficulty if in all schools where, say, forty children of the ago of seven and upwards were found, we were to exclude those under that age. A considerable saving might, no doubt, be effected in our Legislative expenditure. To begin with, the Governor’s salary might, no doubt, bo somewhat curtailed ; and next, I think that Ministers’ salaries should be materially reduced. There has been a cry in some quarters for the abolition of the Upper House; but to this I am entirely opposed. I consider it a most valuable branch of the Legislature. During the time I have been in Parliament it has clone yeoman service in the interests of the Colony. But the members might be reduced to twenty-five or thirty ; yet for various reasons this might take some years to effect, I think their salaries might be reduced by half. ... I would reduce

the salaries of members of the Lower House fifty guineas, not that they get too much, nor so much for the saving which it would effect, but for the moral weight which it would give them to retrench elsewhere. A considerable saving might in the future be effected by a return to quinquennial Parliaments. It is said that each election costs the country L,SO,000; but I have no doubt that, directly and indirectly, it costs a great deal more. These triennial elections keep the constituencies in a state of unrest and chronic irritation, both personal and political. The smoke of one battle has hardly cleared away before the contending forces are ramming their charges home for the next engagement. It is said by those qualified to form an opinion, that some saving might be effected in our Civil Service by amalgamation of offices. If any alteration is to be made, I hope it will be done as soon as possible, as these continual cries for reduction have a most disturbing effect upon what is, even if overmanned, a really excellent and efficient service. I am not quite clear as to the wisdom of reduction on our defence expenditure. Had it rested with my vote to do so, I should never have undertaken these costly works; but would it be judicious to abandon in any degree what wo have done ? In the event of another war scare—an extremely probable hypothesis—the country would again call out for expenditure, I have a strong feeling in the direction of reduction in this item, but will not pledge myself either way. I should be guided by circumstances. If these and auy other reductions suggesting themselves did not make ends meet, I would make up the deficit with something additional in property tax, as I believe in Gambetta’s maxim, to tax what men own rather than what they use. If we do not now economise from choice, we shall very soon have to do so from necessity. But the Government which undertakes the task will have some purgatorial experiences. The opposition which they will receive from all interested, directly and indirectly, will be of a most positive character; and the support from the many will bo, I fear, of a very negative character indeed. But th)y will deserve the active support of all who intend making this Colony their homo. Now, just a few words in reference to borrowing. Some advocate an immediate cessation of borrowing, others a taperiug-off policy. Well, I think that we must borrow to complete those works which are likely to pay ; and I think that less than a million will do that—perhaps half a million. Aud then, unless the work of settlement is to stand still, I believe that we shall still have to borrow to provide roads and bridges for the pioneers of colonisation. But under the Government Loans to Local Bodies Bill, 1 think the money will be judiciously spent—in fact, that it will be a good investment. Bat we must have no heavy borrowing policies, I do not wish, in saying this, to have any out at Sir Jnlips Vogel, when we now hear so much against him. I will, in my humble way, say something, in his favor; as I think that, with a good brake on, he would be a valuable man to the country. He ib, after all, the most towering figure in

Australasian public life. His great natural abilities, his vast experience, and his at once generous and intrepid nature, which has never turned its back on either friend or foe, gives him a position which is unique in the House and in the country. But, as I told you when last a candidate, neither he nor any other man can show you a royal road out of your difficulties.

THE GOVERNMENT. Now, I wish to say a few words in reference to Governments in general, and the present Government in particular. Its course throughout has been one of sinuosity and inconsistency, coupled with an utter disregard of all constitutional precedent. Our political history for the past three years is such as no New Zealand colonist can look upon with satisfaction. In 1884 they practically promised the country Freetrade and a reduction of taxation ; in 1883 they brought down a Protectionist tariff, and though defeated they still retained their seats. In 1886 they told us that retrenchment was a humbug and a sham, at the same time ventilating the idea of a heavy borrowing policy ; and in 1887, seeing the temper of the country, they tell us how much they have retrenched, and how much more they can do in this direction if only permitted to retain their seats on tho Treasury benches, at the same time taking credit for a moderation of expenditure which was forced upon them by the Opposition. And last session, in direct opposition to the policy which they announced in 1884, they endeavoured to hang the millstone of Protection round our necks, and saddle us with additional taxation of about a quarter of a million annually. What a record, when taken with the flourish of trumpets which heralded their advent to office ! It would be well, as Mr Mackenzie, the able member for Mount Ida, remarked, if “our political history for the last three years had been written on on a slate, so that it might be wiped out with the sponge of oblivion.” And now they tell us that their policy is one of three D's, two of them being of a vague, indefinite, socialistic character, whilst ours is that of one D—the policy of despair. But the policy which Hercules gave to the waggoner was not one of despair, ami that is our policy, and the only one which can extricate us from our difficulties. Now, a foolish Government can do much to injure a country and retard its progress, and all that a wise one can do is to give the people an opportunity to do for themselves. I do not blame the present Government for the depression, although I believe they have done something towards aggravating it; but I do blame them for inducing the people to believe that they could recall the prosperity of bygone years. Such tactics can only have the effect of diverting the gaze of tho people from the only quarter whence help can come—that is, self-help—and inducing them to look for assistance to this, that, or the other heroic or ml caplandim policy. I hope the Government will endorse the decision of the last Parliament, and that we shall have a Ministry who will endeavor to teach a politicaffy-demoralised people that it is only by individual industry and thrift that we can again, if slowly yet surely and hopefully, resume our course on the pathways of prosperity and progress, Tha wealth of a State is that of the individuals who compose it.