LOAM FLOTATIONS

Evening Star, Issue 19409, 18 November 1926, Page 5

LOAM FLOTATIONS

THE CASE FOB AUSTRALIA BARKER'S PUNGENT REMARKS Press Association —By Tole£rraph—Copyright. LONDON, November 17. (Received November 18, at 8.9 a.m.) In presiding at a meeting of the English, Scottish, and Australian Bank, Mr Andrew Williamson, referring to the loan pamphlet recently issued, pointed out that Australia, through giving the flower of her young manhood to help in the Great War, eventually incurred expenditure exceeding £600,000,000. Of this £267,000,000 had been repaid out of revenue, and £341,000,000 was still outstanding. Over £90,000,000 of the Commonwealth’s original war debt arose from its debt to the Imperial Government for services rendered and goods purchased in connection with the war. A great proportion bore interest at 5 per cent., and it was all being repaid in semi-annual instalments, being equivalent to a further 1 per cent, on the whole. “ Compare this with our Allies’ treatment of us in respect to our advances to them,” continued Mr Williamson. “ Yet now Australia is being reproached with the figure at which her debt stands, although the war debt accounts for over one-third of it. This attack and its method of laising doubt as to tho security behind the debt is unworthy, and if it is the uninspired expression of the opinion of the two joint authors, it is not lacking in audacity. This unprecedented dictation from a private source through public propaganda seems to go beyond legitimate criticism, and ought strongly to be deprecated.” Mr Williamson added that in Australia, as in Britain, industrial progress and development were hampered and retarded by the heavy burden of taxation. “It cannot be too_ strongly impressed upon the Commonwealth and the State Governments that they should devote their utmost energies to effecting economies in the public services, and restricting any increase in their indebtedness to expenditure essential to the development of the natural resources of the country. Extravagance and wasteful expenditure will inevitably injure its credit.” [Controversy arose last month through the issue of a pamphlet by Mr Sydney Russell Cooks, a London stockbroker, and Mr E. H. Davenport. It was “ dedicated to the Imperial Conference, 1926,” and entitled “ Australian Finance,” in which they strongly criticised Australia’s loan methods and the expenditure of loan money, asked: “Is the system_ safe? Are trustees justified in continuing to hand over a large proportion of tho nation’s savings to such reticent and pertinacious borrowers ? In fact, is Australian finance sound?” Mr Bruce vigorously replied to the statements made in the pamphlet, declaring that they bristled with inaccuracies and omissions.]