SIR TAMES CARROLL'S WAERENGA-A-HIKA SPEECH.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXXIX, Issue 3773, 10 November 1914, Page 2

SIR TAMES CARROLL'S WAERENGA-A-HIKA SPEECH.

[TO THE EDITOR] Wir,—Thinking over your report of Sir James Carroll’s speech at Waerenga-a-hika and your sub article on the contents of the speech you certainly express tilings rightly when you said it contained nothing in the way of politics. Of course we have to remember that the party to which Sir James belongs has , no policy to put before the country; neither can they find an- faults or a logical nature to be able to condemn the Massey Government’s Liberal administration. We regret that Sir James with his years of political experience did not give the Waerenga-a-hika audience some facts and figures of criticism on the Government’s bad administration that they could think out themsevles and later weigh out in the balance of their own minds which of the two parties in politics holds the right to govern the destiny of this Dominion from' their past records. In the first place Sir James pleads to the masses of the people in iiis electorate to return him .because of his years of greatness in politics and evidently he now clauns as kind of heredity right to be returned as Gisborne’s representative. However, I am afraid that that plea can no longer be upheld by tlie Opposition candidate for our district. We ask in return what has Sir James Carroll done for our back district to assist in its opening up. Yet he says the Government has disgracefully neglected the wants of the back districts. But why did he not give proof; simply because it is well known that the Massey Government has done more for the opening up of the large properties of the back country in its short term of office, 2-1 years,' than the Ward Government did in the whole of its six years of existence. Let me instance the case of the Advances Department which clearly helps the development of the back country; restrictions that were made by Sir -Joseph Ward in 1912 were all removed by the Massey Liberals in 1914. Whv we find that “ten days” before tbe Massey Liberals took over the Government of this country the Wardite Liberals left it only £64,000 in hand to meet advances of nearly three-quarters of a million and had to certainly decline further advances till the finances were reviewed: and that i, s why the Hon. W. Fraser while in Gisborne rightly told us that he would promise nothing because “he” was not quite sure where we stood. Had it been one of the Wardite Cabinet lie would have promised everything they asked for and kept leading us on a fool’s errand. Again we take the Advances to Settlers Department under the 'Ward and McKenzie Governments. In April 1912 the Ward Government reduced the amount of advances in the case of individual settlers to £SOO and iofused to accept applications for the repayment of existing mortgages. Now, on May 26, 1913, the limit of £SOO imposed by the previous Government was raised to £600 ; on June 30th to £750 and on February of 1914 to £IOOO while during June last “all restrictions were removed” and settlers can now borrow up to £2000; while it was decided to redeem mortgages of settlers to the full limit of the Act, namely £2OOO. Yet Sir James without giving any figures at Waerenga-a-hika said the Massey Government had done nothing for the backbloek settlers of districts. Again let me quote another instance of comparison. “When the Ward Government left office on March 31st, 1912” the funds available in the Advances Department only amounted to £684,259 while commitments bad., been made to the amount of £1,538,023. As an instance of the above I will particularise the items under the above contention, namely Advances to Workers funds available £1,215 (liabilities £557,323), Advances to Settlers £519,4-01 (liabilities .158,685), and Advances to Loral- Bodies, available £163,643 (liabilities £821,515): while under Mr Massey’s administration on March 31st, 1914, the funds at the disposal of the Advances Department amounted to £1,624,000. and the liabilities, to ■ £565,271. Hence we see the un'paTallelle.d, prosperity made by the . Massey Government ip that Uranoh - alone ; to way. ■ nothing About; the fact: that in June,. 1912, under the Wardi tsr pM'ty the limit if

advances to Local Bodies amounted to £5,000 while under the Massey Liberals the limit is £60,000 to £70,000 with all restriction® removed. With your permission I will continue my remarks in a later issue. Yours, ° tC- ’ G. SMALL.