CONDENSED CORRESPONDENCE

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 28 October 1925, Page 6

CONDENSED CORRESPONDENCE

W. It. Scott (Kapu ni) writes suggesting that it would have been much more apprdpriate had “Bonehead” signed himself “Thickhead” or “Blockhead” ; in any case, he must s.urely be guessing .in his political writings, or the arguments he uses would be backed up by a signature. Last election proved that Liberalism was not dead, says Mr. Scott, and this election will prove it again. He continues:—“EVen if I should see no difference between the policy of Reform and that of National, 1 -would prefer to trust the latter to have the courage of their convictions, for Reform during their term of office have failed absolutely to administer the policy on which they were elected. But there are differences between what the National Party stands for and what Reform has given us. At random I quote a few things which vitally affect us farmers, though Bonehead may not be suffering at all from tlie injustices I mention. Under the Advances to Settlers Act, Reform allows a. man with unencumbered property to get money one per cent cheaper than a man who has even a slight encumberance, which of course is a “rich man’s law” and something the National Party does not stand for. Again we find the same thing under the optional purchase - clause. A man leasing land with the option to purchase has to pay the stamp duty when he signs the lease just the same as if he purchased, the land outright. If the land is not purchased, when the lease has expired, the Government hands back the money paid as stamp duty, but does not. pay interest on the amount, despite the fact that the struggling farmer probably paid nine or 10 per cent- on his stock ' during the time of the lease. Even if the optional purchase clause is availed of, then, at compound interest, the poor struggling “cocky” will have paid nearly double the amount he would have done had he been a- rich, man, able to 'buy freehold to start with —and this is Reform. I regret that space will not permit me to give the numerous differences which occur to me between Reform- and National, but . would like a word about this agricultural bank. Reform are spending £SOOO they tell us to “investigate” the matter, but will Mr. Coates give us a definite promise, as the National “heads” have done, that “If returned to power an agricultural bank would be set up!” The Reform policy is full of that word “investigate” and the evergreen phrase “if necessary.” In conclusion, I must ask Bonehead: “Do the Nationalists stand behind the trusts, combines, monopolies and associations which Reform- have allowed to grow all over the country? I want it clearly understood, too. that Bonehead will get no further reply from me to any of his so-called facts unless, he signs his name.”