CORRESPONDENCE.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 7064, 16 January 1885, Page 4

CORRESPONDENCE.

The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed by correspondents. LOCAL INDUSTRIES AND LIBERALISM. Sib, — There is a rampant and most unfortunate feeling abroad amongst the host of self-elected Liberal leaders in and around Hawke's Bay to sneer at all industries, whether local or colonial — witnesa "T.O.'s" two otherwise very able letters that recently appeared in your columns. "T. 0." tells us that the frozen meat trade, and in fact nearly all other trades and industries, spring from land monopoly. Even if that were true it would be no reason for crushing out all local industries. This sort ot thing is only further perpetuating the miserable class feeling that every true man, Liberal or Conservative, who has the country's -vreal at heart, should wish to see buried for ever and aye ; but it never will be done while there is this wretched cavilling at what Squire Southdown or Mr Broadacres has done or will do with his wealth. Let them by all means give a portion (or all, if they so wish it) of their means in building up the frozen meat industry or any industry, local or colonial, that mtcst add to the wealth of this our glorious young nation. If "T. 0.," able man that he is, had watched the dial plate of colonial progress — or what are known as good and bad times— then he could not have failed to have observed that as the staple product of Maoriland ruled high in the old land so did the index hand of colonial prosperity point to good times for us, the " 'orny-'anded," and with good wages also for our work ; while on the oontrary, if wool was down, as unfortunately it has been this last year or two, so accordingly was " the hand on the plate" reversed, with its miserable coneequences to us the wage earners. "Why, to use the words of my friend Mr L d, 11 it is a perfect truism to say bo, and cannot be refuted." That there has been most shameful land monopoly in the past I'll at once confess, and that far too much of it is now going on under the eye of the most advanced Liberal Premier Maoriland has ever seen I'll also confess ; but why find fault with Mr Moneybags and howl him out of his niche of creation merely because he takes advantage of the law of the land, which you and I, "T. 0.," helped to make? Would not you, "T. 0.," take advantage of the beautiful statutes "in that case made and provided " to mop up quietly (and legally, of course) a small country Bide or bo, were you in Mr Moneybags' position ? Would you not ? Then I certainly would, and I don't know that I am actually possessed of more sin than many of my neighbors. Aye, often in these days of poverty I look me back to times in this colony's history when I could, or you either, "T. 0.," get many a hide of land for an old tsong ; but I had no brains, and would not. " Our gentry " that we see around us now were generally men of brains, as well as industry, anil have prospered accordingly. Do not let us cavil at what has been done, rather let us see that "no more evil of this sort is worked in our midst," but let us hail with glad shouts of joy every industry, no matter of what sort or description. Yes, we want many, very many of them. An ounce of truth is worth a bushel of tirade, either as written against a class of men who, in the old dark days of Maoriland's history, were the pioneers of civilisation, and the creators of very many of the blessings we now enjoy, or, on the other hand, written in favor of the colonial swagmen. That there is destitution is too well-known. Hear the cry how it arises from the far eonth and the sunny north ! It comes from hundreds of stalwart throats. It is, " Give us work or those that are dear to us shall die." Yes, there it is, here it ig, loud and ear-piercing as a clarion's call, the wail of the honest unemployed. Here, out her 9, in a beautiful country not yet half a century old in its civilisation. But is it wise, is it even truthful, to blame all this evil on land monopoly ? In my humble opinion it is not. You pride yourself on being a Liberal in politics, "T. 0.," as Ido myself — a true Liberal, I take it, not one of the milk-and-water stuff that paßses current nowadays for the time-honored name. Just so ; and your motto as such is comprised within those magic words of true liberalism — "Justice to all." You have no desire, I am sure, to deprive honest industry of its hard-earned spoil, or interfere for one moment as to how the owners of those spoi's choose, in conformity with the law of (he land, to spend them. Not you ; you would hail with your honest English heart any men, or body of men, who to-morrow would start another frozen meat mill at Hastings, or a paper mill, or in fact any mill or machine that would improve local and national wealth. Still you think, as Ido too, that there is something wrong in the State machine; and you know also, sensible man that you are, that men will always think bo, even until the end of time. Of course, where there are admitted evils quacks will always arise, proposing cures. Now, I am myself reckoned a bit of a quack, and I have a cure. Here it is : We will premise, "T. 0.," that a true Liberal holds that the land is God's gift to us, his people. Given freely and unreservedly by the Father of AH for the benefit of all. Your true Liberal also holds " that those who occupy the land should pay to the national exchequer a sum equivalent to the advantages he derives from his occupancy of a portion of our common mother earth." Now all men cannot be landholders, and as land, unlike any other commodity, cannot be collated, it follows that those fortunate few amongst us who can occupy and utilise a portion of our mother earth, should return in proportion to the benefits received from our common mother a part of their blessings to their less favored brethren. This they can be made to do by imposing a land tax. Now, a land tax to be of any use at all must be for national wants, not for I local wants. But even among those who favor a land tax in its broadest sense — how divergent are their opinions as to the form it should take ! There are very worthy men, who think, as we all flo at times, that they have grasped the question, and they talk about an acreage rate, certifying according to quality, &c. The impossibility of ever taxing city lands as you would country lands — by the acre — is answer sufficient for this view of a land tax. Then there is the flection who Bay, "Oh, let us tax the unearned increment, and the State machine is bound to gee." Lastly, there is that whilom large, yet ever decreasing minority, who if ever they thought at all about the land tax as a measure nearly affecting them and theirs did so merely as eotne complex thing utterly beyond their ken, and always allowed others to think the matter out for them. Now, just by way of airiug my fad, let us imagine that a land tax is the law of the land. Let us also try and follow this moßt horrible and revolutionary fad in the woe and commotion it would bring upon the land. The first thing to do to raise money by the rate would be to ascertain the actual value of the freehold property within the nation. Let us say it is worth £200,000,000—1 have seen it set down somewhere at £300,000,000, but the former will do by way of argument. The national Exchequer requires say £2,000,000 for the year ; a one per cent, tax on the freehold value of the nation, which is assumed to be £200,000,000, brings in this amount exactly. Thus a man owning £500 worth of property pays a £5 land tax, and so on pro rata up to the man who owns £1,000,000 worth of land, who pays £10,000 land tax. So much for coantry lands. As to town or city lands, total them exactly the same. Timely, & working maa with an allotment 1

of say 60 feet frontage to Dickens or Eraerson street, worth 408 per foot, or | £120 in all, would pay £1 4s land tax, whilst a capitalist with 60 feet frontage in Hastings, street, worth say £25 a foot, or £1500, would pay £15 land tax. Going into the country again, the large landholder who cannot by his system of farming afford to pay even the one per cent, tax on land, let him cut up his property and sell to those who will not only pay the nations tax on its land, but who will also by their superior skill and industry add to the national wealth. The unearned| Increment is here reached also, fora man who has a block of country which he values at £10,000 this year is, by the fact of a railway being built through or near it, increased to twice the amount next year, so he is compelled this year to put in his property at £20,000, and pays the State £200 tax as against £100 tax last year. Now, it is a notorious fact that all those landowners who have reaped the benefit out of publio works expenditure by the increased values to their properties, pay little or nothing on the loans that built the railways, &c, but, on the contrary, they allow the greater portion of the interest to be dragged from the pockets of the many through unjust Customs duties and the property tax. Another popular mistake is that because I don't fill in a property tax schedule and pay the tax directly that I don't pay it at all. Never was a greater mistake made. I pay the property tax indirectly in precisely the same manner as I pay Customs duties indirectly, and not only that, but my share of the property tax iB actually paid upon goods that have already paid one tax through the Customs, and yet this property tax, we are told, "Is an absolutely fair tax, and falls only on the shoulders of those who are able to pay it." On the score of having to cut up their estates your large proprietor shows, I am grieved to say, a very selfish spirit, inasmuch as under the land tax every man pays alike. A land tax should be the rallying cry of all Liberals. It ia bound to come ; it is as inevitable as fate. Liberals, make this your battle cry at the next election, which may be on you sooner than you wot of. Avoid all demagogism and clap trap ; endeavor to gain the respect of your powerful opponents by the moderation of your words and actions. Nothing is gained by useless and generally wicked recrimination. The men whose theories (legitimate and correct ones they think) that you are trying to upset have been always in tha van of progress, remember. It is cruel to taunt them with not having the weal of our glorious country at heart. They are the builders of her present greatness. Then what wonder that they should have pride — great and over-weening pride perhaps—and a still stronger desire to hold their own I — their own that they have won from the wilderness and held in many cases against the tomahawk of the savage. Work as your brother Englishmen have always worked, legitimately and wisely, that when the victory is won, as it will be ere lone;, no bitterness will be left behind — no mutual animosities to smooth away. Above all be self-possessed. Will a dozen Simon Pures make a hundred Simpletons ? I trow not. Nor will one black sheep taint the whiteness of a whole flock. Condemn no man for his opinions In this age of freedom. Consistency even in wrong-doing is to be admired. No point of vantage was ever worth the winning that be won by climbing the treacherous hill of double dealing. — I am, &c, J.P.W.