POLITICAL AFFAIRS.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume II, Issue 113, 27 April 1912, Page 6

POLITICAL AFFAIRS.

A MINISTER AT WOODVILLE. {BY TELEGRAPH SPECIAL.) Woodville, April 26. The technical school in Woodville ■was opened this afternoon by the Minister of Education, the Hon. J. A. Hanan. The function was a verysuccessful one, there also being present Mr.' Morgan and Mr. Ross (members of the Hawke’s E.-.y Education Board). Mr. Escott (member for the district). Judge Gilfedder (Native Lard Courf), and Mr Morris (agricultural instructor). Mr. Burnett (chairman of the school committee) presided. After an exhibition of drill by the children the Minister performed the ceremony of opening the new school buddings.

Addresses were delivered by the Min ister and visitors, the burden being the advantage of technical education and of continuation classes, the Minister forshadowing the making of a*ter.da;:ce at the latter compulsory.

Afternoon tea was served to all present by the senior girls. After the function various depustaticns waited on the Minister with reference to district matters and the requirements of the Hawke’s Bay Education Board. The Minister promised that these matters would be looked into.

UNITED LABOUR PARTY OF

NEW ZEALAND.

Auckland, April 23. The United Labour Party held what was termed a ratification meeting to-night and the following motion was carried:—“That this public meeting of citizens of Auckland hereby ratifies the work of the Easter Unity Conference held in Wellington, which conference we recognise as being the most representative gathering of Labour and the progressive people of New .Zealand which has ever been held, and pledges itself to render loyal support to the new organisation entitled the ‘United Labour Party of New Zealand.’ ”

A SCENE.

SOCIALISTS LEAVE THE HALL.

Auckland. April 27.

There was a remarkable scene towards the end of the meeting held at the Town Hall to organise in Auckland the United Labour Party. Professor Mills, who was loudly cheered on rising, was subsequently subjected /to a good deal of interruptionf He eventually requested the removal of a man who persisted in making interjections. A policeman’s services were requisitioned and the man left the hall. In response to a call for all Socialists to leave the meeting forty or fifty walkeyl out. for too long in Auckland and other centres in New Zealand had a small crowd of ifeen. who had a. capacity to create disorder and not to create anything ‘else, been permitted to hold the stage. The present disturbance was the death rattle of a discredited cause. There were in the Dominion ten thousand working men who stood fop Labour, and who had no sympathy with the disturbing element. He asked for their help. They had listened to misrepresentation of Labour long enough.

COST OF LOANS.

STATEMENT BY MR. MASSEY. Speaking at Stratford on the Bth intt., the Prime Minister, the Hor. T. Mackenzie accused Mr. Massey pf overstating the cost of the £5,000,000 loan. A representative of the “Evening News” took advantage of Mr. Massey’s presence in town, last week to draw his attention to Mr. Mackenzie’s accusation, which was reported in the “New Zealand Times” as follows :—

“What has Mr. Massey now to say regarding our loans? On platform after platform the Leader of the Opposition had stated that it had cost £300,000 to £350,000 to raise ■ the £5,000.000 loan, while the returns furnished to Parliament showed that it did not cost £120.000.” “I noticed what Mr. Mackenzie has said,” remarked Mr. Massey. “The position is somewhat complicated, but it is one that should be cleared up. I made the statement referred to by Mr. Mackenzie, and. I what is more, n>y statement is perfectly true. I was referring to the fact that members of the House were refused information regarding financial transactions that they were entitled to know about, and I merely used the £5,000,C00 loan to illustrate my contention; “A copy of the return referred to

by Mr. Mackenzie was laid before the House during th? recent short session. and I have a copy. It commerce ~ 1 y setting forth that the / ordinary expenses of the loan am- . ■ dinted approximately to £112.900. That, however, docs not include th? discounts, which at 1.1 per cent, amount to an extra £75.000. On ac-

count of the e.xpenses and discounts. ' additional stock was floated outside th-> loan to the amount of £191,283. On top of that there was the conin the way of interest which ; rd not been taken into account in the sum mentioned. “Investors who paid-up m full received tix months’ interest for the first month’s use of the money. The Parliamentary return states that ‘this interest, amounting to £24.507 on £’..634.632 ox stock, is. however, paid with th.-' other 3l per cent, rk interest, and does not appear in the loan account. It is not, therefore, taken into consideration in arriving at the net result.’ ” “Accordingly,” continued Mr. Massey, “this £27,58“ has to be added to the first-mentioned sum, bringing the amount up to £215,853. But that is not ail. The loan was what is called a four-thirty loan. That is investors ni’ght take un short-dated debentures for four years or inscribed stock with currency of thirty vears. the nominal interest being the into stock at any time within three

years, th nominal interest being the same in each case—3.l per cent.

“I take it that the investors, being shrewd business men, would al), or very nearly all, convert into inscribed stock, and by so doing they would become entitled under the conditions of the loan to a bonus of equal to 2 per cent. This, oyer the whole loan, would mean an additional £lOO,OOO. Even if the holders of three-quarters converted there would be £75,000 for conversion alone, which would bring the amount by which the indebtedness through the costs incidental to floating the loan, to about £300,000. “That is the actual position, so far as it is possible to ascertain it. I think it must be admitted that the estimade I made before seeing the Parliamentary return was not very far wrong. It was certainly very much nearer the mark than the statement of the Prime Minister, who had access to information which was not available to private members. Mr. Mackenzie must therefore have been very ignorant regarding the nature of the transaction or he was intentionally misleading the public.

“Mr. Mackenzie made another charge at the same time, to the effect that the Opposition had sent Home statements to the leading financial journals intending to injure the flotation of the £5,000,000 loan. The truth is that ttfe Opposition had no knowledge of the Government’s intention to float a £5,000,000 loan. I asked Mr. Mackenzie, publicly seme days ago to name the man or men who had sent these alleged statements Home, or to publish the statements referred to. He has done so, and the public can draw their own conclusions as to what has taken place.”