REPLY TO "YOUNG MANS" ALLEGATIONS.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 15 November 1911, Page 4

REPLY TO "YOUNG MANS" ALLEGATIONS.

To the Editor. Sir.—"Young Man," Parapar.aumu, would like -me to reply to Mr Monckton's statements made hero at his meting; have to consider vour space, so will not treat on his Native land fudge. I see others are showing up his unfriendly feeling to the natives, and in a nutshell the public can easily see his policy on that question, as "Just a "Milker" put it in his letter of the 12th. viz..

■'to siibgjngate the native race and gradually encompass its extinction so that tho large landowner could dump his idle sons on the confiscated pro-

perty." But, as I stated, space being limited 'before an election. I can, perhaps, show Mr Monckton up (and 'his paity) in their_ true colours seniatum between this and the

7th December. Wc will take Mr Monckton's utterances on taxationHe said that ''by constantly humping up .valuations we made the assets of the country appear greater in the eyes of the Home moneylender, and that the amount taken out of our pockets-was excesisve." He also said that "land taxes which in 1909 realised £38i5.000, in 1910

realised £642, 270. or an increase of over a quartei of a million." How was it got? He said, "By constantly. etc.,'etc." Why did he stop short at- 1910 in making his comnaiison when the figures for tho financial year ending March 31st-, 1911. were available to him. More Opposition "Twisting views to suit their ends." If ho had quoted these he would have .shown the electors that there had been a decrease of £13,-547 on the sum raised by Land Taxes in 1910. Moreover, his statement that- the increase was "got by bumping up valuations," pre-supposes ,g----norance among the electors of the increase in the scale of graduation imposed by the Government in 1910. Mr Monckton made no mention of this fact, but left it to'he inferred that the Ministry was plundering all round, instead of imposing heavier taxation upon the great landowners for tho purpose of bringing about more speedy sub-division. There is no tax more justifiable than the "and tax*, and non.> is felt less by thof-e who are called upon to pay. There are 1-50,000 owners of Freehold in New Zealand and of these 2.5.798 only pay land tax, 10,000 paying loss than €5 >a- year. Of this 16.000 there are over 0,000 paying from 20s down to 2s (3d. Of the whole number not one "s called upon to pay inI come derived from the use of his I holding. If Mr Monckton is prepared to assail the principle of a graduated land tax, he ought to say «o and justify his attitude by argument. Thanks to the present Govern ment. it has em'barked udou this splendid policy in order to bring about a more equitable division of the soil. To bring forward incomplete figure's and to pretend ignorance of the manner in which, this revenue is raise,d. and who pays it. is to travel upon a sham, the usual characteristic- of the Opposition candidates. when appealing to an audience before elections. Tf "Yo'iug Man" wants some more of Mr Monckton's "fudge" exhibited I will continue "in our next."—vours. etc.. LIBERAL.