THE GENERAL ELECTIONS

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LVI, Issue LVI, 27 October 1908, Page 5

THE GENERAL ELECTIONS

MR PEARCE AT NORMANBY.

• There was an attendance of about 60 or 70 at Mr Pearce' s meeting at Normanby last night. The candidate had a splendid hearing throughout, his remarks being frequently and heartily applauded. Mr F. J. Gane was in the chair. The address was similar to that delivered in Hawera, wifeh the addition that the candidate replied to Mr Major's Opera House speech. His references to the right of freehold and the encouragement that should be given to backblock settlers were received with enthusiasm.

With respect to the nationalisation of the 8,000,000 acres Mr Major had said it was absurd to say that the Government would nationalise all the land in the Dominion in seven years. But the speaker had not said they would. Indeed he knew they would not, for the people would not have it, and would put in Opposition members to stop it. (Applause.) Mr Major claimed to be a freeholder. Well, to test his sincerity the speaker would read them the views of the Ministry of the day, which Mr Major supported: —

Mr J. A. Millar (Minister for Labor), Hansard, October 9, 1905: — "The action of the Farmers' Union in demanding the freehold at its original cost was an act of political highwaymen. . . . I do not intend at any time, so long as I retain a seat in this House, by a vote of mine to allow one acre of land to be sold. ... I say we have a right, as trustees of the people, to say that the death of the tenant terminates the lease, but we pay for the interest and improvements. There is no contract broken. The contract is between the lessee and the Crown, and the hon. gentleman cannot snow that there can be any breach of contract when the Crown never touches the lease so long as the tenant lives. — An hon. member: 'Lives for 999 years.'— Mr Millar r However long he lives, he has still got it; but if he dies there is a fresh contract.—An hon. member : 'Then you rob his widow.' — Mr Millar: You do not rob his widow. — An hon. member : 'But you propose to.' — Mr Millar: You do not propose to. You do not make a contract with the widow." (September 6, 1905) : "If I stayed here for the next three months no such thing as the freehold would go through — if only half a dozen members would support me. . . . 1 have always been against the freehold. I have said it in every speech I have made on any platform in the country."

Mr George Fowlds (now Minister for Education), Hansard, Vol. 123, page 143: "The arrogant assumption of a few farmer bodies who had found their way into the House was amusing.'* (Vol. 120, p. 612): "The railways ought to be run absolutely free of cost, and the expenses of running them should be collected by a tax upon land values." He also says: "What should be done with all the remaining Crown lands was that they should be set apart and fixed definitely for some specific object. He desired to impress upon his hearers the desirability of as soon as possible, and as fully as possible, having an increase of the present land tax. He repeated that the land tax ought to be increased by a penny in the £, and, further, exemptions ought to be done away with."

Hon. W. Hall-Jones: "I should be glad to see a shorter lease with periodical revaluation. On- the question before the House I can say candidly that I do not believe in selling our Crown lands." On another occasion Mr HallJones expressed the opinion that a 21 years' lease was sufficient.

Hon. J. McGowan: "Crown lands should not be sold, but should remain the property of the people for all time."

Mr R. McNab (now Minister for Lands) : "I am one who regretted that when we were arranging for compulsory purchase we did not adopt a scheme by which we might have periodical revaluations. If the Fair Rent Bill comes into operation we shall have much the same result as would have been accomplished by periodical revaluation, and so far, of course, that difficulty will be removed."

"These," said Mr Pearce, "are the views of five out of the eight Ministers whom Mr Major supports, and yet he dares to say that he is in favor of the freehold. (Applause.) The policy of the Government ought to be to make every acre in the Dominion produce something, and they were not doing that at present. ■

As to the expenditure of £100,000 on the Wellington post office Mr Pearce again referred to it as an extraordinarily large amount, and he thought it more to buy votes than to build post offices. (Applause.) "Although," he said, "they spend those huge sums in big cities, if you want a small building in the country you have to go down on your knees for it."

Mr Pearce said he had been taken to task for including the proposed expenditure for the purchase of the Manawatu railway in his list of the Government's plunging for the coming year. He did so again. He always supported the purchase of that line, and proposed in that direction at a conference six years ago; and if the line had been bought then it could have been got for £200,000 less than now. But having badly missed that opportunity his point now was that it was inopportune that the money should be borrowed at a time when markets were falling and the round sum to be raised by way of loan in one year would be four millions. To do so was dangerous, and must affect the credit of the Dominion. What they wanted was^ ; a ,more -economical finance than borrowing so great a sum in one year. (Applause.) '; . $

His figures respecting, the itety on boots had been challenged, so he would give details. Ladies' cheap slippers,.dnvoiced at Bd, paid 6d duty with 15 per cent, added, or about 90 per cent, duty; women's cheap evening, shoes, invoice price 2s, paid Is and 15 per cent, added, total duty 66.6 per cent. ; men's boots, invoice price 20s, Is 6d per pair with 15 per cent, added, total duty 24 per cent. The average of the duties was what he stated to be, 57 per cent., and he repeated his arguments to show that it would be better for the colony to pay the working people engaged in the factories to "play ivith their thumbs" and let the boots into New Zealand duty free.

Dealing with the Arbitration Act, Mr Pearce said that a principle involved Avas that the wages of the employee should be based on the profits of the employer. He had shown them how the average wage of farm* laborers had largely increased without the Act, and would ask how the workers would have fared during last year if wages had been in proportion to profits. His clip the year before last, sold at lOJd per lb* whilst last season it only fetched 3£d. In proportion it would have meant that the worker would have got nothing, whereas they had had a living wage. (Applause.)

Coming to the dairy regulations, which Mr Major had supported, the speaker said' he had recently seen an estimate which set out that dairymen along this coast would pay £7,500 a year in fees. The Government had done away with the sheep tax, and it seemed as if they were going to put it on dairymen. He considered that to shift the yards and construct the cement race would cost on an average £50, and as there were 5000 farmers between New Plymouth and Palmerston that meant an expenditure forced upon the dairymen of the district he had named of nearly a quarter of a million of money. The speaker reviewed other relationships between the Government and the farmers, and said that what was badly needed" was a greater representation of the farming interests in the House and the Ministry. (Applause.) -

Mr Pearce said his opponent had characterised the speaker's advertised address in which he announced his candidature as a personal affront to the electors who had supported the Government for the past 15 years. Now in that address he claimed that he would support pure administration. He was not going to be personal with his opponent, but would show whether the present administration was pure or not by proof from Mr Major's own mouth. Speaking at Alton, when a vote of confidence was refused, Mr Major said he was surprised and sorry for the disI trict would find that if it had no confidence in the Government the Government would have no confidence in it. That was reported in the Haweba Stab and it had been confirmed to him (Mr Pearce) by many settlers since. At least a dozen settlers had confirmed it. "Now," said Mr Pearce warmly, "was not that a threat that the Government would not treat the people of Alton as fairly as if they voted for Mr Major? ,1 maintain that settlers have a right to their own opinion, whether supporting me or not. (Applause.) A man who threatens the district like that is practically accusing the Government of impure administration. (Loud applause.)

Mr Major, in reply to the speaker's criticism, had .explained why he was only on one committee, having been put off the others because he had not voted as expected of a Government supporter. But, said Mr Major, he had not received financial support in the election, and therefore felt that he could vote independently. Now what does Mr Major mean? Does he mean that the Government pays the election expenses of/ some of its supporters so that they cannot vote independently? Is that what he means? (Applause.) Is not that a worse accusation than I would think of making against the Government. (Applause.)

The speaker had said that the Government should not purchase the Manawatu railway now because it would be doing so on a falling revenue, and Mr Major's reply was to produce certain figures in an endeavor to show that the revenue was not falling. < He | showed that bank deposits rose from £12,368,610 in 1890 to £22,422,243 in 1906 ; that depositors had increased from 197,408 in 1900 to 298,746 in the year 1906; and that deposits had increased from £4,311,635 in 1896 to £11,170,025 in I 1906. But did they notice that Mr Major stopped at 1906— just two years ago ? The speaker would quote figures to 30th September, 1908, three weeks ago. The bank deposits on September 30, 1908, were £20,310.009, as against £21,655,003 a year previous. The bank advances on September 30, 1908, were £21,217,959, as against. £18,498,184 a year previous. Here they saw that the bank deposits in the single year were £1,344,994 less and the bank advances were £2,719,755 more, which meant that the banks now held £4,064,769 less than they did 12 months previously. Did not tttat show that we were on a falling market? It was Mr Major who was insulting the intelligence of the electors by quoting figures that were two years old. About six weeks ago Mr Major made a speech in the House on the Financial Statement, and was so proud of it that he had it re-published in the Star. In the course of that speech Mr Major stated "that at the present time, by reason 6f a concerted action on the part of the banks throughout New Zealand, the people who are* in the unfortunate position of being borrowers have to pay excessive rates of interest, to the banks— banks which. are steadily piling up their divi«aft^We^#i*so»*tbat the work-

ers- are prone to ask- for more than they are entitled to. Why, they are not half a* bad as the banks; the banks are .a fctmcforedfold worse than they.

. . . It seems there is a conspiracy on the. part of the banks to extort the last copper from the people of the Dominion." Tire returns showing the increased bank advances, which were practically available at the time his opponent spoke, proved the total ignorance of Mr Major on financial matters. Notwithstanding the set-back he felt certain the Dominion would pull through all right, but what would it mean if they left their finances in tfie hands of Mr Major, who showed how little he knew about them? Disaster. (Applause.)

Mr Pearce's defence of the per head indebtedness, showing the Bad position of New Zealand as compared with the Australian States, was taken from the Year Book, and the sum was now more than £71 per head. His figures showing that only £2190 bad been spent during the year for the re-purchase of native lands were also taken from official figures before the House. In these and in other quotations he made he gave his authority, and expected Mr Major to do the same. Mere state-" ments could not be accepted. Mr Major had said that Mr Pearce showed profound ignorance. Well, in reply, he would only say that in some respects Mr Major's imagination had been shown to be very fertile (Applause.)

The speaker gave figures in detail, quoting from Sir Joseph Ward's own speech, showing that he (Mr Pearce) was well within the mark in saying the Dunedin railway station cost £80,000.

It had been alleged that the new dairy regulations were a good deal leg's stringent than those of 1901, and much had been made of the contention that the heads of the Dairy Association bad drawn them up. The speaker quoted speeches made at a farmers' meeting at Okato. Mr Carey, the Chairman, said that "if the regulations were insisted on the dairy industry would collapse. He knew Mr Harkness, the Secretary of the Association, as an impossible faddist, and if the "Union was allowed to misrepresent the fanners' ideas and agitate for ruinous laws the sooner it rome to an end the better.'' That meeting passed strong resolutions against the regulations.

Reverting to the land tenure, Mr Major had said he opposed nationalisation, but with regard to that 8,000,000 acres he supported the Government now, and justified their action in his Hawera speech. Mr Major, challenged him to say where he had neglected the interest of the farmers. The speaker's reply was that in the two vital planks of the farmers' platform Mr Major was foiind wanting — the freehold and a tariff for revenue purposes. (Applause.)

Mr Major had said he might hold a portfolio, and for that reason asked to be returned. But in the same breath he gave an explanation wby he was only on one committee of the House, and said the Government that might now offer him a portfolio had with respect to the committees "placed him where he could do no harm." The speaker would leave it to the electors to say which position Mr Major took up was correct. But he would give credit where credit was due. Mr Major said if he was not to be a Minister he would not go to Parliament for long. Well, in that respect, Mr Major was right! (Applause and laughter.)

Immediately questions were invited, Mr J. Heslop charged Mr Pearce with not having put the position fairly with respect to the improvements on the 66 years leases. There was a hot passage, and when Mr Gane got up to explain what the position was the meeting became uproarious. The difference seemed to be that Mr Pearre held that notwithstanding the clause in the Act allowing for the registration of improvements the tenant would not get his full value He asked if you could not get your proper value now, when the t improvements were before your eyes, how could you expect to get it at the end of 66 years simply because they were registered? Mr Heslop, on the other hand, quoted Martin as his authority for saying that the registration would be an ample safeguard for the tenants' interests.

Mr Heslop: Apart from the endowments, lire not the opportunities for freehold greater now than ever before? Have the Government done away with the optional system?

Mr Pearce : Not entirely, but as much as they dare.

Mr Heslop said that the Taranaki Land Board recently had 20 applications, and all asked for the right of purchase. Mr Pearce: That shows the sense of the people.

Mr Heslop: But you don't give the Government credit. You say they are taking away the right of the freehold.) Mr Pearce: I say they have taken away the right of the freehold over 8,000,000 acres. ' N Mr Heslop said that of that area over 5,000,000 acres never possessed the right of. the freehold, being held in small grazing leases and pastoral runs.'

Mr Pearce said Mr Heslop was getting up and making statements that were incorrect. Mr Heslop hotly resented this, and said he would give £10 or £20 to the hospital if he could nob prove what he said, providing Mr Pearce would do the same.

Mr Heslop asked how much land had been set aside by previous Governments by way of endowments.

Mr Pearce replied that he did not carry all the endowments in his head. He could not say, and very much doubted if Mr Heslop could.

Mr Heslop: I'll back my opinion and you won't. He went on to say that more land was set aside prior to 1801 than since.

Mr W. Powdrell asked how the improvement registrations were to be made. Would they, put down "half, a day clearing log fences, one day climbing, trees, and so on?"

Mr Pearce' said the expectation that all improvements would be registered was absurd. Slips might come and fences be carried away, while the farm might frequently have to be re-grassed through fire. If all those things were added the value at the end of the lease would be considerably more than .the value of the land. He was certain the lessees would not get fair play. i .

Mr Heslop: That's where you're un-' fair agsin.

Mr Pearde: InnI r m giving my opinionj not yours.

. Mr Heslop : Would .you reduce the length of the lease?

Mr Pearee : I would give them the right of the; freehold." (Applause.)

Throughout the discussion there was a good deal of warmth, and the ' applause and laughter,' m the body of the hall wa's loud' and' repeated. At the conclusion, -•', .jf -.,-,• . ■ . Mr J. Forbes moved 1 , That this meeting accords Mr Pearce a hearty -vote' of thanks for his address and confidence in him as representative for this district. " Mr W. Gane seconded.

The Chairman called 1 for a "division, there .being a loud' response of v "ayes" and no "noes."

The Chairman: Carried 1 unanimously. (Applause.)