Untitled

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXXII, Issue 10481, 19 October 1894, Page 4

Me H. P. Geay’s charges of repudiation against the Government cannot be regarded as very serious indictments. Our correspondent has advanced the strange theory that the State has no fight, further than the right conferred by might, to demand an equality of sacrifice from the holders of its lands. He contends that the graduated land tax, which has met with the approval of political economists all over the world, is nothing better than a device for despoiling those fortunate individuals who have managed to acquire large estates, and that the Land for Settlements Act is simply an extension of the same immoral policy. It would be useless to argue with a gentleman holding these extraordinary views, but there can he no harm in reminding Mr Gray that the underlying principle of this policy has been warmly commended by many of the most prominent men on his own side of politics. Even Sir John Hall, whom Mr Gray will not suspect of countenancing anything that could disturb our public credit, declared, from his place in the House of Representatives last year, that "whenever the time arrives when it is really necessary to acquire occupied landfor settlement, private land, should be taken, but on fair terms, and with proper precautions and safeguards for the owners and the public.” There may, of course, be reasonable differences of opinion about the present need for compulsory resumption, but there can be none about the fairness of the terms or the adequacy of the precautions and safeguards proposed by the Minister of Lands and adopted by Parliament. Mr Gray asserts, however, that the compensation provided for owners under the Act is “ very inadequate,” and that, therefore, compulsory resumption is merely repudiation, We can only say in answer to this that the owners will receive the full market value of their properties. Their interests will he protected by the most elaborate system of valuation, and their homesteads will be absolutely secure from invasion by the State. If thia is jepndiatioD, ..then repudiation ia a.

thing that should ha welcomed by many of the large encumbered land-holders in the colony. Mr Gray’s third and fourth indictments are levelled against the employment of Public Trust and Government Insurance funds in other State departments. Oar correspondent objects, if we understand his letter aright, to the moneys of “ widows and minora ” and “ persons of small means ” being invested at a low rate of interest. He entirely disagrees, we gather, with the old-fashioned notion that security should be a first consideration in the disposition of these moneys. He would take a great deal more risk for the sake of a little additional profit. This may or may not be a sound commercial view of the position, but we have little doubt that if the “ widows and minors ” and “ persons of small means ” were allowed to speak for themselves they would express a preference for the prudent methods pursued by the Public Trustee. It is, at any rate, quite certain that our foreign creditors will not be alarmed by a display of excessive caution. They will not suspect us of an inclination to repudiate our external obligations simply because we show a disposition to conserve our internal resources.