THB PEC-TEST AGAINST THE BUDGET.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLIII, Issue XLIII, 13 September 1909, Page 4

THB PEC-TEST AGAINST THE BUDGET.

- t £1, thereby reducing ihe burden on ' transactions of average magnitude. :

LORD EOSEBERY AT GLASGOW. Pbess Association.— Copyright. LONDON, Sunday. Lord Rosebery, addressing a met'ting at Glasgow against the Budget, said lie liad long been an independent politician, but lie believed it to be big duty to show why it would not be in tho best interests of the nation that the Finance Bill should, become law. ilr Lloyd George had? proclaimed it a budget of war against poverty; but it was a war which de-j pleted aapital, increased nnemploy-; ment, and produced universal inso- ; curity. Lord Eosebery said be -was] not aware of the actual amount of the deficit. Sir Eobert Giffen had; declared that he believed thoro wasi no real deficit. Tho new tnxos were ' not for national defence; but to raise vast sums for tho use of tlio central Goverjjmcnt, without parliamentary control. The Budget had no adequate preparation; it contained material for six budgets, and in tho complementary Development Bill wero the most novel and formidable proposals prcsenteft to Parliament for many years. The Budget put Britain into the melting pot. It was a revolution without any mandate from the people. At a timo when it was difficult td make both ends meet, the Budget took as much and harassed as much as posiblc. It placed new taxea on land, besides expanding the income tax and death duties. It was a distinct step towards land nationalisation, which Mr Lloyd George said must come. Land was selected because its taxation could not be evaded; but the unearned increment principle could be applied to every other kind of property. No exertion was needed by the holders of consols or railway stocks. Ho warned the country to consider the contagious interest of tho principles raised by tho Budget. Personally be had found land a harrassing and unremunerativo f»rm of property. The land laws might be improved, and more people of the yeoman class settled on tho land, but the landlords should be justly treated. They were usually human beings in difficulties. . In 1896 a return showed that the capital value of land hat fallen a thousand millions in 30 years; yet this was the industry the Government sought to tax out of existence. Landowners seemed to be dammed, and doubly damned, for. holding property iv land. Many millions of working men's money invested by prudential and temperance I friendly sociotios might soon be touched. . fie considered tho enormous interest in death duties a danger to capital. They ought to be reserved for war purposes. The Government's einormious taxation of capital was strangling in timo of peace the goose which laid the golden eggs in war time. Tho Government boasted it had paid off forty millions. It did not ' borrow, but proceeded to spend Bixteen millions annually. Tho transference by the enhanced death duties of the masses of capital from tho individual to the State injuriously reacted upon commerce and employment, and destroyed tho nations reserve power. Scores of millions were lying idle in the banks, or going abroad to develop other countries, owing to apprehension as to the Government's financial policy. What feelings would Mr Gladstone have had for such a Budget? Liberalism and liberty used to go together; but the Budget established tyranmy and inquisition nevor previously known. Ho de nounced the Government's bureaucratic Socialism. Bureaucracy was almost strangling Prance; yet our Government created staffs of wollpaid officers for small holdings and factory inspection. The Pensions and Housing and Town Planning Acts supertax would bo administered by commissioners from whom there was no appeal. This sort of tyranny was not Libefalism, bnt Socialism. For fivo years before their doatlis mon would be ghosts. During tha: timo they could givo nothing to the children without it being reckoned part of their estate. He declared that Cobden, Bright, and Villiers never droamt of levying the vast sum now asked in direct taxation If tariff, reform was to be the only alternative, ho would cease to defend the principles of free trade. 31 urged retrenchment, but not in national defence Why should Ireland cost £1,200,000 more yearly than sl:o produced in taxation? Ho would conduct tho State as a private busi ness. Ho was sorry the Goveruinon had taken sides with tho Socialists some of the Ministers were conscious that the Socialists wero tho least worthy. Working men were being taught not to extert themselves, aad his Liberal friends wero clearly moving on the path leading to Socialism. He could not follow them ono inch. He might think tariff roform or protection an evil; but Socialism was a negation of faith. In a subsequont speech Lord Ro°o bery declared that Bright would have denounced tho encroaching proposr als of this Budget. Lobby opinion coincides thnt Lord Bosdbory has created a new situation, and rendered oven moro likoly tho Lords' rejection. Unionists attach real significance jto Lord Rosebery 's declaration of his bolief. It is oxpoctod that tho Bill will be sent to tho Lords about the 15th October. Both parties expect that a general election will follow in a few ycoks. "The Times" says that flic essence of Lord Rosebery 's speech is that the Bill involves a eoeial revolution without precedent. He showed that behind devices whoso professed end is is revenue, lurk farreaching schemes for the subversion and re-distribution of private property. The "Daily Mail*' says tho speech will settle tho fate of the Budget, because it will convince the multitude of independent voters belonging to neither party. The 'Telegraph" says Lord Rose-! bery pronounced an elegy ovor tho Liberal party as it existed until Mr! Lloyd Gcorgo assumod charge of tho Exchequer, and Mr Winston Churchill was admitted to tho Cabinet. i The 'Daily News" says: "There is no opponent so venomous as the rouogad.o; no critic so stern as the man who has failed." The "Chroncilo" says the speech I was that of a great landlord, not of [ a great Liberal. It was entirely coloured by the projudices and prepossession of landlordism." i "The Times" states that a deputation of the committee of the Stock Escbanjrn conferred with Mr - Lloyd. Giurg'?. Ir !•< understood that the present duty mi share trau&acfiou?, ranging •':•■. >v (vl 1 3 2s, will be with- j i