GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVI, Issue 5633, 5 December 1879, Page 5

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Thursday. progress or measures. In the Council to day, after the usual small preliminary work, the Canterbury Church Property Trust Bill, anl the Miners Act Amendment Bill, were read a third time and passed, aud a batch of small measures from the Lower Houso were read a first time. Then ensued an hour and a half ele bate on the Te Aro Reclamation Bill, the second reading of which was evenuaily carrieel by 20 to 11. Through the length of this debate a'l the motions oa which notices had bten given, lapsed for thrt day. The second rea lings of the Electric Telegraph Act Amendment Bill, Ouewhero Grant Empowering Bill, the Imbecile Passengers' Act Extension Bill, tho Lanel Act Amendment Bill, took place. The remainder of the sitting was in committee on several minor measures ; a number of amendments being male in the Onehunga .Water Reserves Bill. The committal of the Auckland Loan Consolidation Bill was deferred till next day. The Council rose at 5.30 p.m. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday. The House met at 2.30 p.m. Mr. Macandrew brought up a report of the Election Telegram Committee, lie stated that the committee were of opinion that the seven telegrams sealed up an 1 accompanying tho report hail been improperly laid on the table. The report itself set forth that five messages were originally paid for by the senders, and forwarded through the department to their destination to Ministers, and two sent by mistake of telegraphic office. These had been sealed up aud left untouched. Seventy-six telegrams in all had been sent and received by the Government on election subjectß. Mr. Montgomery asked for the evidence and proceeelings of the committee. H-i read the report, which was not unanimous. There were three votes on one side, and four on the other. Iu reply to a question, The Speaker said tho tele2r,»ms would remain iu his hands until the House decided what c iurse should be adopted in the matter. Mr. Spekmit as'eed what red-cts was to be given for the great injury doue to those parties whose telegrams had been thus improperly exposed. Sir Gsokge Gp.ey proposed the resolution. Mr. Stewart seconded the motion. In supporting the motion, Mr. OrEoßttF. stated th'it t'ie rep >rt did not go f.ir enough. It ought to have stateel who was to b'ame for exposing the private tcdejram. Mr. Sctton contended that the rep>rt being that of a majority of the committee, it co del not be impugned. Mr. Mac >>"dp.ew thought that tho sh irtest way would be to the minutes aud proceeelings of the committee. Mr. HISL p sa el that the Premier had taken the responsibility for the p-o iuc tion of these telegrams, aud they wer-' produced against the will of the heads of the departments. It had been stated that a draft report of the committee ha 1 boon submitted for inspection to the Government. Mr. 130 WEN-, as a member of the Committee, deuieel that the proc.cdings of the Committee he hid been reporte 1 outside as had been alleged. He was epiitp certain the Government had not seen the report. There was a difference of opinion in the Committee. Iu that case they came to tht conclusiou to stick to the order of reference strictly. Mr. Hall said that many statements had been made which were utterly without foundation. He thought the fairest way would be to print and circulate the whole proceedings both evidence and ruin ite.=. Mr. Sl'EtiaiT Slid that a statement made about messages wrongfully produced having been sealed up, was not correct. Tn- Premier saiel he was now prepareel to reply to every small matter. This was not a small matter, and ought to have been replied to. The question was this—Was these telegrams copied ? Yesterday, after the rising of the committee, Mr. Macantlrew said, with the exception of the seven t-le grams sealed, the special telegrams were reael, and were open for any member to take copies. The ejuestion was then put that the report be laid ou the table, as against the amendment that the minutes and proceedings of the committee be printed and read to the House. The House elivieled—Ayes, 32 ; noes, 41. Tho amendment for the reading ot th.minutes and proceedings was, accordingly, lost. Subjoined is the elivision list. Ayes (32): Andrews, Ballance, Barron, Brown, DeLantour, J. H. Fisher, J. T. Fisher, George, Gisborne, Grey, Hamlin, Harris, Hislop, Hutchison, Ireland, Lun don, Macanelrew, Montgomery, Moss, Pyke, Reeves, Reid, Slicpliard. Shrimski, Speight, Stewart, Tainui, Tawhai, Te Wheoro, Thomson, Tole, Tuinbull. Noes (41) : Atkinson, Baiu, Kacthun, Bowen, Bryce, Colbeck, Dick, Fulton, Gibbes, Hall, Hirst (A. J.), Hurst, Hursthouse, Johnston, Kenny, Levin, Masters, McCauehan, McLean, Murray, Oliver, Ormonel, Pitt, Richmond, Richardson, Rolleston, Russell, launders, Seymour, Shanks, Stevens. Stuelholme, Sutton, Swanson, Tomoana, Trimble, Waketielel, Wallis, Whitakcr, Wood, W T right. Mr. Tons said that a distinct statement had been made that the draft report had been submitted to the Government before being submitted to the committee itself. He moved, "That a committee be ebcted to ineiuire into tho truth of the allegation." Mr. J. B. Fisher seconded ihe motion, and expressed surprise that the Government had not denied the truth of the allegation if it was untrue. He was tolel that the report anel proceeelings were copies by an officer of the House. Ye.-terday some of his telocrams had been produceel, aud he wanteil ■ to know how this was done without any authority on his part. He had uevi r been asked to attend the committcu to give evidence on the subject, although lie was tolel by the chairman that his evidence would be taken. It was a moat disgraceful proceeding that the privacy of the Telegraph Department should be invaeleel in this way. Ihe whole conduct of the Government in this matter justiticel him in assuming that the Government were quite well aware that they were producing private telegrams in laying them on the table in the first instance). Mr. Wakefield said the report of the committee was never shown to anyone until it was submitted to the committee. He drew it up himself, and it was shown to no one until it was submitted to the committee for approval. It was simply disgraceful that these rumours should be_ kept up for a miserable party purpose. livery member could get up and say that they never saw the report as had been stated. The House ought to have some respect fen- tho members of the committee, anel e)ught not to take mere idle rumours, aud bring them up iu the House, and keep reiterating them after they bad been denied. Mr. Fisher said he now understood he was wrong in stating that the proceedings were copied by an officer in the House. It was a member of the House who copieel them. . Mr. Wakefield said it was exceedingly wrong to make the statement that had been done on a mere idle rumour, which in reality had no foundation in fact.

Mr. Gisborse said they never had had Mr. Fisher's Dame before them in connection with these telegrams. All the telegrams that ha l been paid for were put aside. Mr. Fisher's telegrams must have been amongst them so set aside. Mr. Tut.kV- amendment nai withdrawn with conseut, aud on the original motion beinj; put, Mr. Macan-orew stated as a fact within his linowle lge, that the telegrams were never at any time in the possession of the members of the comm'ttce. Mr. ITamms thought it was right that the House should have the name of the member who made copies of these telegrams as alleged by a previous speaker. Mr. Sutton said that these telegrams hiving been placed on the table of the House they became public property, and a member was justified in copying them if he thought proper. Sir George GfvEY moved as a further amendment " I'hat the telegrams sealed up be returned to the committee, and it be required to state by whom these telegrams had been sent. This was only fair to the parties whoso telegrams had been tampered with, in order that they might know whether or not they had ground o: action against the Government. Mr. Sheeiian" spoke in support of the amendment, aud argued that the committee had no power to make the distinction it had done between public and private telegrams. Sir George Grey withdrew his amendment, which was agreed to. Mr. HiLL suggested that the motion for printing the report aud evidence be allowed to pass, and au effort woul l be made to get them completed by Monday. Mr. Fiks proposed as an amendment, "That the Speaker be requested to examine the sealed packet, with the view of informing the House as to the name of the sender of these telegrams." Mr. Oliver denied that the secresy of the Telegraphic Department had been violated, and hoped that the amendment would not be agreed to. The debate was interrupted by the 5 30 p.m. adjournment. The Hous3 resumed at 7.30. PROPERTY TAX. Major Atkinson" moved the second reading of the Property Assessment Bill. He said he had aire id j* shown that new taxation to a considerable extent was reoessary. Th>-y had already l'Oiic as far as t'ley could in the way of indirect taxation, and direct taxation was now rendered necessary. A differ' nee of opinion existed as to the propriety of taxing incomes or capital. The Government had come to the conclusion it would be better to tax property than income arising from property. An income tix was a property tix, and" something more. !t taxed a man's energies and ability, and, on that accourt, it was objectionable. An income tax was a great deal more inquisitorial than a property tax. In a colony like this the majority of settlers had no fixed income*, but there was no difficulty in rendering an account ol what he possessed. In America the farmer had to give a return, not only of his crops, but, likewise, of any veal and mutton sold (luring the year. Then, again, he was not al'owed to deduct anything forthe labour employed in improving his property. I'o do so it would be seen that a great deal of trouble arises. If he did not plea-e the asse-s ir, then he had. to exhibit all his books, and disclose all his transactions to prove his income wa3 what he returned it to be. Under the tax, as they proposed it, no snch inqnsitorial proceedings were required. All he required to do was to give an account of his visible property. It lay with him, as far as he might deem advisable, to show any transactions which did not appear on the face of his possessions. The objection that by taxing property, and no iucomes, a certain class escape. To some extent that was true. A property tax was levied for the purpose of adjusting the taxation. An indirect tax bears on all classes of the community, and they could not possibly tell upon whom it mi-ht fall. A property tax, with certain exemptions, was made to equalise the taxation of the colony. The person with an income, and who spends it all, contribute largely to the indirect taxation, whereas the person who only spends £400 or £500 escapes much more lightlj". As regards the property they propose to tax under these x'roposals, it will fall equally on whatever kind of property the man may choose to invest in. The advantages of that were, that it left a man absolutely free to invest in whatever class of property he pleases. The statement that this bill would not tax the unearned increment was a fallacy. If speculation in land was going on to the detriment of settlement, then by all means let them resort to special legislation, but it was wrong to impose a land tax. simply to get hold of the larger class of landowners. They could not deter speculators by that tax, and on the other hand, it was an injustice to tax a particular class of the community. The bill before the House was prepared rather hastily, so that while the bill contains the principle of taxation proposed, there wore details which ho would amend in committee. It was proper to value by the governor—the real property. In personal property, it was proposed a man shall be his own valuator. Tne owner to send iu a return of the Deputy Commissioner deducting as he may think fit any debt he may owe. It was tho duty of the commissioner to object if he thought lit. It was then for tho owner to substantiate the return he had ma ie before officers called reviewers. In that case there would be no prying into the man's affairs. It would be the object of the Government to secure men of high standing as reviewers, and render them altogether independent of the Government of the day. As regards the exemptions proposed by the bill, the Government would be prepared to accept any reasonable proposal on tho point. Of personal effects they proposed exempting to tile extent of £300. Books and works of art would not be exempted in consequence of the great difficulty that would be occasioned thereby. If law libraries, for example, were to be exempted, it would bo just as reasonable to insist upon the implements of the manufacturers being exempted. The Government would bo prepared to accept reasonable proposals on the point. Ho would ask that the bill might be so far altered as to make the tax recoverable from the mortgager instead of the mortgagee. He made that proposal with tho view of preventing properties being twice taxed. The quest:>.n of how much was to be levied on property was nob touched upon by the bill. It was purely a machinery bill, and it was to be hoped that in discussing it they would not mix up the general question of taxation. They had to make up one and half million per annum to meet the demands of the public creditor, and without some such tax as this they would always be in | the position of being compelled to adopt some temporary expedient for making good its liabilities. The proposal was simply to provide tho machinery, and then, as occasion required, to fix the amount. This yoar they proposed to make it one penny. In arriving at that determination, he was actuated by the feeling that they had to face very uncertain times, and it was very necessary they should not overrate their revenue. Then again, their expenditure was more than it should be. They would use every effort toward economy ; still he could not at present take that purpose into account. He had, therefore, estimated the expenditure as that of last year In that case he had shown that a deficit of £800,000 or £900,000 would exist.

They proposed to meet the House ia May, and it tiioy found the revenue w.ia rising, or the expenditure falling, the amount of ono penny could be reduced to what was deemed necessary before next March. They would have to borrow some fSOO.OOO, and it was juafc possible that their loans would not be negotiated by that time. With this tax, they would be in a position go into the money market with a much better grace, having ordinary expenditure amply covered by taxation. The proposals, looked at impartially, he thought, members would agree that an income tax would be inexpedient at present. Mr. Ballan'CE criticised the remvk made that the proposed tax of Id in the £ wa3 chiefly made for the purpose of raising the crelit of the colony in the London money market. To deil with the subject properly it would be necessary to revise the whole of the financial pronoals of last year. The Treasurer called the unearned increment a figment, but this year he deals with it as a reality. He told them that an income tax was more inquisitorial than a property tax, but he had given no proof iu support of the statement. Under an income tax it was only in cases of doubt that it was rendered inquisitorial. Now, he asked, would it be the same in regard to property? There were a large number of concerns in this colony in which large amounts were invested. Mining companies for instance, which paid no income at all. Now, this bill will fall on these as heavily as it would fall on concerns paying incomes. They had evidence that the land tax, which was condemned by the Treasurer, was being resorted to by other col •nies. If they eliminated all the objections from the land tax incidental to its inauguration, then he would say they had adopted a tax acceptable to the whole country. There wa3 a great danger of chopping about from one tix to another, and that was precisely what the Treasurer proposed to do. If a scramble was to be permitted in committee, as the Treasurer had partly prepared them for, then it would merge from the committee iu a shape altogether different from what it now professed to be. The credit of the colnny depended, not a? the Treasurer would lead them to supposs, on one tax, but upon the whole system of taxation. One of the most prosperous classes in the colony was the professional man, aud he was to escape altog -ther. The question arose—was all this ensiling taxation necessary ? They had been told it was to be a shifting tax, small in prosperous times and heavier in other times He would or.ter.d that the taxation was not call-.d for, as a sum of £200,000 had been miscalculated in the Estimates. A large amount of the represented deficiency was due to the manner in which the Treasurer brought down his statement. He saw no reason to reduce the revenue £250,000 as the Treasurer had dine. The late Government had been b'amed for not calling the House together earli r t'lan they did. He however contended that there was no reason —no financial one—for doing so. One charge made against the late Government was, that it lived on the land fund. It was the Treasurer who first established the principle of bringing the land fund into the public accuiut iu 1575, and he (Mr. Ballanoe) went on to show that the Government had levied on that fund far less than the Government of which the Treasurer had previoti-ly been a member, aod oven yet his (Major Atkinson's) Government had not yet cease 1 to live on that fund. He contended that the liabilities had been over estimated, and that large items had been put down which would not come down for payment this fimneial year. The Treasurer had attacked his estimates of the last year. Tiie fact was that they had estimated £100,000 from the laud tax, and they would receive that amount within £10,000. In the Financial Statement for this year, a misstatement of £50,000 of taxation alone had been made. The expenditure was overestimated by £70,000, ami other items were carried and criticised to show that the computation was altogether wrong. Mr. Shkimski next addressed the House in opposition to the bill. Mr. Mac.vxdrkw sa : d that all th j minority could do was to record their protest again-1 the nvasure. The feeling produced iu his mind was that, after spending 30 years of liis life in New Zealand, he would have to leave the country. Before imposing a tax of this kind every other means should have been exhausted. The Estimates ought to have been cut down by the Government. The expenditure proposed was altogether out of the question. He saw nothing for it, but just to go to ?. vote, and allow the Government to make "akick and mill" of the measure.

Mr. Hutchison' dM not think that any amendment likely to bo made would render the bill at all tolerable. Its principal effect would be to create another army of officials, who, once created, tho colony would have great difficulty in getting quit of. The 8j r stcm of taxation proposed was vicious in principle and inquisitorial in its effect. Itmade no distinction between the uian of small and the man of large property, the mail with a fixed and the man with a precarious income. Mr. Tursbull characterised the statemeat that it was necessary for tho credit of colony that increased taxation should be imposed as a most extraordinary one. Tho reduction in the Estimates when passing the House would enable thein to dispense with the proposed taxation. No good reason had b*en shown why a measure of this k»nd should be passed, on the contrary it had been proved that the proposal was quite uncalled for.

Mr. Dick had an idea that the difliculties of the cdouy had been overstated, and he was glad to find that the Treasury now took a more hopeful view of matters. He believed tho measure was an improvement on the Land Bill. At the same time, he th®ught it was defective and unjust. The proposal to tax shareholders was unfair when persons deriving large incomes from these very companies escaped. Education should not be absolutely free, aud such fees could easily be got to the extent of £100,000. At least one half of the property tax might thereby be reduced. The country would revive. Trade was better outside, and no doubt it would bo soon improved here. An increased income from railways might also be anticipated. The property tax would discourage people to bring in capital. At present they should tread upon the resources of the people as lightly as they could, aud rather aim at reducing their expenditure Mr. Moss spoke against the bill. [Left sitting.]