MR. BALLANCE'S ATTACK ON SIR WILLIAM JERVOIS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 8888, 26 May 1892, Page 6

MR. BALLANCE'S ATTACK ON SIR WILLIAM JERVOIS.

WHAT THE ARGUS SAYS. The Melbourne Argus of May 18 has the following leading article :— The people of New! Zealand are again happy in the possession of a subject for abstract discussion. The Agent-General for that colony read a paper on its financial policy and resources at a meeting of the Royal Colonial Institute. The essay was criticised as a matter of course, and it so happened that Sir William Jervois, a former Governor of New Zealand, was among the critics, and he condemned the political conduct of the present Ministry. The Premier, Mr. Ballance, lias at once retorted

by a bitter personal attack upon Sir William Jervois, to which he adds the statement that such a speech weakens the relations between the mother country and the colonies. question therefore arises as to whether Sir William Jervois, considering the position that he had held in the colony, was justified in criticising its financial policy, and whether Mr. Ballance has any right to introduce personal matters into a discussion that bore only upon the policy of the Government. The former would, perhaps, have shown better taste if he had refrained from saying a word ; tho latter 1 would have exhibited more dignity and i manliness it he had either left the criticism unnoticed, or had tried to refute it. In condemning the financial policy of the colony, Sir William Jervois asserted that the labour party had scarcely grasped the enormous issues it was trying to decide, and it would find that it had been led by demagogues. In this remark there is nothing new. The crudities that have been uttered in our own Legislative Assembly by members of the labour party, the narrow and warped views that they have often taken, the remedies they propose— remedies which they have never thought out, and the ultimate effect of which

they li ave never attempted to estimate all these things tend to show that tho party has not grasped tho great issues of the day. The criticism is in itself fair enough. As to the question whether a man who has been Governor of a colony, and has held himself aloof from party politics, should afterwards take an interest in them, and assail the policy of the country at a later date, that is a matter that must bo decided by his own feeling of what is proper. But because Sir William Jervois is critical and Mr. Ballance is angry, it does not follow that the good relations subsisting between England and her 'colonies will be injured. The one will have to justify his opinions against numerous attacks ; and the other will recover his temper and prepare some new fad for the meeting of Parliament.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Ballance has already found consolation for all the criticisms that have been heaped upon his sweeping taxation policy. Some time ago he was inclined to maintain the opinion that the financial credit of the colony had not been lessened in any way. He appears now to think that it has been diminished, being doubtless helped to look at this view of the case by the fact that an investment company has withdrawn a considerable sum of money from New Zealand on account of a fear that the taxation might be still further increased. He finds comfort now in the reflection that " plutocratic rings" will not be able to " exploit the colony in the future as they have done in the past." This is naive and charming. It was at the invitation of the Government of New Zealand and of its municipalities and harbour trusts and inhabitants generally that money was borrowed. If " plutocratic rings" have been | "exploiting" New Zealand for years past without anyone having hitherto discovered the fact, who is to blame ? At one time it was the policy of the Government to borrow extensively for railways and other public works, and most of the troubles of New Zealand are due to the over-borrowing which then occurred. Does Mr. Ballance consider a " plutocratic ring " is responsible for the floating of an excessive number of loans ? Or does the " plutocratic ring " consist of the private investors who sent out money at their own risk, on condition that they should be able to withdraw it after the lapse of a given period if they chose to do so ? Interest has, of course, been paid on these amounts, and this may be what Mr. Ballance means when he says that the colony has been "exploited." If the investing and insuaance companies recall their money as it falls due, a certain sum will undoubtedly be saved to the people of New Zealand in the shape of interest. But along with this small saving there may be a decline in values and a fall

in wages. Capital is generally thought to be necessary for the development of a new country. If an industry is established, there must be some means of paying its expenses until the returns come. If fresh territory is to be reclaimed, and improvements are to be made on the land, and railways and roads arc to be constructed, a certain amount of capital is required. The Government of New Zealand is not in a position to borrow extensively ; and, if the people are called on to pay the private investments as they fall due, we do not see how the material progress of the colony will be facilitated. Mr. Ballance, of course, may think that the inhabitants would be happier if capital were unknown. He may be right. There was possibly more real happiness among the Maoris than has yet been experienced by the European population, subjected as they are to the fluctuations of the money market. But among English-speaking people in these days capital is necessary and no policy can be more unwise than one which hampers legitimate and reproductive investment in the colonies.