CORRESPONDENCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9694, 14 December 1894, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

■ THE SOCIAL OUTLOOK: THE SINGLE TAX REMEDY. T 0 T H E K )) I T 0 R. Sir, —In your issue of 29th October, Mr. Vaile asked us to give direct answers to seven questions which he numbered con--1 aecutively._ Our reply appeared in the Herald of 13th November, and pointed out the futility of discussing details until the primary question of "principle" had been agreed on or disposed of. But Mr. Vaile (in his letter on the 26th ult.) reiterated the aforesaid seven questions—assumed that we were utterly unable to answer them, and suggested that any attempt to do so " would prove us to be communists of the very worst order, if not anarchists in disguise." Conceding that his subsequent apology cancels this ajarminer imputation, we will now deal with his questions. Mr. Vaile's first question is, How do we propose to secure to the occupier the full value of his improvements ? We reply that the right-to occupy being absolute, so long as the ground rent is paid, improvements cannot be in any greater jeopardy than at E resent-on the contrary, tney will, as a rule, e infinitely sater, for whereas individual landowners are constantly on the watch for the opportunity to raise individual rents, the tenant's own improvements being frequently the lever used, (Mr. Vaile's experience will supply plenty of illustrations), any rise of rent under the single tax must be of general application to all land of the same value in the locality, and subject to the incessant criticism of local and general public opinion. It is obvious that rack-renting is now the rule but under the single tax it would not be possible. Our opponents first assert that the voting-power being in the hands of the people, they would vote themselves "rentfree," and then they turn about and tell us that " rack-renting" would prevail! Which are we to believe ? or why should we believe either? Does not experience tell us that landlordism always takes the highest rent that stress of competition will yield ? Have we not seen the State compelled to interfere, as in Ireland and elsewhere, between landlords and their victims, and place a limit to extortion ? Do our pastoral lessees complain of rack-renting? We can supply local instances of purchase of improvements at full value under a rack-renting lease (doubling in 40 years), and where vacant allotments under the same tenure were forfeited but the purchase was for occupation, not for investment. Mr. Vaile tells us 4 it is the single-t&xers who advocate ! monopoly, and what the experience of all time has proved to be the very worst form of monopoly—a Government one!" On this reasoning we should at once proceed to sell ?ur railways, abolish our post office, and invite tenders for the purchase of our telegraphs and telephones, and dispose of our municipal waterworks!! We can couple questions 2 and 3 as to the rights of re-entry. These points are dealt W ui ndei ' 8, 11 au d 12 on page 8 of our pamphlet. " How to nationalise ground rent. VVe may further say that the State, in collecting the ground r<»nt would of course act as it does in respect of customs duties, income tax,' or road rated. Is it not a common thing for land to be sold (and not resumed by the State) for non-payment of rates or goods for non-payment of duty? Why then should tnero be any

■■ ■ ■ -5; yueatioc of the propriety of enforcing payment of ground rent by tha same means ? As to the term of grace that would precede execution, we think it may be taken for granted that the State would not be less lenient than the landlord. Questions 4 and 5, as to the investment of trust funds,_ etc., and as to investment* generally, will also go together, and we answer that it is no part of the duty of the State to provide a channel for investments; and still less to provide such channel by selling or by maintaining the privilege of levying ground-rent on future industry; and on that privilege alone does "land value" depend. The only honest employment foe wealth, apart from proper private use, is iD developing industry ana assisting labour to produce more wealth. Question 6 is completely answered by our new departure," as explained in our pamphlet, " How to Nationalise Groundrent.'' It is the recognition that the interests referred to were created in good faith, and that all would suffer if such institutions as banks and insurance companies were unable to meet their engagements, that has led us to propose to waive the question of principle as regarda past land transactions in this colony, and to suggest the debenture system as a concession to expediency. Let not our opponents presume too far on this concession—it does not commend itself to many of our friends, and we have incurred great odium for suggesting it. We out selves do not support it as applicable to the state of things which exists in Lngland. We think it expedient in the circumstances of this colony, but we remain advocates of the single tax, whatever means may be found necessary to attain it. It appears practicable and advisable to make such terms now, but prompt acceptance ia of the essence of our proposal. Let Mr. Vaile remember the " leaves " of the Sybil—-sncb are our profferred debentures. The seventh and last question relates to the "liquor" traffic, and we really fail to see how this touches the " land" question ; but of course as all Customs and Excise duties would be abolished, liquor would be admitted and manufactured free. This would at leust have the good effect of reducing the monopoly now enjoyed exclusively by the wealthy farms of importers and brewers, and of preventing them from " tieing" such a large proportion of licensed houses, to the exclusion of independent retailers. Having now answered Mr. Vaile's questions the best of our ability, we should be glad if he would reply to a few pertinent questions from our point of view, viz.:— 1. Has a man the same right to demand payment for the use of the earth as for th» use of the fruits of industry ? 2. Can any individual create " landvalue ?"

3. If "yes," then how? If "no," then why should any individual be allowed to appropriate it? 4. Does not the competition for the privi« lege of levying ground rent increase the price paid for the use of land? 5- Does not landlordism deprive the general public of a large portion of their earnings without giving any equivalent? 6. Would not the single tax prevent this? 7. Is not a "value' which arises solely from the presence, the necessities, and the public expenditure of a community, eminently appropriate to maintain the public services of that community?—We are, sir, for the Ground Rent Revenue League, Edwd. Withy, President; F. M. King, Hon. Sec. Auckland, December 3, 1894.

ADVANCES TO SETTLERS ACT.—A i IVE-SEVENTHS SECURITY ONLY.

TO THE EDITOB. Sir,-In alluding to this the Hon. J. G. Ward said, " As the basis of valuation is one of three-fifths, before £3,000,000 can be advanced there must be security to the extent ™> Jir^' le r r two-fifths. Therefore, when *3,000,000 of money is obtained by the State and loaned, it will be advanced upon landed security worth £4,200,000." If this i 3 the yv&y the Government calculate a 3-sths security, they will be prepared to 0,1 a farm property worth only £420. But how can this be a security of 3-sths. lo advance cn a three-fifths basis, they could only advance £300 on a farm value £500, and on the same basis when they had loaned £3,000,000, it would be on landed security worth £5,000,000. - \? ear n °t a misprint (as further on in his speech the hon. gentleman referred to the margin of £1,200,000 in the security), but expresses the intention, of the Government to lend if the farm shows seven-fifths value of the sum proposed to be lent, and this will work out that they will lend exactly fave-sevenths of the total value of the farm.

I do not know the exact wording of the Act, but if it is capable of having this construction put upon it, it appears clear the brovernment will take that view of it, and any Government or private individual who lends up to five-sevenths on farm properties may reasonably expect, with a sufficient ii- ro P e i to have nothing left to lend at all in the near future.—l am, etc., 81, Queen-street. J. Thobnes.

ON WRECKS IN GENERAL. TO THE EDITOR. _ Sir, —1 beg to offer the following sugges* tions for the prevention of such lamentable disasters as those which happened to the illfated Wairarapa and Tararua, whereby so many lives entrusted to the captains of these vessels were lost. 1. That the Government should make such regulations, re speed of steamers in times of fogs or other dangerous times, and their general management, as shall minimise the risks run by the sea-going public, whose lives are really committed to the care of the captain. 2. That each steamer carrying pas-, sengers should carry also a Government inspector (said inspector's salary to be paid by the owners), whose duty it should bo to see that these regulations were carried out. 3. That in ordter to enable the owners to pay the salary of such inspector, owners should be prohibited _ from reducing fares below paying rates in time of competition. On former trips to and from Sydney, 1 have paid £10 10s for a single saloon ticket and £5 for a steerage ticket. Now, sir, is it possible tor the Union Steamship Company to make a saloon fare of £1 10s to Sydney pay ? Such low rates will not pay should loss of time occur through fog, or other _ contingencies. I consider cutting of fares increased the risk of loss of life, as ib tends to lead to quick steaming, regardless of risks. We employ a traffic inspector ashore in addition to_ our numerous police. Why not have such inspectors afloat also, as there the risks are so much greater.—lam etc., Alfred C. Laurie. Weymouth, December 13,1894.

PACKING OP FRUIT. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In one of your late publications ) noticed an article on fruit-packing in Australia, in which it stated that tea-tree bark was found to be a great success. For several years I have been experimenting in the jjacking of fruit and plants. It is well known that cork dust is one of the best materials for the purpose. I have found dry cocoanut dust, the refuse from the fibre, equal, if not superior, to cork dust. It is a perfect nonconductor of heat and cold, and does not impart the least flavour to the fruit packed in it. I have had ordinary keeping apples packed in that material perfectly sound aa late as the end of September. I have had soft-wooded plants perfectly sound after having been packed sixty-five days. I have a letter by me from a nurseryman iu England in which he says the plants I sent arrived in as good condition as if they had only come from Scotland. The material could be easily obtained from the islands.—l am, etc., W. J. Palmer, Government Fruit Expert for the North Island. Napier, December 1, 1894.

ANOTHER AUCKLAND WHITE ELEPHANT. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Auckland up till lately has been able to boast of being the proud possessor of two white elephants, but lately the city wiseacreß have purchased a third in the shape of a clock, and after wasting time and money in altering and disfiguring the tower of the Free Library they have percherl it up there completely out of sight to all the business part of the city (Queen-street). But that of course is nothing. It has been up two months or so now, and has never kept reliable time yet, and can hardly be relied upon to go at all. It has from time to time registered all manner of lies as to time. It has continually

struck the wrong hour, played the wrong time, and frequently not gone at all (to-day for instance), and in fact in its present position it is an expensive white elephant, neither of use nor ornament, like the huge dock and dredger to which -Aucklanders point 80 proudly when showing visitors round.—l am, ■ etc., Citizen. Auckland, December 11.