THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1906. THE BRITISH MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13326, 5 November 1906, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1906. THE BRITISH MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS.

The result of the British municipal elections is asserted by Mr. Balfour to have surprised both parties, and if this is the feeling of the jubilant Conservative Leader we can easily imagine the amazement of his opponents. Yet while it will gratify those colonists who prefer safe and cautious progress to the wild-cat schemes of irresponsible theorists it Mill hardly surprise them. For the good old rule that onlookers see most of the game applies in politics as in everything else, and it has long seemed impossible—at this distance—for the recent ruinous folly of certain British local bodies to be maintained for ever. There is always a very close relationship in the united Kingdom between the local elections and national politics. In the colonies we are disinclined to discuss the politics of a candidate for city council, road board, county council, 01 mayoralty. We do not care in Auckland whether Mr. Myers is for or against the General Government, so long as he makes a good Mayor, and the same broader civic spirit generally permeates our colonial life. But at Home local elections and general elections are fought, out with the same party organisation and upon the same party divisions, the chief difference between them being that the franchises for the local elections are more limited. From this it would have seemed that after a general election in which the Conservative-Unionists who in the London local elections are termed the Moderates—had been wellnigh overwhelmed the local elections would indicate the same trend of the municipal voter. That an unmistakable reaction in favour of the Conservative-Unionist has set in is therefore of peculiar political significance and very naturally gives heart to Mr. Balfour. But, however this may seem in England itself, from the colonies the reaction has long appeared inevitable. When ratepayers vote the preposterous inflation of rates it can have but one outcome. With the Poplar Workhouse scandal emphasising the weakness of socialism the overburdened middle classes would not be " tHe backbone of Eng-

land'' if they did not straighten up in revolt before they were utterly ruined. :

It is very difficult to realise what has been suffered by the English ratepayers during the past " progressive" decade. In some towns shrewd and capable municipal management has enabled municipal enterprises to be extended without unduly burdening the rates, and these towns have been used to cloak a host of sufferers. The expenditure of the local authorities rose from £75,000,000 in 1894-5 to nearly £130,000.000 in 1902-3 ; the amount raised by loan in 1894-5 was £15,000,000, and in 1902-3 it was £35,000,000. The outstanding loans in 1902-3 had reached the enormous sum of £370,000,000, or nearly half the amount of the National Debt. But as the ratable values by no means kept pace with this heaping up of liability and increase in expenditure, rates went up by leaps and bounds in the '" progressive " districts. The ratable value of property in England in 1894 was £161,000,000 ; in 1904 it was only £199.000,000 ; and en top of it all the ''Progressive" party has everywhere been advancing and advocating schemes involving the further spending of vast sums. But'the most startling evils of unrestrained and unbalanced municipal tinkering with social and civic problems is to be seen in the poor law statistics. In spite of freetrade and cheap loaves there are nearly a million paupers in England and Wales alone, the number on January 1. 1905, being the largest on record—-932,207. Their relief now costs over. £13.000.000. But each London pauper costs the ratepayers nearly £29 yearly, while outside London the cost is more than £15 less, an enormous difference, the cause of which has been unearthed in the Poplar, investigations. Under " Progressive-'' administration, the condition of workhouse inmates is decidedly better, not only than that of the industrious poor, but than that of the small ratepayer himself. The best of meats, butter's, eggs, and other edibles arc supplied with wasteful extravagance, and palaces are built provided with the latest conveniences and improvements; the '"pauper" becomes the pampered favourite of popularity-seeking demagogues or sentimental fanatics who squander huge sums upon him, sums that have all to be wrung by the rate collector from the industrious ratepayer. The ratepayer has revolted at last—and Mr. Balfour says that both parties are surprised. The revolt of the British ratepayer has been led by London, and the extent of it in the Imperial City can be seen by a comparison of triennial elections of 1906 and 1903. They are as follows : — 1906. 1933. Modiii-ai-s ... ~. 97£ 59* Progressives .. ... 257 bib Independents ... 97 112 Labour . . ~, 3? +0 Socialists . v ... 2 - . In 1903 the Progressives controlled 14 of the 26 London borough councils ; this year the Moderates have carried the control of 23 of them and the Progressive influence on the others must be almost gone. Throughout the provinces there has been a similar demonstration of the public feeling. An era of retrenchment and economy in British municipal administration has undoubtedly been entered upon. As has been very bitterly urged in England for some time the "middle class" has borne the weight of the recent increased expenditure in both local and national business. The man who has little to tax and the man who is so rich that he does not notice ordinary taxation have gone practically scot free, while the men of " limited incomes" and of small property have been pressed to the grindstone. This revolt of the ratepayer which has been commenced in the local elections will certainly be continued in the general elections in the form of an agitation for the lightening of *" middle-class " taxation. England is not socialistic. It tolerated many-unwise and impracticable municipal experiments until it found its pockets emptied and nothing to show for the money. It is now engaged in municipal reorganisation of the very practical kind which reduces rates and encourages public, expenditure. But it is also inquiring why the middle class should be singled out for taxation, while neither the millionaires nor the artisans pay proportionately to their incomes towards public purposes. The result of this national inquiry may surprise both parties quite as much as have the municipal elections of 1906.