SIR JULIUS VOGEL’S POLICY.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 658, 3 October 1884, Page 2 (Supplement)

SIR JULIUS VOGEL’S POLICY.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND MAIL-

Sir, —Sir Julius Vogel having announced his policy, it will be well to consider it from a non-party point of view.

1. Sir Julius proposes to borrow one million and a-half only at once, but his statement shadows forth a seven and ahalf million loan. This one and a-half million is half a million in excess of the annual million Major Atkinson thinks advisable, and a similar million a year which Sir Julius himself proposed in IS7O for ten years (actually the House of Representatives has borrowed about two millions a year, and Sir Julius’ original “ ten millions ” yet appear to be required). 2. The abolition of the sinking fund is a direct contradiction of Sir Julius’ own first proposals, which specially advocated such a fund. This, however, is only another instance of the spendthrift heir cutting down his timber as a last resource to meet his engagements. The sinking fund had to go.. I should have liked to have seen some expression of regret upon Sir Julius Vogel’s part, at the necessity of adopting this course, some regret at witnessing the terrible state of refinement of taxation in which his policy has plunged this colony. 3. The proposal to encourage trade with the South Sea Islands and other neighboring tropical countries, is a good one, seeing how much good direct steam communication with England has done for us, and further, seeing that any man having the true interest of New Zealand at heart, say so far back as 1870, would rather have advised the opening up of foreign communication and trade, than inland communication and railways, at the cost of plunging the colony millions into debt, and making it the slave of the London Stick Exchange. Sir Julius’ other proposal to grow beetroot sugar, flies, however, directly in the face of his desire to encourage foreign trade, as this means a first supply of raw 3Ugar from the neighboring tropical countries. Besides, there is not labor in the country even to “ top and tail ” the roots, and it is impossible to get it for many years to come. Moreover, beet-root sugar will never be able to compete, upon an equal footing, with the vast supply of cane sugar close at hand. 5. The seven and a-half million loan, shadowed forth to complete the railways (many of which will not pay, as i 3 the case with many of those already constructed) will further prevent the encouragement of foreign trade, which cannot thrive under a heavy debt, and so long as we keep adding to the debt. An excessive Custom tariff and heavy port dues effectually close our ports, and allow Sydney to sell 10 to 15 per cent cheaper than we can sell. This quite cuts the ground from beneath our merchants’ feet, for not even “ drawbacks ” overcome the difficulty. Thus, America by its high import duties has completely destroyed its mercantile marine. Our highest law here, isolated as we are, should be to encourage our mercantile marine.

6. It appears evident from Sir Julius Vogel that Major Atkinson has not been guilty of many laches, but he considers the late Premier a bad financier and a poor statesman. This may be so, but Major Atkinson is certainly the more honest man of the two. c(I exceedingly regret to see, in Buch times as we know are upon us, Sir Julius Vogel purchasing the popularity of the House of Representatives by such a thing as the late trip of the Hinemoa, for even if it was possible to save £IOO worth of coal it should have been saved. Our politicians must have a higher regard public virtue than is shown even in this slight matter, and it may be well for Sir Julius Vogel to know this.) 7. As to the whole question of a public debt and our right to pledge posterity. I think New Zealand should take steps at once to pay off its debt. My opinion is that public debts are infringements of the moral law, and that we have no right to mortgage the labor of those who come after usf generation should provide for itself aloDe. The policy of England and other nations of late years of running heavily into debt is a bad precedent, and will only lead to trouble. None of these debts are yet paid, and it is terrible to think even of the suffering which would ensue to a mass of helpless people depending upon it, if the laboring classes of Europe refused to pay any further interest. But let us take our own case here. A large proportion of our debt has been incurred to grow wheat. Now it is found that wheat-growing will not pay. 8. I am exceedingly doubtful whether

Sir Julius Vogel has any sound idea of what really is best for the true interests of this colony, and I think, it would be quite a mistake to allow him to borrow any more money for us. The policy is more than doubtful, and he himself is very inconsistent. It is a great pity that he has returned amongst us, as he has done quite enough harm, and will only intensify the causes of our depression by making things easy and pleasant for us for a year or two. My opinion is that itis far safer for us to accumulate our labor and natural wealth into capital, and to quietly extend our trade and gradually develop our colony, than borrow ready - made capital by the million to be foolishly expended, besides demoralising the community in every way, and making it bankrupt. Surely the happiness and prosperity of the present generation of colonists is a higher law than its bankruptcy for the sake of forcing the colony ahead too fast, for the benefit of the few.

9. Einally, Mr Stout appears an able man, truly desirous of the colony’s welfare, and he should receive a fairtrial. But Sir Julius Vogel’s principles are so uncertain (especially as shown in the appropriation of his own sinking fund) that I hope the Canterbury members will consider what I say, otherwise it may be necessary to resort to a policy of repudiating any future loans.—l am, &c., Coleman Phillips. Wairarapa, September 30, 18S4.