MR J. G. WILSON, M.H.R., AT PALMERSTON NORTH.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1056, 26 May 1892, Page 38

MR J. G. WILSON, M.H.R., AT PALMERSTON NORTH.

'(BY TELEGRAPH. —OWN CORRESPONDENT.) Palmerston North, May 20. A large meeting was addressed by Mr J. G. Wilson, member for Palmerston, last night, about four hundred being present. He dealt mainly with the taxation proposals and the land question. He favoured a reduction in the postal rates, but thought it just as important that something should be done to reduce the Customs duties. The Bank of New Zealand would gain L7OO a year by the penny postage, and the Loan and Mercantile Company LSOO a year. The property tax was more equitable, fair, and just than the land and income tax. He strongly objected to the taxation on improvements, and the graduated tax, holding that under the latter the more a man was in debt the more he would have to pay. He contrasted unfavourably the small amount a man paid on the income tax compared to the man with the same capital invested in land. As an instance of the manner in which the rate of interest would be raised, he said that on money lent to the mortgage companies by persons at Home, the tax amounted to 13s 4d in the LIOO. The result of Mr Ballance’s proposition, not to place servile dependence on the London money maiket, would be to crush the Colony, and he instanced the favourable manner the banks, insurance, and building societies treated them as compared to the mortgagee companies referred to. The difference to the farmer was in being allowed to deduct his debts from the taxable value under the property tax but not under the land tax ; though the business man was allowed to deduct his overdraft. He believed the rise in the rate of interest would mean increased|charges on landowners of L 300.000 a year—sufficient to maintain 2000 families in comfort. Mr Seddon vvas referred to as an authority on building Parliimentary stonewalls, but not a financial authority. On the land question h 9 admitted that the land proposals of the Government commended themselves to him. .Muchof what Mr McKenzie was doing was right. He had long been a firm friend of the Minister. They had gone into the House together, and although opposed in politics, always met in a friendly spirit. Mr McKenzie was a Highlander who was very suspicious : to that he attributed his ideas about the prevalence of dummyism. He had certainly unearthed a bad case down South—the Scott v. Ritchie case —and if there were many other similar ones he deserved all the credit possible. He knew of no cases of dummyism •n this coast, although Mr McKenzie had proved its existence in the Colony, and everyone ought to assist in putting it down. There was no large amount of land, except at second hand, available to settle upon, and they should reserve as much as they could for the poorer people. His belief was that every Ministry had been very slack indeed upon the question of land settlement, and had not settled as many people upon the land as they should have done. The last Ministry certainly had not done so ; indeed, he would say that the last Ministry might have done better. Instead of economising at the time of the depression and accentuating the prevailing distress, they should have increased the staff of the Lands Department, put on more surveyors and opened up the land. How much better that would have been for the country, for it would have utilised the surplus population, taken away from the labour market many who were a drug on it, and allowed others to obtain work. As many people as possible should be employed to survey land and help settlement. He did not agree with the people who thought it was a sin to put a man upon the land without money. The land was safe, so was the Colony, and if a man was prepared to take the risk he should be allowed to do so. If he did go to the wall the State could always confiscate his improvements. Considerable credit was due to Mr Ballance for the inauguration of the special settlement system. Since it was first brought out he had always favoured it, and done his best for it. He objected to the amendments in the Land Act compelling settlers to reside on the land instead of effecting double improvements, doing away with the right of purchase of perpetual lease selections, and allowing a Minister to put up the land on any system he chose. A freehold was essential to a poor man, though it did not matter to one with means. He expressed his intention of standing for Otaki next election, though he believed he would be returned at the head of the poll for Palmerston, Mr F. Pirani proposed a vote of thanks and continued confidence in the Government. Mr N. Valentine seconded the motion, but the Chairman, Mr Snelson, pointed out that Mr Valentine should propose a vote of confidence in Mr Wilson, to which he assented. Some confusion resulted when the motion was put, the Chairman declaring that 120 voted for the amendment of confidence in Mr Wilson, and said it was carried without counting the large number against. The meeting loudly objected to the decision, and asked for a division, but the affair ended in confusion, the last words heard being a declaration by Mr Wilson that there would, be in the New Zealand Times next day a significant ‘ No.' A vote of thanks was proposed to the chairman. Palmerston North, May 21. The end of my report of Mr Wilson’s meeting should read : “ It was significant that no vote of thanks was accorded to the chairman.” A specimen of the biassed nature of the Press Association’s report is given in its account of Mr Wilson’s meeting. It says the motion of confidence in the Government was lost by three to one, when, as a matter of fact, the motion was never put at all, a motion of confidence in Mr Wilson only being put. The Mayor admitted after the meeting that if the vote of confidence in the

Government had been pressed to a division it would have been easily carried.