ROSEBERY ON THE BUDGET

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 6964, 2 November 1909, Page 7

ROSEBERY ON THE BUDGET

(To the Editor " X.Z. Times,") Sir, —I lead lord Rosebery’s speech on the Budget in your issue of yesterday with keen interest, having been one of his followers while he was leader of the Liberal party. Like most Liberals, I became convinced several years ago that his lordship never was a genuine Liberal, but rather a Tory, who considered that ho would be more useful ,to the landlords of Britain on the Liberal than on the Tory side, i His lordship says that the principle of Mr Lloyd-George’s Budget is "to take as much and harass as much as possible." , This is simply not true. • The Budget, as a matter of fact, takes no more than is necessary, and if there -is any "harassing" about it, it is because it takes out of the pockets of the landholders an utterly insignificant part of that annual value of land which they do not earn. It is extremely illiberal and mean for his lordship to complain of this extra taxation of land values, 'considering that the land tax only - amounts to about £BOO,OOO a year, and that the great bulk of taxation, both national and local, is paid every year by the toiling masses, not one oi -w ho ill earns as much in a year as Lord Rosebery Spends in a day. He says that Mr Gladstone would oppose this Budget were he living. This is doing dishonour to the name of Gladstone, the statesman who deplored the tendency of wealth to accurpulato in few hands, who also "expressed his disgust at the ostentatious vulgarity of wealth, and whose Government made a big increase, in the death duties, for which they were denounced by the. Tory press as thieves and robbers. No, there is abundant evidence that Gladstone, were he living to-day, would cordially support the - Budget. Lord Rosebery says “this Budget seeks to establish an inquisition unknown previously to Great Britain, and a tyranny, if I venture to say, unknown to mankind.” What is this inquisition? Why, simply a body of valuers going through the country to value land. And this is what his lordship calls “a tyranny unknown to mankind!" Could any statement be more utterly ridiculous? Why should not land be valued os well as buildings, and why should there have been no valuation of land for more lhan 200 years? In this country we have a valuation of the' whole of the. land at least once in six years, but in Great Britain they have not had a valuation once in 200 years. And here is a great noble crying out ’“Tyranny!" when it is proposed to value the land after a period of 220 years. Sir, it- is time to have done wasting time and money on landholders. '.lt is time the whole revenue was raised from land values in every country in the world. When one country does this the rest will goon follow. Let New Zealand be the first country to do it. ’ The Premier is about to take a. referendum on. the question of the totalisator. Let the question be put to the people at the same time—“Do you want the revenue raised from laud values?" —I am, etc., E.D.