THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, MARCH 28, 1896.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10631, 28 March 1896, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, MARCH 28, 1896.

It will be interesting for the next few months to watch the process of manufacturing a "Liberal" policy designed— shall we say for the good of the colony a3 a whole, or must we not rather say for the advancement of the interests of the great Liberal party? The result of the Christchurch election has not been lost on the Premier, and he recently sent out one feeler in the . shape of a so - called programme of proposed legislation for next session. Subsequently in his speech to the Hokitika electors a few days, since he further elaborated the programme,- It is cunningly, if not over skilfully, conceived so as to take with all classes. We are to have a scheme of State Jire insurance to, catch the votes of those who recently raised a clamour on the subject, consisting mostly of the business part of the community and largely of people, who as/a rule are loudest in their protestations against State interference until their own turn comes, when they are as clamorous in their demands as the working man is. for State work for the unemployed. Then we have something held out to fetch the farmers. The Advances to Settlers department is to be " overhauled " and to have more life put into it. This amounts to an admission that this most important part of the great Liberal programme has not by any means served its full purpose, which was mainly to gain the support of those who were to be benefited by the Act. It was "freely predicted at the time of the passing of the Act that the effect of it would be to alienate more support than it gained for the authors of the scheme; and, behold I these predictions are even now justified. The scheme as originally passed by the House of Eepresentatives provided, for unlimited borrowing for the purposes of the Act, and it was in consequence pf the action of the Legislative Council the amount waa reduced from £3,000,000 to half that amount in one yew. And now we find that a single half million has sufficed for a period of nearly two years. Could anything show more clearly that this scheme, like other schemes of the Government, never received that serious consideration which subjects, of such importance demand? The fact is the whole scheme was delusive from the heginning. It pretended to be intended specially to help the struggling settler by providing an easier method of getting money at a low rate of interest. As a matter of fact it was not, as we have more than once pointed out, specially intended for settlers at all, and it was the Legislative Council that amended the Bill so as to restrict advances to rural lands. Under the Bill as introduced by the Government the owner of a palatial suburban residence would have had the same benefits as the struggling settler; and the " poor farmer" who has security on which to raise - £5000 would have been on the same footing as the struggling , settler who wants only Here

again it was the Legislative Council, 1 by reducing the maximum amount to be advanced from J35000 to .£2500; that brought the Bill nearer to -what/ it professed to be. It was also predicted that if the Bill w«s really intended to help the struggling settler it must necessarily fail because the man who needed assistance the^ most would have least chance of denying any benefit from it, inasmuch as he would not be in a position to offer first-class security; and this is exactly what has happened. The advances to settlers offico is not concerned to help the poor settler who needs assistance: all it concerns itself about is to gei: the money placed so as to eaxn interest on first-class security. The consequence has been that well-to-do people who were in a position to offer gilt-edged ■security took advantage of the Act, while the struggling settler is left to get money the best way he can. But ■ we are told the effect of the Act has been to reduce the rate. of interest. There is no doubt -the rate of interest has fallen; but then the fall lias not been confined to Mew Zealand.. We know that in Australia, for example, the rate of interest is lower, than in New Zealand. We do not suppose tho Treasurer would contend that the Advances to Settlers Act of New Zealand produced that effect any more than he could argue that the floating of our loan in London enabled the other colonies to borrow at 3 per cent. What is meant by the expression " putting more life into the Advances to Settlers department" the Premier in his Hokitika speech has not informed us, and we are unable to guess, unless it be that the department is to abandon its policy of selecting the best of the securities, and is not to be guided entirely by the goodness of the security, but is to look also at the urgency of the caise from the borrower's point of view. We need hardly cay there are difficulties in the way of snch a course. We are told that " the exorbitant rates of interest still charged for loans will receive further attention," but we are not told whether the proposal is to establish Government shops for the benefit of the poor man who has only " personal'" security to offer. We have not forgotten that we were told in the Governor's Speech last year that the Government intended to legislate on the subject of usury; but we know the Government neither legislated nor attempted to legislate on the subject. Legislation to this end is again promised, but we doubt whether the mere promise will serve this time; people are not always content to take the will for the deed. We would suggest to the Premier that he should refresh his memory by a perusal of a few of the speeches put into the Governor's mouth, for he will find a good many | promises that remain unfulfilled, and they might perhaps be brought forward ! once more. Bracketed with the subject of usury we find distress for rent, the abolition of which is to be adopted by the Liberal Government: we say adopted because the proposal does not originate with Mr Sbdbojt. Sir Feedekick Wiutakeb introduced a Bill with this object as far back as 18S1. We only hope Mr Sekdon will show himself more in earnest over this subject than he did in the case of his Bill to abolish imprisonment for debt. We are also to have a new departure in the acquisition of land under the Land for Settlements. Act, for we are told " land is to be acquired for workmen's villages close to the large towns." It was generally understood at the time ot the passing of the Act that this was to be the object of the legislation, but the law was applied to quite a different purpose—namely, the " bursting up " of sundry large estates. We presume that it has been discovered that the bursting, up of such estates as the Pomahaka, for example, has had the effect of " bursting up" the policy. It is impossible to help admiring the ingenuity shown in trumpeting abroad as a new departure something that should have been done long ago if the Act had been administered according to its true spirit and intention. Then Mr Sebdon at Hokitika promised that labour legislation is "to be completed"—whatever that comprehensive phrase may mean—the* Betterment Bill, repeal of the Contagious Diseases Act, &c.; and what 'is of real importance, the Local Government Bill.

We venture to predict that the real policy will be found to be something very different, and that " borrowing" under some other name will form no unimportant part of it. We wonder how a Treasurer who has "collared" the local bodies' sinking fund is to resist the temptation to " collar" the million intended (?)f or the settlers. X the settlers cannot be. induced to take the money, what can an unfortunate Treasurer do but find some other use for it—and find some means of appropriating it? We know what happened in the ••case of< that moat beneficent measure, the ISfew Zealand Consols Act. Its professed object—and what should have been its true object—was "to encourage thrift," butits real object proved to-be something quite ; different. We know that the Bank of New Zealand was "encouraged " to invest £150,000 in consols, and that the money was very opportunely paid into the Colonial Bank. No doubt we were told that the Colonial Bank had no need of the money, but subsequent events have thrown a new light upon banking affairs. The Consols Act professed to be fox one purpose, and was actually intended for another and very different purpose ; the Land for Settlements Act professed to be • for: one purpose, and was used for " burstingup" Pomahaka estates. Can it be that the Advances to Settlers Act, another of the great Liberal policy measures passed at the same time, is to be applied to an entirely different purpose from that which its preamble professes ? Time will tell.