THE MINISTER OF FINANCE AND POLITICAL ROBBERY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17089, 22 August 1917, Page 3

THE MINISTER OF FINANCE AND POLITICAL ROBBERY.

Sib,—The Minister of Finance declaims aga.nst the notion of conscription of wealta suggested in the Budget debate, and characterises it as " nothing short of robbery." Again, he proclaims that "we must raise revenue in such a way as not to contravene the principles of political honesty." Ic is evident that his chief concern is not that these principles should be honoured, but that he should obtain the money that is required; and in this he i s guided by expediency rather than by principle. Ho realises that his financial policy is faced with the genesis of an alert and determined opposition, which, though turned aside meanwhile, may renew its attack at any time. Ho is acting on the defensive, and his first and chief line of defence is absolute conservatism. "No Treasurer at Ihe present juncture could afford to go off tho beaten track to get money and try experiments.. .Ho was not going to turn off tho acknowledged paths to raise the revenue necessary." The after reference to the principles of political honesty were mere colouring added for the purpose of giving h:e policy the appearance of a quality which it does not inherently possess.

It is generally admitted that the public borrowing of the dominion-has added materially to tho value of the land and all forms of wealth. It is tho same wtory the world over—material prosperity means a limited number of very wealthy people a greater number of moderately wealthy; then a grading downwards to the general mass of those who aro ablo merely .to live in comparative comfort, rear their families and make due provision for their declining years; below, again, there is a further grading downward to the "submerged," a class unknown in undeveloped countries. The justification for public borrowing is the fact that it develops the country. Development of a _ country means added value to its material wealth, but to the masses it brings no financial gain. It is true that all reap benefit from tho use of public utilities, but from the financial point of view the position of the toiler is made more acute by contrast with his wealthier fellow citizen or neighbour. The " bottom dog" becomes more emphatically the "< bottom dog." When a landowner borrows privately in order to increase the value 1 of his property, he repays the loan himself out of that increased value. _ Equally so when the money is borrowed directly through tho medium of the Government the result is the same, and justice demands that the burden of the loan should be borne by the property that is thus enhanced in value and repaid by it through the same indirect medium. To spread the burden over the general. taxpayers, who are not financially benefited by it, is not " political-honesty." The present effort is to obtain money' to meet the expenses of the war, yet the analogy with ordinary public borrowing holds good.- This war has its two distinct aspects: tho defence of the rights of humanity generally, and also the protection of property. The former is so important, and looms so largely, that it is absorbing the public attention and drawing it away from consideration of the latter. In so far as this struggle concerns humanity as such, its demands are being met in the sacrifices by our manhood, which by its own desire is being conscripted into' service. In so far as the war is a means of preserving our material wea'th, it is the concern of the owners of that wealth, upon whom, in justice, lies the obligation of paying tho cost of its redemption. The fact that the war has its greater and more arresting ' aspect in no way qualifies this obligation. Sir Joseph Ward, speaking as Minister of Defenco, when introducing tho Bill for compulsory training, described the expenditure under this system as a business insurance. And so it ib ; the cost of the war is the price of the salvage of our wealth from the clutches of tho Hun, and, according to the principles of political honesty, the owners of wealth ought to pay for it—l am, etc.. j. D. B.F