ALLEGED MURDER OF A WIFE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2363, 8 June 1899, Page 23

ALLEGED MURDER OF A WIFE.

CAMBRIDGE, June 3.

The medical evidence at the inquest on Mrs Carroll showed that the body is much bruised. Three ribs were found to be broken, and the wound behind the left ear, -which caused death, was, in the doctor's opinion, caused by violence. The inquest has been adjourned till the Bth inst. to allow the police time to complete the evidence.

AUCKLAND, June S.

William Carroll, on a charge of the murder of his wife at Cambridge, has been remanded for eight days. He was brought down to Mount Eden GaoL

The extraordinary prosperity of Taranaki (says a local paper) during the last year or two is causing an influx of people from other parts of New Zealand to settle on the land there and assist in the development of her roBQuicea.

•Sir,— l notice that my old friend "T..M." has closed his career as a correspondent to your columns. Old age and infirmity have overtaken him. lam sorry for this on two grounds — first, he is a very old acquaintance, and a much-respected gentleman ; and, secondly, -I know of no one who will or can take his place to defend his views on the above subject.

" T. M.," in his letter of May 25, says that I said nothing in my last to change his opinion on the single tax. Probably not: I did not expect to work a miracle. "T. M." will, nevertheless, confess that on six different occasions he has been quite unable to reply to one sentence in one of those letters, while I have on every occasion been able to show him to be completely wrong, as I intend to do on this occasion. "T. M.'s " great concern is to increase our produce, our exports, in order to exceed our imports as well as to pay interest on our debt, and he declares that to put the tax on unimproved land values will prevent this being done. Let us see. The late John Baliancp gave U3 a small instalment of the single tax when he exempted all improvements from taxation on our farms and put it on the bare land value, and the result was that the Cheviot estate was forced into the market, and this year's returns show that the produce in grain alone has been increased from nothing to 133,000 bushels, and yet " T. M." will reiterate the statement that the tax retards or prevents" production. He says the tax would keep capital from being invested in land. I want to tell " T. M." that that is a much-to-be-de-sired event. Does "T. M." not know that one man having capital i^as enabled to buy up Glenmark estate, comprising an area of 70,000 acres of the best land in the colony, and thus keep it out of use? Now, I challenge "T. M.," and I challenge any other reader of the 'Witness, to prove to me-fchat to apply the single tax it would reduce its output oi lessen' the produce grown upon it. And 1 further challenge any of your readers to giv« me proof that it would increase the unemployed. On the contrary, if the tax were applied to all land it would tremendously increase our products, and at the same time tremendously increase the demand for labour. This last sentence makes one pause to think that for generations yet to come there is room enough and work enough for millions yet unborn. Afiß when we look back one decade and remember the exodus from these shores, as well as the numerous meetings of unemployed men crying out for work, it is then that we conclude that our past political history is the history of a great crime. "T. M." says that the single tax is unjust, but he has never yet attempted to provt the statement: he only gives his opinion. He objects to buying big estates; so do I. I believe in applying the tax on unimproved land values only, and then those who would occupy those estates would g^ them at about one-fourth or one-fifth of what they have to pay now. "T. M." says that any system lihat would relieve a man like mo of taxation would not be a wise one. It is not a matter of wisdom at all ; it is a matter of justice. I contend that because the big estates are not settled or cultivated they can't pay their fair share of the tax: I want to compel them to pay more — like the Cheviot, .for example; and when they pay more I shall pay less. Wherever the soil and situation aro equal to my soil and my situation, then I want that land to pay an equal tax to my land. Where is there any injustice in that?

Likewise, when an acre of land on Princes street, Dunedin, becomes worth £90,000, then wo say that all society creates that value. " T. M." is willing to give all that away to one individual — that which belongs to all. The tax would apply here and give it back.i

T. M." objects to -well-paid G-ov eminent officials being relieved of taxation; but I want to tell him that all that army of Government officials, the customs officers from one end of the colony to the other, would be ultimately dismissed, and that addition to our taxation would be abolished, while the machinery in operation now would assess and collect all the land tax, just as it does now. "T. M." says that the people under the single tax would become serfs ta&the Government. The people are the Government : then how can the people - become serfs to themselves? Had I space I could prove that the single tax -would set everj serf in Britain free. Perhaps I shall have another opportunity, by your permission. — 7 am, etc.,

ROBERT DODDS.

Otamita, May 30.

:.o fnr. editor,