RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUES.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume V, Issue 511, 18 June 1897, Page 3

RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUES.

Second Edition.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—ln my last letter I endeavored to set forth clearly a few of the main features of both systems of local rating, my object being to help ratepayers to form a sound conclusion on a very important subject, and so enable them to cast thenvotes on Saturday next without having any misgivings as to the effect then action will have on the future of this community. The real paint at issue between us seems to be whether this community will continue to tax labor and capital and allow speculation in land to go free, or whether the ratepayers will avail themselves of the present opportunity and just reverse the position by letting labor and capital free, and compelling the speculator to pay nothing more nor less than we resident aud improving ratepayers are called upon to pay towards keeping our municipal pot boiling. Now, it is perhaps worthy of note that our opponents, Messrs Vile and Eagle, have not furnishid one argument in

favor of continuing the tax on these instruments of production (labor and capital), nor have they furnished one in favor of the speculator going practically free from taxation, and the reason for this want of force on their

part is quite obvious. Neither of them likes the idea of taxing labor and capital and allowing the speculator to go free. They would fain go with us, but the pride of prestige has been taken away from them and they don’t like being left. This may be a charitable view to take of their position. However, it seems certain that either their wans of frankness or their native perversity (without a motive of course) prevents them from coming over to help us. In my last letter I also referred pointedly to the evident opaqueness of T.A.E. on the subject, hoping that the effect would be to cause bint to repress rather than augment ht 3 power of saying nothing, and the result is something truly awful to contemplate. Like Don Quixote tilting at the windmills Mr Eagle’s heroism never flags ; on he goes, rearing and tearing, and to me it is simply impossible to contemplate with any degree of equanimity his threat to further expand his arguments in the hi-pe of simplifying his style. It is surely time, Mr Editor, that T.A.E. learned that simpleness of style goes hand in hand with brevity in the art of composition, and that together they form the .scul of wit. R.1.P.—1 am, Ac., Alex. Reese.

to TUE EDITOR. Sir, —To morrow the ratepayers are called upon to decide for three years whether the iniquitous system of rating shall continue, or they shall change to Rating on Unimproved Values. I think conclusive proof wus given in my letter in Wednesday’s issue of the injustice of the | pn sent system, and if space would | permit I can quote from the borough i valuation roli many cottage properties worth less than £2OO that contribute more in rates than £2050 worth of unimproved land in the Main street. Statements have been made by an opponent of the proposed change—to i wit Mr Job Vile—-‘That improved properties in the Main street would contribute less if rated on the unimproved value.” This I say with two or thn e exceptions is not true. I am owner of a frontage to Main street, purchased about eight years ago for £55, which is now worth exclusive of improvements £261. This increase in value is not given to it through any effort on my part, but owing to an increase of population and improvements made by tho whole community ; thereforo why not rate it for the benefit of the community, l-'rom careful calculations made 1 would pay on this improved property 50 per cent more if rated on the unimproved value. Now in conclusion let me remark that it has been proved Mr Vile was very much at sea with figures in his fir t two letters, therefore it will be well for ratepayers to take any statements that he may make with the proverbial grain of salt. Think and decide for yourselves.—l am, etc., .1. I >. Wilson.