THE FINANCIAL DEBATE.

Colonist, Volume XLI, Issue 9263, 30 August 1898, Page 2 (Supplement)

THE FINANCIAL DEBATE.

(' CiOO'uet,' August 23th, 1898.

It has been said that nearly every conceivable subject save finance is being introduced by members speaking to the Financial Statement, and it is undeniable that the greater number of the speakers on the Opposition side have wasted time by speaking of matters quite outside tbe question of finance. Mr Scobie Mackenzie was credited by his friends with putting life into the financial debate, and he, after questioning the Premier's references to past surpluses, spoke on the subject of land settlement. "It was a fact," he Baid, " and an fextraordraary one, due to the persistently misleading statements of the Government, that the whole of the unthinking people of the Colony were onder the firm belief that the settlement of the land in New Zealand dated from the day the present Government took their place on the Treasury benches." Now if this assertion be correct, Mr Bcobie Mackenzie may well feel sad, for he must appreciate that the repeated assertions of men on his own side in politics, backed up too by the majority of the Press of the Colony, for considerably more than half the papers of New Zealand support the cause of the minority, are discredited by the people, whom he designates •'unthinking." Mr Scobie Mackenzie then sought to make a point by presenting a table showing the gross number of settlers in each year from 1878 to 1898 inclusive, tbe number of forfeitures and surrenders in each year, and the number of the net settlers. From this table it appeared that tbe largest number of net settlers gained in any one year was 6660 in the year 1878, during the regime of the Grey Administration ; and that after the Hall - Atkineon party came into power, in 1879, the number fell to 2024. During the Stout-Vogel term of office the number of settlers gained each year was about 2000, and during the reign of the Atkinson Administration the number showed a further slight falling-off. For the year that ended with March, 1891, the number of new settlers was 1881, but 200 forfeited or surrendered in the same year, leaving the net number 1681. In 1893, however, when the Ballance - Beddon Government was in office, the net number increased to 2377 ; in the following year it wa3 2218, and the next 1596. In 1896 the number was 1613, and the year before last it was 922, whilst last year, according to Mr Scobie Mackenzie, the forfeitures and surrenders were 704, and the net settlers 835.

This statement was, of oourse, put forward with a view to bringing discredit upon the present Government, but, unfortunately for Mr Scobie Mackenzie and his friends, the people of the Colony are given to think for themselves, and they both know and appreciate the fact that the area of convenient land suitable for settlement is becoming less and less, and that even now it is not easy for would-be setters to find land such as they require within easy reach of market.

The Minister of Lands, however, in his reply has|denied the accuracy of "some of -Mr Scobie Mackenzie's figures. He asserted that the average number of settlers placed on the land since he held his office had been 1760 a year, as against 1606 during the term of his predecessor • moreover, he showed that whereas j in 1878 there were half a million acres of land to dispose of in Canterbury last year, there were only 75,000 acrea to dispose of, and he very justly remarked that it was absurd to expect that he could show the samQ volume of transactions as the pluvious Minister. But;, besides this he showed that the comparison was unjufit, because in former years gridironing of the land was practised By wealthy squatters, and in one year the number of " selectors " was about five times that of the individuals — that is to say, that, on the average, each ■selector got five selections. The effect of the gndironing was that wealthy men shut settlers out from large areas of [land, but happily that system has been effectually stopped to the advantage of the legitimate farmer.

Mr George Hutchison also attacked the Government, supporting Mr Scobie Mackenzie, contending that the Land Administration of the Government had not been a success, and making charges in connection with the Advances to Settlers' office, that money had been lent on improvements that were in many cases wor3e than useless. Bis main attack, however, appears to have been directed against the Premier, and on the extraordinary ground that Mr Seddon had once been in partnership with Chinese—an assertion that the Premier said was absolutely untrue. I

But while certain of the opponents of the Government have been wasting time and urging that the administration of the Ministry has been disastrous, another of their champions has been speaking at a meeting of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce, where Mr Duthie said, " The very large export cf pastoral produce of course meant that a very large amount of development had taken place in the country. A very large area of raw bush land had been brought into cultivation. This meant the creation of wealth within the Colony." That speaks for itself, and that a large amount of development has taken place must be admitted by all who have either travelled torough the Colony or studied the returns. Opposition members may puzzle themselves or seek to puzzle others in connection with the way in which each surplus has been stated, but whatever they say they cannot get round the fact that during the administration of the present Government two millions sterling has been devoted to public works, and that, as Mr Graham pointed out, means a saving in interest of £70,000 a year, for had cot these works been constructed out of surplus revenue the money must bave been torrowedi