THE HON J. G. WARD AND SIR ROBERT STOUT.

Taranaki Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 10616, 16 May 1896, Page 2

THE HON J. G. WARD AND SIR ROBERT STOUT.

TO THE EDIfOB.

Sir, — By your leader 'of 14th' inst., you appear perfectly satisfied that Mr Ward gave'good and valid replies to the charges against the Government made by Sir R. Stout. So, that your readers may hear both sides, perhaps you will allow one who is not so satisfied to state the result from his point of view. Sir R, Stout complained that the Government refused members reasonable information askod for, notably on the question of the seizure of the Sinking Funds accumulated under the " Government Loans to Local Bodies Act," and that the Government prevented a debate upon the Public Works proposals. These two charges are amply proved by the Hansard records, and Mr Ward's only reply is (according to your article) that another Government (whose deeds he and his colleagues continually condemn) also did something similar. So, on the Seddouian principle that two bbcksmake a white, these two charges are settled to yonr entire satisfaction. Sir R. Stout complained tbat the accumulated Sinking Fund under the "Government Loans to Local Bodies Act " had been seized and thrown into the consolidated revenues during the past financial year, and this without bo milch as informing Parliament of the chango Mr Ward's reply was a rambling statement as to the legality of seiziug Sinking F«ads, but the facts remains, the Government Loans to Local Bodies Sinking Fund is gone, and these loans will all become a charge upon the ratepayers of the colony in place of being paid off by Sinkiag Fund 25 years from date of borrowing, and this to help to make a surplus for 1895-6, and Mr Ward made no statement to the contrary. Me the unpledged £3,000,000 of securities, it is a matter of history and fact that the statements made in the House by Mr Ward and Mr Seddon when pursuading the House in 1894 to agree to a premature colk cfciou of the Land Tax do not fit in with Mr Wards statement in Londoo. As to the charge of bogus surpluses being a quibble, as you call it when we know that they are made up' of such sums as the eighty odd thousands of Local Bodies Sinking Fund, grabbed and put into the current revenue 4 there ! is the quibbling ? You say that Sir R. Stout assorted that the present Government had added £8,000,000 to the pablio debtwhereas what he said was that £8,000,000 had been added to the colony's liabilities, which is not quite the same thing, and is a most undiaputable faot still. R e the Banks : Sirßobert Stout said that it is pretty certain that a member or members of the present Parliament who took an ustive part in passing the recent Bank Legislation, had benefited by 'the writing jS of a sum of £55,000 from the C list, [f such is the case, such member or members should not remain in Parliament, ac:ordiug to my- idea of what is right. Mr fVard got as excited upon this subject is though he had been personally accused jut missed the opportunity of saying in io many words that he had not benefited iither directly or indirectly by this writng off. Instead of that, he gave a long listory of the passing of the various 3ank Bills through Parliament, leaving >ir Stout's statement just where he bund it.— l am, &c, A. Subscriber.