TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1890.

Timaru Herald, Volume L, Issue 4871, 17 June 1890, Page 2

TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1890.

Tub Hon. Mr Fergus him addressed nn enormously long cotntnnnioation to tbo Otatjn Daily Times, on certain pointß touched on by him m his Qucenntowu Bpccch. Ho says th.it he foola it due to

himself and his constituents to take come notice of the criticisms on his speech because there has been so much misconception and misrepresentation. We have studied the papers pretty closely, and cannot find the misrepresentation — that is, the wilfully false representation — of which Mr Fergus complains. Misconception there may have been, but only to a very limited extent, for a good deal of the contents of his communication to our Dunedin contemporary it a mere elaboration of the speech as it was reported, and is certainly not a contradiction. The questions referred to by Mr Fergus are those of (1) roads to open up Crown lands m unsettled localities ; (2) the acquisition of Native lands for settlement purposes m the North Island ; (3) future borrowing for local purposes ; (4) the settlement of large estates held by mortgage companies and banks. First, as to any misrepresentation or misconception with regard to roads to open up Crown land, nnd to the acquisition of Native lands. It was pointed out by the criticß that although Mr Fergus at Queenstown had declared ngninst borrowing (he said that it hud been determined for the Government that they should not borrow), he nevertheless proposed a scheme which was merely borrowing under another name and on less advantageous terms than could be obtained m the London market. Hia Queenstown proposal was to issue debentures m the colony both for roading purposes nnd for the purchase of Native lands. In this explanatory communication to the Otago Daily Times he says : — " The modes of dealing with the first two which I proposed were essentially the same. They were to ' road ! the lands and to purchase the Native country by the aid of debentures issued and payable m the colony. I think it will be admitted on all hands that it is one of the first duties of the Government to see thnt the country is opened up, and well opened up, for the settler. This cannot be done without an expenditure of money." He then proceeds to an elaborate statement of the facts as they present themselves to hiß mind, and cites instances m which it appears to him absolutely necessary that there should be an expenditure of money m the directions indicated. Our object is not to meet the case now put forward by him, but merely to point out that there was neither misrepresentation nor misconception on the part of the critics of. the Queenstown speech with regard to tho roading proposals or the pro posals for the acquisition of Native lands. He said then that he was m favour of issuing debentures m the colony, and he says exactly the same thing now. What he did not tell us at Qaeenstown and what he still fails to make plain is whether he is simply putting forward his own views on two most important subjects or whether he is the mouthpiece of the Government. If he is speaking merely for himself he ought to say bo plainly; if he is speaking on behalf of the Government we enter a protest against the policy enunciated. If money is to be borrowed let it be borrowed on the cheapest terms, nnd not under a scheme which means high interest and the diversion of colonial capital from legitimate channels m which there is plenty of employment for it. Now then as to the third question raised by Mr Fergus, namely (as ho puts it m bis communication to the Otago Daily Times), " future borrowing for local purposes," or as we prefer to call it " consolidation of local loans." We shall let him speak for himself, the quotation being from his letter to the Times : — With reference to tho consolidation of local loan?, if tho subject wero not ono of such moment, it would bo amusing to hear people nay thero is a danger to tho country m enabling local bodies to obtain fund 3 for carrying on works at a move reasonable rato than they now do. I havo bcon charged with wishing to tako over at onco tho wholo indobtodncss of tho local bodioa throughout tho colony, and practically add it to tho colonial dobt. I qnoto tho notnal words which I nttorod. They aro ns follows : — " I do not for n singlo moment advocato that increased facilities Rhoiikl bo given to local bodies to borrow ; nay, indeed, I I am clearly of opinion that tho sevcro deI prcssion which wo havo oxporionced, and < through which I hopo wo havo passed, was m a great measure contributed to by tho fact that wo, as a colony and as local boilioa, and, for that mattor, us pvivato individuals as woli, havo borrowed far moro largely than wo ought to havo done ; and wo havo thus been reaping our reward. Still, Ido say that it would bo folly on tho part of tho nountry to illow tho local bodies to bi bled ono by ono to tho extent of 1, 2, or 3 por cent por annum moro than thoy wonld havo to pay if their loans wero put on a moro satisfactory footing, md thnt it is tho duty of tho Government to too that something is done, it it can bo dono. h ordor that m any futurn borrowing which rniy tako plaoo whon tho loans fall duo tho nov loans Bhould bo issued nudor snoh condifons that tho local bodies will bo ablo to obtiin tho accommodation required at moro rcasnublo rates than m tho past." All I propose! to do was to ouablo, by a prooess of amalgamation, thoso local bodios to obtain monty at a loss rato of intorost whon their loans fell dno than thoy aro now paying, and m, thointoroats of EotUoment. It. is news to us that the critics charpd Mr Fergus with advocating a scheim for immediate consolidation. It was tho principle which (rightly, or wrongly, wisely or unwisely) was adversely criticised, and tho chief objection .aken was that when the scheme camo to be carried out, the colonial taxpayer would be called on to bear the bnrdtn ■of nil tho indebtedness of local governing bodies, no matter how extra\agantly the debts had been contracted, or how waßtefully tho money 1 had been expended. . As far n,B we lire aware, that portion of the speech was fnirly commented on, and we do not see thnt the letter puts any new .construction ou the proposal, or. mnkcß matters plainer than they were before. If Mr Fergus means. anything it ia that local loans as they fall due shall be replaced i by stock guaranteed by. tho State, or by ordinary Government debentures. Not a word ir said by way of limiting i the proposal to the better class of local kmna. All aro spoken of under the aamo hend. Moreover, it certainly suggests itself to the intelligent reader tint the proposer of such a -scheme ' coild see no valid objection to the better . terns being obtained at once. If it i woild bo good to save so much interest ■1 m be future, why postpone the happy ' hbu\? However, Mr Fergus nays that , ho die not, intend such, prompt notion, andws must belieyo him. The fourth qucatim is the settlement of large . eatatefbcld by mortgage companies and bsnki, The paragraph with regard to it m tic letter is as follows :- — Mr Crmonti is roportod rooontly to havo ' b u id L .hnt " thnro was oonaidomblo talk of 0 puruiixing lands at proaont m tho possession g of prj'ato guvnors. Ho admitted, that it noensary and right riow." I liovor wont ho i faranMr Ormond is ropoctod 'toY havo (Kino ; O but -\hiit I did toy,, and what I still firmly

beliovo, is that tho same clauses which exist I m tho charters of onr English banks and ! other banks trading m the colony should exist m all, and that when theso monetary institutions or mortgage companies take over estates they Bhould bo compelled to part with them at as early a date as possible. If such a clause had originally been m tho charters of somo of onr colonial institutions, I ventnre to say that these institutions would not have suffered so severely as they have dono, and they wonld havo been moro careful of the advances whioh they made to individuals — advances which, instead of bringing any profit, brought loss to them and ruin to tho people who borrowed tho money. I We have nothing to say againßt that J paragraph, but it is not a reflex of the Queenstown speech. In the latter Mr Fergns not only advocated the adoption of measures to compel the companies to sell, but he expressed an opinion favouring State acquisition. Ho said : — " The Government had some time ago put £10,000 on the estimates for the acquisition of property for village settlement. The vote was struck out. Why should they not go further, and take up considerable quantities of the land, rendering it fruitful nnd profitable, was a question that would have to be faced." After that the less that Mr Fergus says about misrepresentation by his newspaper critics the'better.