SIX JULIUS YOGEL AT ASHBURTON.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6016, 26 August 1887, Page 3

SIX JULIUS YOGEL AT ASHBURTON.

[Per Press Association.]

ASHBURTON, Ana oar 2G. Sic Julinß Yogel addressed one o£ the largest audiences last night that ever assembled in the Oddfellows' Hall. Quite 700 people were packed in the building, and an unusual number of, ladies were present, both in the front seats and on the stage.

Mr Sealey, Mayor of Ashburton, presided, and in introducing the weaker, said Sir Julius Yogel was before then, to express the views of his Governmei h, and in response to a numerously signed requisition. It was not usual for Ministers to travel about among the country districts, but this was a large centre, and it was right that Sir Julius should come here. It was also right that the constituents should hear both sides of the question, which, in the present crisis, was a most important one. He bespoke for Sir Julius a patient hearing.

Sir Julius Yogel, who was received with loud applause, said he was glad to re-viait Ashburtoa. He wished to avoid going over questions he had before dealt with. He would refer to

THE LANJP QUESTION.

In any policy embracing the encouragement of local industries, the promotion of land settlement must enter. He did not himself attach any significance to the feature of perpetual leasing. The leasehold would become a freehold whenever the Colonial Treasurer of the day was offered a sufficient price. As a matter of principle, the landlord and tenant system was not desirable. As Lord Beaconsfield had declared, it was vicious because of its casting the burden on the land of yielding three distinct profits, the landlord's, the working tenant's, and the labourer's. They wanted in this country > only the two profits, the working owner's and the labourer's. But as a present measure the leasing did good rather than harm, for it kept the Government from j competing with private owners who were willing to sell their land for settlement. He referred especially to land which the owners had not capital to work, the sale of which would benefit the Colony. The Canterbury land system was a good one until the upset price became less than the | value for speculative purposes ; then it became a very bad one. A great deal of the depression complained of at present arose from the inflated value of land. Persons who had speculated and lost, now blamed the : Public Works Policy. A man who cut his finger might as well blame the knife instead of his own stupidity ; indeed a Btrong adjective regarding the knife was generally the first impulse indulged in. AN OLD LETTER. It would be instructive to look at the feeling at the time when the price of land rose. When he was Agent-General, Messrs j Royse, Stead and Co. sent him a letter which the city editor inserted in the city article of | the Times. Sir Julius read the letter. It complained that the price of land was not nearly as high as it should be ; that farmers could go on to the land without any capital, and acquire the freehold in from three to five years. In nine-tenths of the cases, the letter said, they succeeded. The writers also declared the railway j policy a success. He did not blame the authors of the letter; they probably stated their opinions ftt the time they wrote, 1878, and it might be that they were as much less sanguine now than they ought to be, as they were too sanguine before. The medium now might be correct. Men like these were always up in air or j down in the dust, blaming at one time j the persons they extolled at another. I This letter expressed the current view ] of the time, and showed the opinion of the Public Works Policy after the period when he ceased to have charge of it. Sir John Hall said recently that necessarily I large landowners liked to hare smail settlers round them. This was contrary to received opinions, unless on the principle that the cat loved to dwell near mice. There was an old, old Btory of a rich man coveting his neighbour's little vineyard.

THE HOLDINGS IN THE COLONY were large. There were 14,^92 holdings of over 100 acres, embracing 16,400,000 acres, on an average for each holding of 1110 acres; but of these there were 1924 holders of over 1000 acres each, who had 1,203,000 acres, or an average of GS64 acres, so that the 12,868 holders had 3,794,000 acres, whilst 1924 holders had 12,630,000 acres. Another 12,521 holders of from 10 to 50 acres had only G 10,101 acres, with »n average of 48 acres each. Some holders held more than one holding, and holdings included freeholds and freeholds rented by the workers. These figtires suggested that

THE DUMBER OV SETTLERS REQUIKEI> TO BE

INCREASED, as the mortgage system in connection witli the depreciated value of produce had operated to the prejudice of the workers. Supposing ten years ago they entered into arrangements for money which required their relinquishing for interest half the produce. The fall in the value of the latter might entail on them the sacrifice now of three-quarters. This was remedying itself, as the lenders were agreeing to take less interest ; but large transactions paid the lenders best ; the small men were greatly handicapped. The proportionate expenses were large; they were mostly tied down to dealing with lenders, and had to pay commissions on buying and selling. Of the total gross yield of .£10,830,000 agricultural and pastoral produce, about .£6,000,000 was required for local consumption, or far more than half. Yet prices were regulated to a large extent by the prices ruling 13,000 miles away. Ab a primti facie fact, the farmers ought to make a fair profit on the supply of the necessaries of life, for no imports could compete with them ; but the control of the market waa too much in the hands of those who profited most by exports. The farmers wanted a larger population, and extension of the co-operation system, more direct interchange, and less of the credit syßtein. He contended that local consumers ought not to wish the farmers to supply them at a loss ,- but the so-called Freetraders declared that cheapness was the first object, and the bogie of their contentions was that it was desirable that consumers should be able to supply themselves at prices that would ruin the farmers.

THE MEANS OF PROSPERITY. He wasconvincedthathigh rates of wagea and high prices meant more prosperity. Every country was most prosperous when wages were highest. Ac to not investing capital because wages were high, that was the capitalist's bogie. When wages were high, means were found to make labour more effective. Sugar sad cotton were produced cheaper noM', with paid labour, than with slave labour — the common error was in attaching more importance to prices outside the country than to those within ife. Even Great Britain, the great exporting country, of £880,000,000 the produce of Its mines and manufactures, only sent away less than £250,000,000. He took the mean of 1880 and 1881. If they could consume in the country all that thsy now exported, which was of course impossible, the prosperity would be enormous. The speaker explained away the bugbear that exportation waa necessary in order to pay debts. If the country could consume all its exports, the volume of the trade would be so much increased that trade capital would have to be introduced by the great financial institutions. The speaker then went into the Bubject of THE PROPOSED TARIFF, and showed that in several particulars it benefited the farmers. Farinaceous food, arrowroot, starch, and other things were really made from potatoes. He dwelt upon the importance of fruit culture both to the community and to the agriculturists, to whom it would leave large profits. CHEAP MONET.

Before leaving the subject of farming, he stated that lie had always been impressed with the necessity of enabling the farmers to borrow small amounts on more favourable ferine than they could now, and after

1884 he had sketched out a measure, but it met with great opposition from vested interests in the business. He might tell them the Government had a measure ready laat session to deal with the matter in another way, and one he thought could scarcely be open to exception. Of course, it was not feasible to bring the Bill down during the late session, but he hoped the Government would be able to do so next session. After what he had said about high wages, it would be right that he should make it understood that the Government could not artificially raise or maintain the price of labour. They could not pay more than current rates, and those were regulated by supply and demand. They wished to see the rate well maintained, and he was convinced the employers wore wrong in wishing otherwise. They profited most when wages and prices were high. A large financier had lately said publicly that the Colony's best h o depended on reduced wages. There were two sides to the question. One side advocatad low wages, cheap imports, and se holdings, small ones being discount. id The other side advocated high prices, L.gh. wages, profitable local production, and numerous small holdings. Ab to

KETJIKNOHMENT, if the Government) were supported they would effeot it, but; he Had yet to find that members would be sincere when their own districts were affected. The increase of the Customs' duties was a measure of safety incumbent on any Government, the revenue having fallen so low. He oxplained the eff ect of the

I'KOPEai'Y TAX PROPOSALS. New valuations could not be made without great cost, or the Government; would have preferred the plan they proposed in 1885, to except machinery and agricultural implements. He showed by figures that the Government had greatly reduced the grain rates. He was bo impressed with the benefit of low rates that he felt if new taxation could be remitted, it would be most beneficial to the community to reduce the railway rates. He then referred to

THE MIDLAND UAIMVAT

To hear _ some of the objections to it, it might be supposed, as Air Bruce said of another railway, that ifc was proposed to cart the land out of the Colony. He was sorry to say that he thought fresh legislation would be necessary, but he hoped it could be put into an acceptable shape. In the interest, of Parliamentary institutions, he considered the conduct of those who had supported the Government until they thou^h't the line was safe, and then deserted their Bide, waa much to be deplored. Ther* was a great REACTION* IN FAVOUR OK TRE GOVERNMENT from the feeling produced against them after the session., by the, savage attacks of comparatively irresponsible men. The leaders had nothing to say of any moment, excepting to blame the Government for faults which, tf faults, they had themselves also committed; and now they had tho ignominious spectacle of members of the Opposition discrediting tl/eir own leaders. One member lately fold him that they would turn out Government after Government until they had., one with which they were satisfied. It. reminded him of a football match, in whwh man after man, as he got the ball, was hurled down and trampled on. The Government stood forth in the full light of day. They asked far fair consideration. They did not assert that they were infallible, far less that they possessed supernatural powers. Although vexatiously opposed in every way by men -who made it a boast to prevent their doing anything, they had greatly encouraged local industries, they had provided for the construction of the coal harbours, the Midland Railway, and the North Trunk Bailway ; for fisheries, and for land sottlement ; they had stimulated mining, pacified the Natives, stopped Native land-sharking, remodelled the Statute Book, repealed the lioads and Bridges Construction Act, provided for Government loans to local bodies, reduced the cost of the Civil Service, practised retrenchment in various waya, and reduced the railway rates. They had bo re-arranged the expenditure of borrowed money, that the misapplication, of loans issued after last year was rendered impossible. They had, after a lof; of negotiations, succeeded in arranging for the appointment of New Zealand aa a naval station. They had kept down taxation, and only asked for its increase ■when Property tax had been less, and the Customs revenue had fallen from causes which no one could control. That was their record. It would have been better still but for the bitterness of their opponents. They should not ascribe to the Government the depression it could not prevent. There were signs now of better times. The rate of interest waa falling, and that would give great relief. Land would probably rise in value, money be more plentiful, and labour more in demand. The Government asked for

A FAIR AND DISPASSIONATE VEKDICT.

If it was desirable to change for change sake, if it was better to try the old Government, or a nvxr one of inexperienced men, they would be content with the decision. But they were confident that no Government would be found more anxious to do their duty. If, on the other hand, the verdict was in their favour, he hoped the elections would give the Government such a majority as would enable them most effectively to attend to the wants of the Colony.

At the close of his speech, Sir Julius replied to a very large number of questions. Mr D. Williamson rose to propose a vote of thanks, and attempted to say a few words in support of Sir Julius Vogel's views. A number of people in the back of the hall made a great noise, and cheers and counter cheera and groans and biases were indulged in. Mr Williamson ultimately succeeded in moving that a vote of tbanke be accorded, and this was received with loud cheers.

Dr Tbevor seconded themotlon,

Criea were raised for Mr Fnrnell, but as soon as that gentleman got up, there wa3 a •perfect storm of groans and hisses, and he could not get a hearing. The motion was put and carried unanimously.

In thanking the audience, Sir Julius Vooel denied that he had come to Ashburton to advocate the cause of a particular candidate. He had been invited to speak at Ashburton some time before there was any talk of that particular seat being contested.

A vote of thanks to the Chairman ter minated the proceedings.