RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUES.

Waikato Argus, Volume XVI, Issue 2629, 3 May 1904, Page 2

RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUES.

Me S. Vaile addressed a public meeting in St. Peter's schoolroom last evening. There was a good attendance, and in the al sence of the Mayor, Mr C. J. W. Bar» ton occupied t he chair.

Mr Vaile, in his opening remarks, said he was very pleased to once again meet a Waikato audience, for it was here that he had made his maiden speech. Ha was sorry that he had been unable to devote mr rj time to the preparation of his subj.-ct, but he had been engaged in preparing a paper to deliver before the of Commerce on Wednesday next on the fiscal question, and he bad come up to Waikato at considerable inconvenience. He referred o the number or aliases the advocates of rating on unimproved values had adopted iu Auckland. They had fijst appejred as Land Natiouali-ers, and pointed out the m enormous benefits that would accrue if the State were the Bole possessor of tbe land. When it was found that their intention was that the land was to be taken without any compensation whatever, public opinion was against them, and they fieri styled themselves taxers. Finding this did not take on, they ealiei themselves the Aoti-puverty Society. Later on th y adopted the n«me of Giound rem Valuers, and uow they had ad pied the name of Haters on Unimproved Values. It was usually found that those who adopted a number of uliases were o t much good If the system was right, just, and equitable, what was the reason for the changes of name ? Their aim was simply 10 destroy ihe freehold tenure and take from every mm his laud by the m"sc sub.le prucena ihnt could be devised. The ilea ot unimp.oved values was originated by the Single Taxers' Association, who Were uying to sneak Single Tax in by on unimproved valuer. Such men should have given them some proof of their ■ hility to deal with such great queati /as. Where wsb the maD, iu or out of the colony, who bad tiven evidence of his ability to deal with such a great soo al question ? Were any of them larije owners 01 land ? No ; they were merely shopkeepers, who required veiy little land. The workers of the land ■ ever advocated such a system. The proposition was utterly uusoum! in principle and theory, and was aimed solely t the destruction of the freehold tenure, and 10 increase the rate on laud as miicn as possible until the whole rental V lue was taken away. Iu the words of demy George, ' We have the kernel and you have the husks.' He had uoihiog 10 say against laud nationalises, as the State had a perfect right to i ; hut the State had no right to take it without paying for it. If the State took the laud it destioyed the security of life policies, fire insurance policies, ibe deposi s a Saviues Bank*, and friendly societies, as each branch held larue nnrtgagei iu freehold estate. The real quesiion w-s : Ought a man or woman to pay lowanls Ihe State iu proportion to his or h r income, or ou the small or lree piece of land he or she may poss ss? '1 he raiers on unimproved value contended th t land alone should he r the taxaticu, and that every i.ther form of wealth should escape He thoutht j.ist taxation should be evied oo income, which was a lairer and more desirable system than that in vogue at the present time. There were difficulties iu carrying this out, but they were not insurmountable. Instead of Weighing down land, which they contended was the source of all wealth, he thought they . should lighten it as much as possible and encourage people to make use ot it as much as possible. (Applause ) The unimproved value system pressed most heaviiy upon the poorest portion of the population. Why should tbe mau who owned several houses whioh returned him £IOO a year only pay the same tax as the ■ man who owned a cottage which returned him £3O a year? The Single Taxers considered that the whole of the land belonged t the State collectively and the people colleotive y, and no private individual had a right to any portion of it, however minute ; that the who e of the improvements belong to the individual occupier, aud that the Siate had no right to any portion of them Was it possible to carry out such a scheme ? Ihe owner of the land must take the larger share of the improvements. Ha was secure while the tenant occupied the same position as the unsecured creditor in a bankruptcy ca-e They Slid that the State and the cummuuity as represented by the Government of ihc day should be the sole landlords, also that the community as represented by the masses of the people should be the only tenants. Would not the tenants elect the landlords -xho would give them the beet terms ? The Crown tenants were agitatini' for the freehold, and ihere was do doubt they would get it. They would elect the men who would give it to them md obtain it in spite of ull opposition. Bating on unimproved values had been tried in China in 'he. eleventh ceDtury, aud led to such dire di.-tres.- that in the following year it was done away with. Their proposition was that ihe Crown tenants should uot have a lease, but only have the laud from year to year. Under these circumstances, what possible ikcurity couid they have lor their improvements ? Auother great oljeotion to the system was that the rate in a borough was fixed for three years. Every new house that went up in the borough increased i he expenditure ot i he luc.il body. If land values dropped, where were the rates to oome from ? The only way was to go to the hank and increase the overdraft The income could not increase until they Btruck a fresh raie. The accumulation of land by jobbers was easily met by limiting the area of holdings, and if they wanted to increase the prosperity of the country, the best thing to do was to increase the number of small freeHolders and encourage them to the largest , possible extent. Refer'ing to the manifesto issued by the committee, Mr Vaile Slid it was a very remarkable one and the n ost ridiculous thing he had ever read. (LiUghter). He could not conceive ai.ythiug more absurd than the statements inadfl i" it. It was evideutly he work of men who had never studied the question. They based their argumeut for the continuance of the present system on the a sumption that the unimproved values had raised the valuation of the Borough of Hamilton. Now the SiDgle Taxers claimed that Iheii measure would have the effect of cheapening laid. What had ruised ihe value of laud in Hamilton J Trie increase was due to its splenuid position. I; had the advmtaee of any other town in Waikato, although of course it was difficult to predict what the future would bring. As far as the progress haviug be enhelped by the unimproved rating system, Hamilton he considered had progr ssed in spite of the handicap imposed upon it by the system. In Devonport where the system was in force less progress had been made than in any other suburb of Auckland, and Dovonport was also petitioning to revert to the old system. As ' Ratepayer ' asks in bis letter, if the progress in Hamilton was due to tbe rating on unimproved values, how was it Cambridge had pr gressed as it had done? ihis writer was right when he stated that Hamilton was dependent on butterfat and also on the improved value of stock and general farm produce. But was the progress confined to Hamilton ? Had not the country Lids increased in value 1 and there was no rating on unimproved values there. It amounted to this that the high values of country lands were leflected in Hamilton. They had do rating on unimproved, values in Auckland —think God I—and it »a* only carried here because the people did not uud"rßUnd it, and yet the increase iu values iu Aucklaid was much greater than here. Land in the am urlis which a few yea a ago could not brj sold for £l5O an acre was now readily Bell D g at £IOOO. He was ju tas much eaiiiled to s*y that this enormous increase in values in Auckland was due to the absence of rating un unimproved values as Mr Fowlds had to attr.bute the rise in Hamilton to the system. The increase in values in New Zealand was due to the • normous wave of prosperity which had swept over England aDd the Continent of America. but things were looking gloomy, and let the depression come and New Z> aland wr u d as-urenly feel it. I'o say that tbe high price* of laud luduced people to build was & monstrous assertion; tbe higher the price of la;-] the less money there i, to oe expeodfe on buildings, and instead of aasisring: building it actually retarded It. fielerring ag»i D to 'ho mauite-to, Mr Vaile asked if anyone could show him a towa where energy and industry was not taxed. It was not the land th«t paid the tax, but the energy and industry expended on it. A nv.n should be ashamed! to pen such a paragraph. If they did not tax industry, as 'Ratepayer' asked, what had they left to tax ; Fauoy the leaders of public opinion writing such traib as tint. As tq the ttatetueot that

because £SO a foot wax aßked now for 1 -nd that i'uiili'l be obtained three year* aiio for £lO, ibia was aa evidtDce of the justice of the pre-ent successful method, Mr Vaile saia every buildine that was erected adds value to the surrounding land, but tc say that a building was erected on account of the unimproved value was utter nonseme. He could not ■ee how taxation of land could increase ita value. The ' coat of paint' statement was part and parcel ol the old argument that accumulative wealth ehould cot pay taxation, but it should be levied on the land and nothing else. He held rh.tthat proposition was absolutely uusou..d. Dcvonport would shortly keep Hamilton company, and there would be plenty more towns before long Mr Fowlds had s<id that over 60 towns had taken a vote on the question At the polls taken the proportion of ratepayers who voted had been very small, and but for that unimproved value would have been beaten all alone the line. (Question !) The e'eat bulk of the towns that had adopted this system were in the South Island, and he might state that there had never been a man south of Auckland who had been able to put the Other side of the question. He thought the increased price of land values in the North was due to the absence of unim proved values. In saying that the principal municipalities in Britiin were join ina with Glasgow in an attempt to have a Bill passed to enable them to adopt the •ystem, Mr Fowlds had delibeiately stated what he knew to he absolutely untrue. The Bill referred to u.ade farther provision for taxing improvements. This he was prepared to prove, as he had the Bill. The statement regarding the Strand Arcade and Milne ond Choyce's building wa» equally untrue. Referring to his statement as quoted by Mr Fowlds, the speaker said when he wrote that the Hamilton people would be lucky if they did not have to pay 4d or 5d he meant that in his opinion, and in that of many better judges, land had ■ eached its limit, and if it fell in price the r.tes would have 10 be r.ised per £ When advocation single tax to the Waikate. faimers, Mr Fowlds had included every town in New Zealand with the exception of Auck land, WellinE'on, Christc'iurch and Duoedin amonggu rural lands, which only n ant a difference of £29,000 000. He also gave ins aooss of Mr Fowld's inao curacies in the Houpo and in a letter published in E»glind. In coi.clusion Mr Vaile impre-std upon thos-- present the importar.ee ol voting in accordance uih their convictions, no matter in which direction they might lie. Mr Tidtl asked if the value of improvements had not anything to do with the inciease in the value i.f land, how was it that the acre adjoining the Alexandra buildings, which was valutd at £1450 three years auo.was no < va'i.ed ut £49110. How was it iha r land on the outskirts of tho ihe town had not icci eased in the same proportion ? Mr Vaile said every building put. up increased ihe value of land. He con tended that it was unfair that » p'.or man, whose house would only briug him iu £3O a y<-ar, ahju'd pay the siiie taxa tioo as the man whose house brought him in £IOO a year. (Applau-e). Mr Tidd : There was a block of land in Hamilton the unimproved value of which had risen from £l2O to £750 in three years. Was it not right to tax that man on the £750 and not tho person who had created the increase in value by buildine ? Mr Vaile replied that if the land was valued at £750 he ► hould certainly pay on that amount. The value was created by the general prosperity of the country, and had nothing whatever to do with the system of taxa'ion. Mr H. S, Haidly asked regarding the water supply and drainage service and their relation to the overdraft, if people did not pay rates on water end drainage? Mr Vaile : Of course they do. Why shouldn't they ? Mr Hardley : That does not increase the overdraft, does it ? Mr Vaile : If they had to put down a drain they had either to get the money from the Borough or the banker. (Applause.) » r Lymburo combatted Mr Vaile's statement that no man of intelligence had ever associated himself with the Single Tax League, and informed the meeting ihat 'Sir George Grey was president of the Anti-Poverly Society. Mr Vaile rep 1 it d that his statement referred only to those who had taken part in the movement in Hamiltou. It was a libel on Sir George Grey to say this, and if it were true that he occupied that position he must have been misled as he (the speaker) wa*. Mr Whyte was surprised to hear such a statement made to an intelligent audience. It was an in.-oit to the memory of Sir Georee Grey. In reply to Mr Young, Mr Vaile slated that had it not been for tho general prosperity outside of Hamilton his prediction regarding ihe increase in the rate would have been fulti ied. Mr Young then attempted to address the meeting, but in the face of cries of •qutstion' resumed his seat. A little later on, Mr Young rose ard requtsted peimi«sion to speak for five miuu'es. On the motion of Mr Tristram this was agreed to. Mr Young ascended the platform armed with notes, hut tho uproar rendered the greater portion of his remarks inaudible. Interj ctions were frequent, and Mr John Webb convuls-d the house with the polite request: ' For God's sake, Alick, sit down.' Several oner important question* were answered satisfactorily, and on the motion of Mr Youne, seconded by Mr Bond, a vote of thanks was accorded to the speaker.