As a result of the " foolish "and wild railway legislation of 1870, inau gurated by Sir Julius Vogel—who also spoke at the Institute —we are now burdened with a debt of thirty millions, incurred in carrying put his policy of reckless extravagancy.,. In order to meet the liabilities reciting from this policy of Sir' Julius ~V#£ el's friends and followers, the p:eopTe,,of this colony have imposed upoii,, themselves a very heavy5 increase of Customs and other general taxation. Last of all, when every other source of revenue was ex hausted, a property tax was proposed to be levied. Property had, as has al ways been the fashion, escaped contri buting any appreciable amount towards the public revenue, and the property tax was promptly denounced as a "fad." Nevertheless, in the face of the disas ters impending if the colony did not meet its obligations, the "fad" became a reality, and the property tax was im posed. ■ ... . This tax was a " new departure," and New Zealand —as in not a few other instances—was the first colony boldly to adopt it. There was nothing "penal " —to use a term now in vogue —in the property tax, though it was the Grst successful attempt to compel Capital to bear some small share of taxation. Our critical friends of the Colonial Institute may rest assured— though we have not yet come to regard wealth as a virtue and poverty a crime —that no penal legislation against Capital will be carried out in this colony. Capitalists—least of all. ab sentees, who entirely escape payment of Customs taxation, which falls so heavily on all classes resident in the colony, and most heavily of all on the poorer classes—capitalists, whether resident or non-resident, cannot reason ably object to bear their fair share of the cost of government. Capital is very well able to take care of itself. If it were not, there is no Party in this colony—except a few wild enthusiasts —which desires to do anything beyond requiring Capital and Property to do their duty—neither less nor more.
