MUNICIPAL DEBT AND ASSETS.
[To van Emos or TIM "SPPOTATOIL"f Sia,—In your notice (Spectator, February 16th) of Mr. Robert Donald's excellent "Municipal Year-Book" you say that the case of Manchester "suggests the question of the value of the assets," and in regard to the Corporations generally that " it is possible that these [the assets] may be overvalued, while the debt must be accurately stated." I think it is more than possible that the assets are overvalued, and I should like to point out that, in relation to the repayment of debt, they are of no value whatever. They consist, for the most part, of tramways, waterworks, gasworks, electricity works, dust destructors, cemeteries, and so forth, all of which are only -valuable in situ, and absolutely unrealisable for money, except as part of the "scrap-heap." The only real asset, so far as lenders are concerned, is the rates, which are in future ; and in view of the impending rate revolt, investors had need be cautious. The banks are beginning to realise this, and are writing down the value of the Corporation stocks held by
Previous page
