LAND NATIONALISATION.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1277, 30 June 1886, Page 2

LAND NATIONALISATION.

A lecture on Land Nationalisation was delivered in the Orange Hall last evening by the Rev D. McNicoll The attendance was rather meagre, and Mr D. H. Br wn presided. The Chairman in int.odacing the lecturer said the "subject was one that wan receiving very great attention in ad parts of the world and he did not think the time would be long before it would engross much more of the public attention than at present. Mr MciMColl said that there might be some who would take exception to his ap-

pearing in the character of a lecturer on such a subject as Land Nationalisation. Now while he agreed that clergymen should abstain from party politics he thought all social reforms should- receive their warm and undivided support. It

was but too true that many of the reforms In the past were due to Atheistical and Sceptical men and that the Lord’s Spiritual, or the English Bishops in the House of Lords, had invariably,beeu found on the side opposing the reforms. He knew that Christians were as a rule, severely conservative and opposed to change, but he thought Christianity was the proper home for reforms. Laud Nationalisation he looked upon as a reform which would have the effect of alleivating the distress which was almost everywhere to be found. In Great Britian alone there were one million paupers ; out of every hundred people, three were supported by the other ninety 1 seven In the colonies they had not that 1 distress because their land was not all taken up nor had they in America though in the latter country it was fast approaching and would be the immediate effect of the two streams of people from the Atlantic and from the Pacific meeting. Side by side with this great poverty was also to be found great wealth. To account for: this Inequality, of course, theories were \ propounded. Some people blamed capital, which they said was grinding labor to the ground. That could not bo, for capital was a result of labor ; without labor there could be no capital, but labor was not altogether dependent Jon capital, though of coarse the latter wai a gre t|assUtance |to the farmer. Another way of accounting for the anomaly was to blame Nature. The lecturer disposed ofJMalthua’B theory, that the poverty in the world was due to population increasing in geometrical ratio, while the means of subsistence on'y increased in arithnelod ra io i.e That population increased 2 4 8.16., while sus enanca only increased 1 23 4, aud 8) on There was the fact that the most 1 densely p puiaied countries wore the wealthiest and that each year the world produced one hundred Jm lhon bushels of whoaT, more than was needed for consumption. The real cause of the discrepancy was the bad land laws. During the last five hundred years land hd j vastly increased in value. Labor had derived no benefit from that increase, \vh ch it was evident, therefore, had been wholly to the advantage of the landowners. A man might take up a quantity of land in a thinly populated district at a more nominal figure. By-and-bye settlement ad sauces, a township springs up in the vicinity, and the owner of the land can dispose of it for many times the sum he originally gave for it. He has done nothing to give his land this value ; otner people have worked for him, and it is they who thus increased the value of his land. Now this was not fair. Individuals had no right to claim for themselves the whole of the benefit which resulted from a congregating together of the many. If the land were nationalised , that accretion would not be swallowed up by a few men, but the whole community would reap the benefit After quoting various writers o i the subject with regard to the desirableness of land nationalisation, the lecturer went on to speak of the many schemes which had been propounded whereby the State might resume the land The principal of these were—Henry George’s proposal to tax the land to its full value, thus practically amounting to confiscation, and Wallace’s proposal that after the death of the presmt holders aud their first heirs the land should revert to the Crown John Stuart Mill’s and Herbert Spencer’s opinions on the subject were also referred to by the lecturer, who then went on to speak of the advantages which would accrue to the «hole community by the nationalisation of the land. Land speculation, a form of gambling, which was the cause of much distress by keeping back land from the cultivator, would cease, the revenue raised from the land being sufficient to carry on the government of the country. The tenure would be equal to a freehold, for so long as the holder paid the small annual rental he could not be dispossessed of his land. Mr McN coil concluded by a brief reference to the three systems of landholding set forth in the Land Act of this colony, viz , the homestead, deferred payment, and perpetual leasehold. A number of questions were asked by those present, and the proceedings terminated with the customary votes of thanks to the lecturer and chairman.