LAND FOR SETTLEMENT.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1353, 28 September 1886, Page 3

LAND FOR SETTLEMENT.

Notwithstanding all the complaints of lowness of prices for agricultural produce, it is evident that if only land could be obtained at a reasonable figure there is a large number of persons ready and willing to take it up. This is sufficiently proved by the results of the land sales held recently in various parts of Canterbury and Otago. In the last-named provincial district for example, and just on the borders of Canterbury, a block of deferred payment land was thrown open for application, with the following results, viz. : —Block IV: Section 5, eight applicants, 250 acres, Wade and Moore, at 12s (upset 255); section 6, 303 acres, five applicants, J. H. Chalmers, (upset 255). Block VIII ; Section 4, 83 acres, four applicants, J. Prentice, £2 tos (upset 30=); section 5, 83 acres, three applicants, J. Spratt, jQ2 3s yd (upset 30s); section 6, 84 acres, nine applicant®, G. Coker, £2 xßs (upset 30s) ; section 7, 71 acres, thirteen applicants, J. O’Neill, -£3 3s 6d (upset 30®); section 8, 78 acres, 10 applicants, T. Shine, is (upset 30s) ; section 9, 89 acres; six applicants, Miss Mary Shine, 3s (upset 255); section 10, 87 acres, J. T. Hobson, at upset From the foregoing it will be seen that for nine allotments containing from 71 to 303 act is of land each, and making together a total area of 1128 acres, there were no less than 59 applicants, so that while nine applicants succeeded, no less than fifty were disappointed. Of course the competition, which necessarily took place, resulted in the land fetching a great deal more than the upset price, only one section (probably a very poor piece of land) being uncompeted for, and the remainder, put up at from 25s to 30s per acre, realising from £2 103 to is per acre, i.e., from twice to three times the upset figure. As the sale was by tender, and not by auction, it is to be supposed that the sums offered were the fair value as estimated by the ten derers, that is to say, such as they could afford to pay and yet obtain a living from their holdings ; but it would, we venture to think, be better in the long run for the State had they been able to obtain them at the upset pries. At any rate it is abundantly clear, as we have said, that there are plenty of people in this part of the colony willing to take up land if only they could obtain it at reasonable rates. Under these circumstances it is matter for the greatest regret that so large an area in Canterbury is locked up either under 'reserve or pastoral lease that there is practically no land available for settlement. It is quite beside the mark to say that land under pastoral lease can be taken up in freehold by any person willing to pay cash down for it ; for the fact that no land can be bought under £2 —that jQ2 must be paid down on the nail for every acre selected is an absolute veto upon settlement. For all the accessible land of first-class arable quality has long ago passed into private hands, and it is only remote or inferior land that can now be taken up, and nobody is prepared to pay £2 an acre cash for it. If such land were opened to free selection by bona fide occupiers at per acre cash or on deferred payment at 30s per acre, payable in instalments spread over a period of ten years, we should speedily see a very different state of things, and instead of settlement being at a standstill, we should see it progressing on every hand. This the member for Waimate has, for the past two sessions, contended that the Government has power to do under the 162nd and 163rd clauses of the Land Act, and it would seem from a reply by Mr Ballance to a question during last session that this contention is not unsupported by the opinion of the law advisers of the Crown, who are understood to have advised that the power undoubtedly exists in the Act, but that it may be open to question whether the Legislature intended to confer it. Under these circumstances it would surely be well to bring the matter before the Legislature with a view to such power being explicitly confirmed, for it is monstrous that we should be asked to submit to the continuance of the present stagnant condition of things until 1890, when the present Crown tenancies expire. Mr Ballance has done much good work since he assumed the control of the lands department, but that good work has been mainly restricted to the North Island. Can he not manage to give the South a little of his energy and attention? There are many matters in connection with the administration of the lands which would be better understood by him if he would spend two or three weeks of the present recess in Canterbury and a like period in Otago and we cordially invite him to cross Cook’s Strait— to come over and help us.— Mail,