THE LAND ACQUISITION BILL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1525, 5 April 1887, Page 3

THE LAND ACQUISITION BILL.

The admirably clear and complete precis of Mr Ballance's Land Acquisition Bill, which we reprinted from the •' Lyttelton Times " m our issue of Saturday, will enable our readers to grasp all its salient points, and it is with much satisfaction that the public generally will note that the Government measure fully redeems the promises made by the Premier and the Minister for Lands. We say the public generally, meaning all those who desire to see settlement widely extended, and not the few selfish monopolists whose one idea of a desirable country is a few enormous sheep runs, with only just sufficient population to afford cheap labor for shearing. There are some such, add already they are beginning lo howl m condemnation of the proposals of tho Land Acquisition Bill, and their newspaper organs are endeavouring, with might and main, by all sorts of sophistical reasoning, to prove that the measure is both immoral and unnecessary. But they seek to prove too much, and thus answer their own objections. For it .is argued, first, that the acquisition of private lands is unnecessary, becau c the Crown has yet millions of acres of its own to dispose of, and that as there not settlers available for this, much less will there be settlers available for taking up comparatively high-priced private lands acquired under the Bill;, and, second, that the Bill will do great injustice to private holders by depriving them of the properties m the possession of which it is contended they ought to be protected by the State. Now it will be seen m a moment that both these contentions cannot be maintained, for if there be no settlers ready to take up the land then the present holders cannot be interfered with; while, on the other hand, if there be a demand for such land, then the Crown will have no difficulty m realising a direct return for its outlay, m addition to the enormous indirect advantages which will flow from the extension of settlement and the turning to a more profitable use then is at present made of large areas of country. Further, if, as we feel certain, facts will prove to be the case, there are hundreds (we might even write thousands) ready and willing to . take up land now lucked up from settlement, surely it is wise and statesmanlike to take means to render such land available. We entirely concur with those who say that, granting all this, evil must not be done that good may come, that there must be no spoliation, no robbing of the individual for the benefit of the many, but the Bill also recognises this, and throughout proceeds upon the principle that whatever land is acquired shall be fairly paid for. The one point on which the new measure goes' beyond the lines of existing law is simply m giving the Crown the right to take land compulsorily. But even here, though the application of the principle is a new one, the principle itselt has been over and over again affirmed by legislation enabling the compulsory taking of land for railways, roads, defence works, and other works of public utility and advantage. And if the Crown, that is to say, practically, the public, may rightly take land for these purposes, surely so also for the purposes of settlement. For, why are roads and railways made but for the precise same purpose ? If then, land may be taken to give means of access to land with a view to rendering settlement possible and profitable a fortiori^ we argue, the land required for settlement, and without which settlement is not possible at all, may be (ray, should be) acquired m the same way. But it is denied that land now held m large blocks by private individuals is required for settlement — that there are settlers forthcoming l willing and able to avail themselves of the opportunity of acquiring such land which will be afforded if the Bill be \ passed. We join issue upon that point, and assert the exact contrary. That issue is easily decided. Let it be put to the proof by the. passing of the Act. If events prove our contention, by the land being taken up, then the Act will justify itself. If, on the other hand, events prove the opposite contention _to be the correct one, then no harm can possibly be done, for the Act will prove a dead letter. It is ridiculous to point to the large area of unsold Crown lands as affording ample scope for settlement. ' The lands held by the Crown m this Island are for the most part either wholly unfit for small holdings by reason of their poor quality, their great elevation, or their inaccessibility and threat distance from any market, and while the only suitable lands for small holdings are m the bush districts of the North Island, it cannot be expected that we shall retain that best class of settlers, viz., the sons of settlers, reared on the soil, who are seeking for the opportunity of establishing homesteads of their own. If such a$ these cannot get suitable holdings m Canterbury and Otago, but must take up bush land m. the North Island, or go without land at all, then they are just as likely to clear out of the colony altogether, and to go lo Victoria, New South Wales, or Queensland. What is wanted if settlement of this — the very best — sort is to go on is suitable land m suitable positions m Canterbury and Otaf o, and "such land we contend can only be obtained under such provisions as those of the Land Acquisition Bill. Speaking generally, the Bill has our most hearty approval, and we hope that the Government will persist with it, and leave no stone unturned to pass It into law. It is conceived m a spirit of fairness pnd justice, and deserves the firm support of all who vrish well to the colony. It is, however,- capable of amendment m one or two particulars. The maximum area of holding by any member of a Settlement Association should not be fixed at 100 acres — 300 acres would be a fair thing — and the provision which enables or proposes to enable the Colonial Treasurer to divert moneys voted for other objects to this particular purpose te objectionable ; but, amended as regards "these, and m a few minor particulars, the Bill promises to be a thoroughly workable and most beneficial measure — one which will do more towards lifting the colony out of its present depressiiD, and securing for it a new era of progress and prosperity, than any other scheme which has yet been proposed, or which it is indeed possible to devise.