The Akaroa Mail. FRIDAY, JANUARY 21.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume V, Issue 469, 21 January 1881, Page 2

The Akaroa Mail. FRIDAY, JANUARY 21.

Says the Echo (Dnnedin): —We can at last congratulate the Ministry on having , got a defender for the Patctere job. TTp to the present the Ministerial Press have fought shy of this big hind affair ; but now all is changed. The Otago Daily Times has boldly ventured to defend the handing over of the public estate to capitalists. When we state the reasons it gives for its defence of the "job," our readers will be able to ccc how little can be said for this nflair. The Times begins by proclaiming its anxiety to see people settled on the land, and it admits that in theory the lands should be bought by the Government and sold through Waste Land Boards. But it adds—

"In practice, nevertheless, this is found to be open to several grave objections, arising out of the peculiar circumstances oi that part of the country."

Tliis is always the tale. In theory, Or course, the Liberals sre rig-lit, but "in practice " what good is theory ? No ; the practice that is built on a " wrong theory " is what is pleasing to our Tory friends. What aro, however, the grave objections ?

Number one.— The Government cannot get tlie land.

Number two.—Private persons can

Number three.—lf the Government buy the land it is not certain it will be distributed amongst the people.

Number four.— lt is unsuitable for small farming.

These are the grave objections. Let us take them seriatim. As to number one, it is simply untrue. The Government, during the time land purchase has been conducted by it, has bought more land and more quickly than private spectators. And we challenge the Times to publish the areas purchased by private speculators and Government, i\nd it will be seen that its first grave objection is simply untrue. Number two falls with it. Why, even private persons, after some ten years? negotiation, have been unable to get leases, far less purchase*, completeAnd had it not bee a for the illegal inter" ference of interested speculators in the Patetere business, the blocks woul,] have been completed by the Government. Read Mr Grace's letter published in th c Patetere papers, editor! Number three.—All we can say i« that if the Waste Lands Boards are slow in giving the land to the people, speculators are certainly much slower And with this difference. The specu lators make a profit out of the transac. tion —a profit either the country or the settler should reap. Let the time that it has taken to get a block purchased by the Government into the hands of the people be compared with the period that a speculator's block reaches sale for settlement, and our statement will le verified. We challenge comparison Let the Tiwes give instances. Number four. —This objection simply amounts to saying that the lands in the North Island are unsuitable for small farms, but must be held in big blocks to pay the pettier. Nmw this is the very opposite of the truth. Tt may pay a man to hold a large area in Otago or Canterbury for slicep, but few big- areas in Auckland can be ho utilised. The land is generally fern land, and this requires treatment quite different from the grass lands ot the south. In small areas it may be made suitable for grazing, but if thousands or hundreds cf thousands of acres of hind r.re given to one individual they lie unimproved, and arc not fit for even a few sheep. Bat this argument cuts away the other objection made. If the land is un- I suitable for moderate-sized farms why is it a " grave objection " that the Government does not cut it up for settle ment in small farms? This is "too much." When penning this objection number four, the editor must have forgotten objection number three.

After the Times has stated its objections to Government baying hincl for settlement, it goes on to point out the great, gain to the- country of helping speculators to made profits out of the sale of the public estate.. We like to see a position stated " squurely." There is no mistaking what the Times understand..-, the policy of the Government to 1)0, and what the Times advocates. Tim vast mass of the North Island is to be handed over in vast areas to a few people. This is to be the policy of settlomenf. Yes, it will settle the Norih Island Capitalists may re-se!l their possessions to I lie buna fide settlor, and if in sodoi>-'->----they reap a large profit, will not -this Jiclp foi M vn«''J ] <* c>llll f.rv

Wo wonder why the same principle should not be tried in the South Island. Of course, "in theory " it is altogether wrong ; but "in practice " it becomes right. At last the issue has been put. There is no need of beating about the bush. The Patetere job is the first instalment of the Ministerial policy of settling the Native Lands questionShortly put, the Native title is to be got rid of by handing over the vast areas of Native land to European speculators. Native titles do not tend to cultivation, but if this policy of dividing the North Island amongst n few is carried out it will be found that a "title" more mimic d to progress than that of the Maoris has been created. Ho\vever,there is the policy. We know what the Ministry mean, and those curious to read what a Ministerial journal can say in defence can peruse the leader in Monday's Otago Daily Times. The platform is—The North Island for Land Kings. Again, we thank the Times for putting the issue so neatly. There can be no crying , back, no explaining away the issue. Wi'l the settlers in New Zealand vote aye? We do not believe they will. •