THE LAND QUESTION.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 151, 26 June 1907, Page 8

THE LAND QUESTION.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —As the result of the debate which will shortly take place in Parliament on the Land Bill will be of the most vital importance to our country, it is the bounden duty of all who bave the welfare of New Zealand at heart to calmly and conscientiously compare the proposals of our Government with those of the Opposition, as voiced by Mr. Massey and other leaders. Our liberal land policy which, a few years since, superseded one that was altogether unsatisfactory to the State,.'has produced wonderful results, as _ho.m in our pre-, sent prosperity, largly caused .by close settlement, which could only have obtained by the easy terms of Hfie Government leasehold. That the Opposition are determined, if possible, to tamper with the leasehold tenure, so as to make it unworkable, is shown by their taking every opportunity of discrediting the leaseholders by referring to them as, inspector ridden .rack-rented, weedy fanners, and other reproachful terms; and also by holding out the bribe, "That the Opposition are prepared to give them the freehold of their holdings at the upset' price." Their persistent attempts to liken the conditions of our Crown tenants to those renting from private landlords, is a deliberate attempt to hoodwink and deceive the electors. Take the case of a private owner, who looks upon his land as property, on which he is entitled lo obtain as much return as possible. He mostly lets it for short terms, and all the improvements made by tenants belong to him (unless specially enacted otherwise). Whilst he does ] not act illegally in this, he is responsible to no one but himself. But in regard to Crown lands, the case i 3 quite different; they are held on long leases , at a moderate and fixed rental, and with ■ a title that is just as safe as freehold, and all improvements made by the ten- 1 ants belong to them, and can be legally transferred. The Government are only . trustees for the whole community, and are liable at any time, to be superseded . by another Ministry. Therefore, if any- • thing unjust or prejudicial to the interests of the State is attempted, it would soon be rectified by the united voice of - public opinion. Sir, there is a develop- '. ment connected with this land question \ which bids fair to obliterate the patriot- '. ism of our people, and that is the subor- j dination of the State's welfare to that ] of individuals. The Opposition leaders, whilst continually bringing prominently -j forward the struggles and hardships of ] the pioneer and back block settlers, en- , tirely ignore the claims of the State , which should always be with 5 our sparse population there should be < no necessity for anyone wanting land \ to go beyond the fringe of existing and approachable settlement. Since oar Lib- ■{ aral Land Policy has been in operation, . our Government,-by buying improved eatates, and cutting them up in sections, ( have constantly shown a desire to place { their tenants on holdings 'from which , they could get immediate returns, and j where they should not be isolated. During the last, few years our.country has led the world in land reform, un'd the working of o ur land laws is being carefully watched by other countries. Even in our Motherland, where hitherto the sacred rights of property have complete- c ly over-ridden the righteous claims of . humanity, the "leaven of land reform has -ommenced to work. Not long since Lord Carrington, himself a large land- r owner, introduced a measure into the * British Parliament, to give tenants com- 1 pensation for improvements, and the -mall Holdings Bill now before the same £ Parliament, provides for the compulsor- B Jy taking of land for close settlement. ? Sir Henry CampbeU-Bannerman, the British Premier, lately said, "An effort C nust be made to intercept the unearned § rncrement for the State." Now, Sir, _ in the face of such facts, can we, in .-, rTew Zealand, upon whom the eyes o/the -. tfhole civilised world are fixed, go back , >n our progressive path and take up ' such an immoral and retrograde policy , is that held out by the present Oppo- 7 dtion? I think, Sir, the verdict of the ? najority of our people will be emlhatically, no.—Yours, etc, v WALKER, CRISP. I Fencoujt, June 24, 1307. „■■ U