PARLIAMENT IN SESSION.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 23, 22 October 1907, Page 6

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION.

SEEGrAIi, /REPOETS fmw'S

THE LAND; BILL

THIRD RE ADM CARRIED;

OPPOSITION CRITICISMS.

I'm, Consideration of amendments' " at'7:3o last night, ::.?" tho Minister' for''Lauds (Hon. .11.-.,.M'jmiui ' >•>>< moved that the amendments -.made in the .?«■!- Land - Bill by tho. .Committee .pf. the .'.Whole ij.H-vbeVagreed.to.'.--..:;'• -.; -a- ■ i,;;';,.v- '~ r :> .-. Mr/ W. H. Hcrrics (Bay of Plenty), said •:'■ :.rthat tho Land Bill, with -the;amendments •r pmado„at the instanco:of the Minister, afforded ' m.. !. B everaL instancesi.-of the Government adopt..V- ing tho suggestions of tho Opposition. In the .v. limitationclauses-of.partlV, they had.taken a policy advocated by'tho Leader of. the Oppoj -iisitioniand the Farmers' Union. (" Oh, ohl" '•and laughter.) They had continually ■•:■'" cated that if the freehold was granted, limita■■••i\tion'clauses.should bo inserted; Personally, 'r'ije had never agreed with limitation. , Any/■"v'jbody who laiewthe history of, real -property ' »"'v'ii'as aware -of tho'- difficulties, attending any i f3 'iimitation ! proposal.' The thing had been /'tried in. 'England,,;and:, during, successive .'years it had been so whittled down'that now '. did .not-exist'at a 11.' .: •*'«,' Inconveniences' of Limitation. ; ? '■;•■■ ■. ' 'f /'.'-.What seemed to'hiiri'so inconvenient about' '", ..tie new liinitatiori* clauses was that.thoy ~;;:,|,wonld ..apply'to any.Crown -grant/for whnt"'.'i' ever purpose it was issued. '■ JJ'or instance, tfte """-' Minister had said in regard to clause 73 : that -7ri-.it.would often be: ..convenient'for Crown, lv in'iacquiring land, to makoan -exchange, but ■■ ■■/'•>'-that- would bo impossible if the other-party ; '•; ji'eld more than. 640 acre's: of first-class -land, ;i4and clause 73 would'become a' dead letter. ,;>k.!fhen .'sometimes/ f a-V County;' Council, in ! ,':- ; 'istraightening a road,*wanted to make an ex- ' .'change of land : with/a"'private owner. It, '■■'-' -t'fwbuld be-impossible ,'riow';'to/give the owner. .•/a piece of Crownland for'this purpose if ho ... 'held more than'' 640' ; acres?; of first-class land. Then thero were the /township;' lands, which J,; "i;-wero sold by.'auction!; .A. person ;who held -.'' Wire' than 640 •acres of first-class land could ■■•"iiiot buy a,township'section. How.would the " r Sianks acquire sites ; for their buildings, or ,'■ fgome'bf the great merchants.for their stores? jSurelytho Minister,; did. not wish _to prevent V-.'/ihese evory-day transactions, whicn, were not ,v; .jmado with the object, of "aggregating estates. r7£ho limitation'schomo might strike where :.t Uught to, but it would, strike in .other places, .'"~. as well, and.would,bo hard upon.tho; public. :-"IIis own panacea to .take the place of :limita T - : '• i-tion-was taxation, ~and,.ne.,>ras;. glad, tho ' .-■■ Government had,adopted it in another. Bill.-, ■'"' Shi- three or lour years there .would :be such .an' agitation against these limitation clauses that they would' He/swept off the Statute. \Book. • ■, , ~ ~,. ~,,... '. ■ "■" f Elective Land Boards/ ;>■ " : He had proposed" a clause which he thought , contained the germ, .0f,,.a. /good.'idea—to make the Land Boards elective.' He suggested that ;1: " there-should-he two-■membors..nominatcd. by ; ' 'the Crown,' includingithe Commissioner,' one ■■ i-Aby" the' County Councils' (because the County, ";!',.wCounoils' had a "great/deal'tovdo^mth'.tne, :'-■■■■ Crown: lands' in tho way, of roadragand col- :: -"Acting: rates, and'theproper 'management or. ,-.".';-'ihe lands was ofvital ..importance to ...them);.. ' 6":';' ! ''-'.' B nd"'two members/:-elected- ,l>y_.-.tno .iCrown;.; ', r tenants.' He supposed .that was where tho. '. 7. Silinistor got the idea :for. ; his, own.-.amend- '■ /'■• .jfcneht. which, however, proposed'to' have only, -£=• SoW elected -member' and. all; the;'rest ■ nomi-^ Seated; However; the*'. Minister; would ;; be; ,:-., siound to bring in Van /amending Bill; next ..'-'!>■ year, and the pressure of..public; opinion,, would'cause him to,-put,in another elective. »•'( ■ "member;- The Opposition had .been.demand- "''■'•'"• Vg'elective Lahd'Boardii for years past, and ( : ; of the' House who representedj ' : country district's, and who tried,to servo the of the .tenants, believing that they v rv would thereby bo 'doing good to, -the/country;. a.rt';«is" a -.wholb,. had' -advocated;.tho I'samo idea. -, '' :l lt was a part of,th^ ; policy of the Opposition " the farmer's' Umon.;. He was'cunous.to, ■'"» ;see whether.the'; Government regulations re-, ■""/'VEardihg th'e'electiqn of'ith'o tenants■ represenv" tatives oritlio LaniJ. Boards would follow his ' suggestions or hot.-, Ho intended ,to brln^, down his proposals jiext year m theJorm ot, I " ■ '• a Bill, and'find,'byweails of a vote, what '• the House really,wanted. He believed the., desiro.of the country people was to,, ' % /.see '.the-Crown tenants. .represented on tho. /,' : .J3oards. . ,'' ..,:'.-. '.-';, ~.'.' K , '"'

.|T;i)tW Homestead Systerny "\ v-:-i; ! ,i if' He ,was sorry, that the' honi'es&ad 'system. -'■V, .lad been knocked out,'of .'the Bill> ;He con- ' .V; gratulated-. the. ox-Minister for Lauds' on ;.,'>'geiting that clause inserted, andjie thought ■■■•/ l ':';his" successor' would, have been'. wise Vtq .let -/V-"jt. stand. It would havo rested.wrtb.. him. I . i«l'ahd with tho Land Boards'to-put.'it .into d'iti operation .'when arid where thoy thought pro-, ■'.- - ! ;..;;per..-Statistics. showed' that' the homestead ■>;' system was the 'most successful .:; form. of "-■-, ■,'/settlement ■ that had ever., been.tried in tho : -,iJ' far .'-north-.and on the. West ..Coast. The bo-, '•■: ( cialistic element in the House got hold "of r-Vii-tlio- Minister at-that .point' and prevented-—'•-■him accepting 1 " the homestead system; AH', ' • tho ''iiill. thcy. ; .saw".tho infiiionce of r ."'"• this'small body of men—l 3in number.. The 'ivi.„-.Jsill. wouldv please . neither, side.' It: was 'a' butit.should nothavebeen ac- ', "icopted '.by the 'freeholders,', and -those, of. them who .had. voted, for the Bill-'would have a difficult'.'task; in explaining itlieir action to their constituents. Those who had Btuck to the freehold would come out-on ..'„,',Valuation for Acquisition. Claus.o 80, formerly' known as clause .66, j'-i-had; ho wbuld'admit, been materially .altered for tho bettor, and here the .Minister, who was rather like; ii.'chameleon, had not ... . favoured the land reformers, but had acted '" ; as • a'"freeholder. It ;irould, howbvor. net .' harshly, and tho subsidiary roll would not .'*' work out well in practice..'Tho clause would /probably ,kavo„ to bo altered, next session':'., it was satisfactory to have clause 69 (now ..v;.''B2). so 'altered .that small'farms within 15 miles of any borough would riot now'be at the mercy :of tho Government to take for workers! homes. -'J.'hd- assurance that tho ~.- ...subsidiary. roll would not bo used for local : rates was also an improvement.. The man •'in with'".£4o,ooo. worth of -freehold land could '.''-• -take care of . himself.'Mt was tho small mail. ,;"'/''that lie was, anxious .about. 'The man who : could employ the best legal assistance, would -'•''.'.'.b°. able to evade.every clause.- *H'o,- himself * " could' see two ways of getting out of the ...limitation clauses. /He would tell the Min- *'."!' is'tcr later on.' '. ?' '■.■ The House and the Freehold. ''• . v m;';. The Premier had stated that it would •'-' -never be possible; to.-'; carry a>-proposal .to give tho tenants the freehold at tho original '' -'value. For his part, however, he believed. \ that such a proposal could havo'been car-. "r : ''ried this sessiori. (Voices: ,"N0,.n0!" "It could.") Twenty-four members- voted for the freehold, and six others wero absent. If the Ministers had. also voted for the frce- '■'' hold there would have becn.thirty.sev'en. That ' / - ; ~v/ould -have been a .majority,, and moreover ';'.... there were nlwnys'.sbmo members who would .follow the Government into, either lobby. Therefore tho Government; coiild hare car- ' .-? ricd the freehold, easily.'. ';'-'" '. Mr. Laiireijson: "And destroyed their. •--position with the country." : This gave them heart to go on (continued ; " ' Mr. He.-ries) and try to get' the .freehold ■"''■ for the tenants. He believed they would. get it in time. ■> Tho -Minister- would como down just before the election with the freet. hold at tho original value, and the member ■'■' ' for" Lyitcltoii. and the member for Invercargill would bo found supporting thorn. : The Term of the Leases. .... -In altering the'.ter'm of. the .renewable 'f,':';',lease .from."CO years t0"33 years, Iho.Minis-.. . ; . ; ; '.tdr's: Mr. Hyde, so- to .speak,"came .upper..'.,;'.,'ihost: again, and ..his;'Dr. Jelcyll -was, for- " -gotten. Tho majority -of the House would have voted for 83 years, but because .'it was'

'tho .Leader of the- Opposition who moved it, it .was .defeated.' He believed tlio Goveinmorit had dohb right to rcduco the rate of interest; to ho taken as rent en the leased lands, andhe believed they would find themselves bbliged'td reduce it still .furtkbr. Concluding, Mr. Herries said ho had shown that the Government had,, in a :great many instances, :borrowed ideas from' tho Opposition. If the Opposition were not thero to' give .them ideas, it was- doubtful if the Government could bo'successful with' any legislation. When'■ they/had a Bill that did not emanate from the Opposition, it was covered with derision, and stank, in. tho nostrils of the people;"', Tlie Tram ways Bill, and tho Pire Brigades Bill were instances. > •.-.-. .Leader, of; the-OpiMsitlon.: Mr.'Massey (Leader of tho Opposition) said tho' Opposition side of the House had been treated shabbily in committee becauso the Minister and. his followers had evidently mado lip their minds not to accept any amendments that camo from them. Instead, they afterwards'-'brought down .clauses almost identical with Opposition proposals. ~ This was the case in regard' to land boards, classification, and .Crown tenants' rebate The limitation proposals in regard to Crown lands to be alienated in thofuturo bad como from .the ,L T nion. / v He ferred'to : the new proposals' to retain interest at. s"per 'cent, on o.r'.'p. lands, and said it indicated that tho Government intended- to discourage the freehold . settler. Referring • .to a "press interview with, the Minister,'ho said that on tho Opposition sido of /.the Housc'.'mem'bers, had nothing to oxplain'in' regard to/their, .votes in, pommittee. They, had voted throughout.. according to their convictions and principles. '. : ' '' The Minister., did not reply, and the .third reading was/th'en'moved. , .' ;

Mr.. h Massey said.ho.thought.the Minister should explain 'somo of the amendments; possibly his reply would be made in .the' small hours of the morning to a thinned House. Proceeding, Mr. Masscy said it was interesting ' to look'hack upoiv the'work, of the past three weeks. The most important amendment'in tho Bill bad been the substi-tution-of tho 66. years;for■•• the T.iip. in thecaso of Crown, Lands, and 33 years for Lands for Settlemont Lands.' Ho thought the latter tenure- was too short, -especially in. regard,to some Auckland lands, which were in a natural condition, and would take;alot,of labour ,to be made profitable. .-.Unfortunately,-...thero were members in the HousoWho knew little of, the difficulties,!of the men on,!thei land; Under the' 33 years'! tenure,, a settler;; woukl v be unable; to' en joy, to tho full extent' the fruits of hiViabours, and the. • inducements and encouragements to silccessful Settlement. would be:missing,..and very much to. thot'eqiintry's loss. He was sorry his proposal,,to give :Crowni tenants': the ..freehold .was- not' agreed to. i- He ; referred to the clause he-had moved in this connection—viz,., to give the freehold at, the capital lvalue, plus 1 per, cent.;,for the .term; the lease had .been held—and. said tho proposal l : was a perfectly fair,;one,,,hutt not-, withstanding,-.* majority had voted against it. Proceeding, Mr.' ivMasHey..,said,. theo'freehold, party, under Clause 19,-had gained; but. in Part 11. of the: Bill'they; had lost. Thatwa's in regard to lands, for 1 settlement lands. ~ In the proposal to do' : away/with the Li.p. tehuro in 'order "t6' ,; -"substitutefa a'stupid mistake-had been made,"and one that would' not the' Minister's reputation in'tho fufiiire.' 'AsHo village settlement.lands, tho Opposition dos.ired tliem:to be disposed.of 'at auction f-'hoir their'disposal was'left ;!to the •':;• , ■"■

..Mr. Mas§ey, 'proceeded ;to ;quote . from a 'speech" by;the.';■ Minister.for: Land? ,;in,.1895. •In the:spee'dli ;, Mr. M.'Nab-.he-said,;had:care-fiilly argued:that: the, Crown tenants,.coiild. never become a power, in: the., land -becaiiso 'thoy would be out-voted, by. thoso'whoso interests'lay -in;'another direction. -The.Minister had also' expressed.-regret,that.,in tho measure of, that date.jthcre was not. provision. for periodical revaluation. "'"'He : wanted revaluation then 1 , .and-, he.ihas now-got it/' I said. Mr: : .Massey.. .Presnmably, ! the„Ministor .was: sorry, then: that ihero was; not.:provisioii' in '-that: Bill for periodica|iyaluation_ because present loss might be futuro gain—at,, the oxponse of the people on the land and for the .benefit of-the,irest, of the cginmunity. It seemed'they had, a Ministei;-of the .Crown: showing at that date 'settlers. were in lii minority,..therefore they..must- suffer, No other .deduction-could.,be drawn, from his ■ speech, is Ho '•■ (Mr i .,Massey)- honestly behoved that tho'Bill dMast. year and this year, were part-of a .carefully,, worked, out,, plan'. .Last,year!s .Bill had gone.top,far and had., • to', be/'withdrawn. ,-..This year, "apparpntly- the .Minister would get .some of his 'idoas'intho Statute-book. - But it, was .impossible for settlers to. have confidence in; a, Minister who •had years ago . given , expression ~, to. such views as he. had just quoted,' and. who was responsible for., the, Bills of this.and last •year. .■;■■ ■■ . ■ .■;■'. '■.'.._ :■ ■■ ■'~'.;.■,.-, ~.';,,\; ■ ■Last Year's Bin. ~„[",... ~'.;';;'7,;: ; '"":,,: ;■' • Various statements .h'adi.beeii made, as to tho reason for the -withdrawal,of 'last, year's measure.' The -hon. gentleman at thei.sccond reading had 'said they had'the samo proposals in -three-".Bilk, this year, : as it was impossible to : carry; all-the proposals'.in the ono ' measure. Tho real reason had como from an unexpected. :a' member of- tho who-had.- -stated.. in,'ii' speech '! he was. not: committing, a breach' 'of '■ faith 'in'saying that-the best''attention was given- to th'e last, year's ma'esuro,. but it'was found, impossible .to make it really workable, ■ and' for that reason,they, adopted the'; principle which underlay, tlio-proseht'" Act.'': That' gehtkman : : expressed the opinion' that the principle :df the' present. ..Bill ..was. totally different fr^oiri.'the' principle, of . tho Bill.of last year,: and''tha;t,,':tho Bill'.'of -lasv year 'was .unworkable.'". Veli, if that was' tho 'Bill of the Minister'.for 'Lands,'whose was .the Bill of last year; and if the Bill of last year was that, of-the Minister for, Lands,, th'nri who was responsible for the- present. Bill? .'At, all events the opinion ;he had. just quoted' was that: of.-a mombo'r-'nf j'the Executive, and it was the : most complete 'g'iyc-awayho had cvcriieard"of."; '" ";; ;'",.'. . '■ r . -, Takatloyfcl.atises';'''.'.''' ,'■<>;'■■/ ./■•.' - As to. Clauses " .156.; and". 69.-'-relating to the valuation of land to be.;o6fnpulsorily ac-: quired, Mr.'.Massey' asserted-:'tbey were: taxation- clauses'; they were not .there to -'benefit- settlement; but they should give' extreme satisfaction' to .the',.,single ;tax '.tail,'- which.wagged the Government dog.- He,.was sorry .the homestead clauses were riot Retained.Tho proposals;in this respect-were thoy ; had really'beimiti''operation'until tho year. 1892,' when they' were inadvertently repealed. The - homestead system had been' very popular, in !tho Auckland,district, and there were at the. present day/500; prosper!, o'us settlors who took up'land under it. The system was waniod as much to-day as it :was years ago,, becauso thousands engaged in tho , gum industry would take. up land under,it and make, poor-land'-profitable. Ho could not understand the action of. the Minister over tho clause;, it was.,hot that .of a statesman. - -.' - ■ .-■ .... The Bill. ; '■ v :'; \ '"_ ■'/'. ;■;;/ ,'"l.'beliovo,-': said Mr. Massoy, "that.the. Bill will pass-into. Taw in something: approaching its present form, jßut don't let anyone imaginethat. the last,'word, has been, said in connection with the .land proposals Of tho Government.?' There, woiild. bo another opportunity in : the case of ; tlio Endowment Bill, and perhaps'in other directions, and they know that tho •..leaseholders and huul nationalists would go .nil'.blocking and undermining with the ipbje'ct of,. having their ideas given.,effect to, when, ;tho,)\ got a Government pleasant enough in officer , Mr. Laurcnson: They are a,bad,lot/ • .. -Mr. Massey: -They are. He..proceeded that, on„,tho : other,, harid, there. w<;re those.. who would endeavour ,to have the lands, settled to the satisfaction, of thesettlcrs.themselves and for the good,of .the .country ~as; a whole. , Mr. .Massey concluded 'that;.an insidjous''at-. tack tied, been made during .'the last.year or. .two, bri. the principle of. freehold; .but, those members of the House who had 'Stood 'shoulder I to shoulder in support of. itwould-have-reason

to ; bo' satisfied with their action, and the whole right-thinking community'would apprcciatb,what they had done. 'V- " 'THE PREMIER'S SPEECH. The Premier said the whole proceedings in regard to the Bill had been creditable to the House, and ho complimented his colleague the Minister for Lands "on tho way he had conducted, the matter. Me thought something of this courtesy should have come from two mombcrs who had spoken on tho other side \of tho House. Mr. Masscy had misrepresented tho words of the Minister for Lands in the interview which ho had quoted. Mr. M'Nah, when saying that some members would want to explain their votes; was not making an accusation' against tho Opposition. It was quite natural that on such an important measure as that members would wish- to lot their constituents and others know how they came to the decision which they did. Was there any member who did not wish to explain his vote? The House and the Freehold. In. spite.of what tho member for tho Bay ,of Plenty had said, he (tho Premier) maintained that he was right in saying that no party in this country could carry a leasehold policy pure and simple through* Parliament. He would concede the possibility that tho party nqw in Opposition would-bo in a better position to do so than tho party in power. Thcro was a strong feeling on both sides of .tho question, oven within tho ranks of the 'Government supporters, as there was throughout the_ world, and legislation was only possible with.some amount of give-and-take. When tho peoplo of tho country, including the farmers, realised a truo conception of tho Dill, they'would say that it was a magnificent • step forward, and was largely in the interest of the farmers. (Hear, hear.) Some More Questions. It. had. been said that tho legislation of this "year was very different from that announced by the Minister'for ! Lands last year. Well, a good',general generally did a certain amount of skirmishing. And, after all, tho members who sat last year on the other side of tho Houso were still in the same unhappy position. They gave quotations from speeches delivered, in times gono by, and tried to show what the position of tho Minister had been and what it was now. But the fact remained that the Minister for Lands was on the top. ("No, ho!") Was .the Leader of the Opposition above tho same form of criticism? Mr. Masscy had said that ho was in favour of giving tho lease-iib-perpetuity tenants the ■freehold at tho original value ■ puro and simple. . ' / ■ Miv'Masscy: "No. With ono per cent, added." ... , Tho Premier insisted that Mr. Massey had said, "the" original value pure and simple," or words of that moaning, but'waiving that point,.'he'had admittedly intended to say, ;''the original value plus ono per cent." ■■' Mr. -, Massey: "Yes." !,-/The Premier: "And did not the Leader of ;the Opposition 'say he would have tho question' of - value determined byl actual valuation?"- -,' ' .•' Mr. • Masscy: " Yes; I'm glad you have mentioned.', it." ;'. '

/'The/Premier: "And at another-timo the 'Leader of tho Opposition said that tho-ques-tion'should bo settled upon such conditions ,as Parliament thought fit." Now would not the Loader of the Opposition admit'that .tin' this' very important matter he had changed his views? Surely tho'only thing left for him to do was to tumble into tho bosom, of the. Government and. say that they had done the right thing, both towards those ipeoplo who had obtained land at very low rates, and towards tho country generally in enabling the lesseos to acquire the freehold at the present-day value. That was tho equitable and honest ..method for tho to adopt.

.'.Tfrb Clauses. If, ho had ovor heard anything politically •grotesque;- it was tho assertions of tho member for the Bay of Plenty thai everything the Government had done in Committee! was stolen; from the Opposition. The hon. member, whilo he did not approvd of| tho limitation' clauses, accused .the Government 'of taking them from tho Opposition and. the Farmers'.. "Union. Did it not occur to the hon. member that tho Bill was tho Bill of the Govornment? It was idle for tho hon. member, .or anybody elso, to -select a paragraph or clause and say ho intended to do -something that the Minister had dono in somo.other way., Tho Minister was responsible"''for 'accepting • and rejecting amendmcnts;.'tl)qt were moved. Tho ..member for the Boy of Plenty had to fall back upon the possibility of the Bank of New Zealand, or some merchant being unable to purchase a site for>bttsirioss purposes, on account of tho limitation of the sale of Crown lands to those who did not possess 640 acres of first class lands. .The hon. member overlooked'tho fact that'such a limitation was already in existence,, and tho Bank had gono on extending its operations. Thoro would bo no difficulty.. of., the kind referred to in practice. One had heard so often of the tern bio consequences = of Government legislation, but tliey had. never taken..place, and now one was .inclined to discount them. ~

"' In regard to the action of the Minister on tho question of the constitution of the Waste Lands,- Boards, and Mr. Herrie'sj strictures thcreon/-.hc would ask again,-whose Bill is it? Surely'the Minister who \ was responsible for carrying tlirough this important piece of legislation had the right *to make such proposals as ho believed to bo bestj suited'to the needs of the country. There was 1 a'"great; deal to be said in favour of. the elective systonr in regard to public bodies. '(.Hear, hear.) But tho Government was imposing great responsibilities on these Boards, 'and giving the tonants great opportunities to alter their form of tenure and to convert to freehold. The' whole scapo of 'our land legislation was being greatly widened: Yot the lion., member was, apparently, • prepared to'give all this-land to hand, ovor all the Crown laud, leased or to be leased, and to bo converted'to bodies.-without any representative of, the Crown iipon thorn. If they wanted that kind of Government for the people, lot them relievo tho Government of all .responsibility-in the'matter. Ho believed, tho, people of tho country would say they did not want chaos, hut good administration •.with proper representation of the Government.. ' . The Homestead System... ~,.., ' Ho".wish«l to pay a"sincort tribute to liis old colleague,- the ex-Minister for Lands,' who had tried to re-introduce tho homestead system,; .but that system was not suitable under present circumstances. The land laws of .the,country .wero very different when it wasin ..forcp. Thoro was no Lands for Settlomont.Act, no cheap-monny lent to sottlers. The Government wero making tho land system so''free and so broad that they wore now unable to set aside the lands that would bo. required for the homestead system. They were -improving the land- system generally, but while'there was no boil.'member from whom they would sooner accent an amendment-, than tho member for Oamnru, they coukl not see their way clear to accept that proposal.: The policy of tho -Government's party had given an enormous impetus to settlement by such measures as tho Lands .for :Settlement.' Act, Advance's to Sottlers Act,'and other measures which had been opposed by-members sitting on the other sido of the House. ' The Price for the Freehold. •Mr'. Mnss'ey'explained that bis contention was that'the-l.i.p. tenant, in converting to tho' freehold,,should .pay the original value plus 1 per cout. - for tho whole period he had held the lease, so as to place him on the same footing-as though lie had selected the o.r.p. tenure.'■ As regards'thc actuarial value, what he said was that ho .would bo content to have the sum to.be paid by the tenant determined by an actuarial officer of the Government. The buildings, improvements,, and goodwill/ belonged to tho Government, and nothing but the original valuo belonged to the Government, lie was prepiirwl to stand by that oll'er now. Tho Premier then read. an extract from a speech of Mr. Masscy's, as reported in " Han-' sard," .October 3, 1907, stating that he was in favour of the freehold at the original value, arid adding,, " Is that plain enough?" , Mr. Massey: I,cannot bo expected to men'tion) this addition of 1 per. cent, on every occasion, but it has always' been put forward from this, side of the liouso that the i;i.p. tenant iii acquiring. the freehold should be placed in the same position as theo.r.p.

tenant by making up the difference of 1 per cent, in the rental. OTHER SPEAKERS. Mr. W. Frascr (Wakatipu) said the Bill was no stop forward in regard to tbo conferring of the freehold!!. The only provision in that respect was under the o.r.p. tenure, but that was not new, and yet credit was taken for it. And, he contended/under the proposals of the Bill no one would take advantage of that provision on accountof the present-day system of valuation. No concession at all was made to the leaseholder. It was because the Bill was a freeholders' measure, and to a certain extent a land nationalisor's measuro, that ho could not vote for it. Ho prophesied that when the provisions and principles of the Bill were assimilated by the country, especially by those on the land, there would be a very different feeling towards tho Government. What had been done in tho past could bo done again, and the right of option might bo denied in tho future. In conclusion, he said ho would have great pleasure in voting against the Bill. The Hon. 0. Mills,looked upon the Bill as being a distinct improvement on past measures. Mr. D. Tiuddo (Kaiapoi) denied that the Bill was tainted with, Socialism. Tho moderate section of tho people- still ruled, and always would. - Mr. Marnier (Kaipara) expressed great disappointment at tho deletion of 'the homestead clause, which lie said' had been foreshadowed by tho late' Premier. The voting throughout the committee proceedings, with one or two oxcoptions, had shown that the Government' had agreed to a compromise with tho Socialistic element in the- House. The Ministry could have carried tho freehold if they had been in favour of it. Therowas a strong feeling in support of the freehold in the North Island, but the present. Southern Ministry had disregarded it. Mr. Malcolm (Clntha) regretted that the Bill did not contain more "to encourage closer, settlement. - Debate Falters. Tho Minister was about to reply, when Mr. Lang rose and travorsed some of the most important clauses. Ho said remarks had been made about the "endless talk," hut it was expressive of tho attitude of certain members that on- an important measuro as this there had been such a lack of discussion that evening. . Tho debato was continued by Messrs. Thompson, Stallworthy, Reid,! Herries, and Duncan. Tile Minister for Lands in his reply described tho debate as very satisfactory to tho Government... Shortly 'after 2 o'clock the House divided on the'third reading, which was carried by 42 votes to 15.