LAND NATIONALISATION.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 586, 14 August 1909, Page 12

LAND NATIONALISATION.

SOME FALLACIES ABOUT LAND AND LAND NATIONALISATION. ■: - '■ , IL ■"', ':■.'• (By James Ashchoft.) NATIONALISATION. "■'■' ■ It is a little difficult to grasp fully what is really meant by land nationalisation. In a souse, our land is already nationalised in this, our Dominion. Tho , iwsition id altogether different {rom that of Great Britain, as I shall presently, show, Our titles are simple and rcCont, and come direct from the Crown. ,The disposal of the land has been under tho control of our' Legislature, which' for somo years past has been' liberalising the land laws so as to limit holdings, and to subdivide into _ smaller holdings where practicable, by buying up the larger estates ■and letting them out in smallcr.arcas, This has not boon done without protest, but has on the whole worked well and settled a eon-. sidorable number of [desirable settlers'-on, holdings of' moderate size, .greatly■ increasing production. This recognises the right of the. State so to regulate-matters a 6 to ! prevent monopoly, ; and it has no parallel in the.land laws of the Old Country.. ... ■. ■';•..;'.' But I apprehend the Socialist Land Nationalist goes much further than this, ' He holds that there Is ho hope for tho workers till all land and all capital, are under' the immediate controlof the Stato and not of individuals.': .What.does- the ."Statb",.,then mean to us here in Now Zealand? It means: a Government responsible.to. Parliament and representing a. majority^.',sometimes a bare' majority, of the people. 'If, therefore, all land were absolutely: in tho control of ,the State, all,-existing."individual titles.' being abolished,;, tho ; majority; could that could bo got out ; of tho land' to the .benefit of: themselves,; and,, to', the' exclusion', of 'the Ministry, and .that'/.means' a- number of fat. billets' hold "by ■ partisans 'of -the-; Ministry, .of the 'day/' Is this liberty p/Bastiat' has ivell; said that the freeholder is tho best bulwark of liberty. Arid what/becomes .of. the inalienable right of the individual to. the land, which they regard as an axiom? .'.'Corruption and"oppression; would grow, up and extinguish v the of the individual. - What does that staunch. Radical,; Mr.LTcEv'^aylor,-.say? '' The study of modern''political;conditions suggests that democracy is impossible. Within overy democracy the power of mltia T tive and veto is practically vested in an oligarchy." '■•."■" ■■'/.' .'':"•';".'' But let us consider. How are existing titles, to , bo. extinguished?. , (a) By .Binglctax and a gradual squeezing out? This is little better than stealing; l ßut single-tax presupposes T that other taxes must bo abolished, arid among them the/Customs. ./.But for years, rightly or wrongly, we have established industries under a protective system, and once,adopted that system cannot' bo r sot aside without producing distraction of in? dustrial employment. /All pur woollen mills and boot factories and other industries now protected would have to closo.do\yn,'as they could not compote with other countries with? out protection. . Or elso, wages would have to, be 4 greatly reduced. .''Or'(b). are all the" existing ,holding's to/ be taken over 'without compensation, oxcept perhaps for improvements? I venture- to think that'the Homo Government, from whom .the titles, virtually emanated, -would 'have 'something to say about that, and would' consent to no, Bill; embodying so revolutionary and unjust a proposal, - and any such Bill 'would' have to. be reserved by the Government for-the sanction of the Imperial' Government, /'/' • But- suppose it_ia admitted that compensation must be given, what does/it amount to? , The. total value of';land in New Zea : ,land in 1908,' as given/ in tho; Year Book, T?as as. follows:—/ ' ' Unimproved value .;.,.'.....'.;....• Improvements ...................... v 92,115,409 ;;■ '/:,:, '■'•':.' -.-, ■■;■ :/Y:'£253,446,172 Of this hug© total tho. value of the land .in boroughs 'with 'improvements .amounted to £91,150,222.;.. So,that,.-.if-/only.country land !'wero, dealt:: ;with,/'.over.. b]ie,, l hundred .and '<: sixty-two'millions ;,would./ha'vo : '/to/bo'■■ found l ,; • '-without ,'to'■■',- buy -out ■ 'existing-holders;';. Howy-is' : ' -that, . money : to-/ be-'-./found?. '; ;..Ouri../oredit|-at/> Home' , would - be : /utterly: damned; by vth'o'/very.;pro- ' posal of '.such a, thing. ;';Wherey ; l: say again, is" the' money toVbe ;fpuii'd ?'■ ■' : That, ■'. I ./think - at. the, outset., shows'/ the utter/impracticability of -the;, proposal, I -will', not; enlarge on ,' th 6 question how itho/Goydrhmont :, would . work', the/farms':; if ,tho. present, holders ..were ;• dispossessed, bccausb':it 'seems /toimo /that thej''cannot bo disposspssod./ /'Would Mr. ;. O'Eegan, who has/such-. wpuderfuKindustry, '. worthy of a better-cause,' give'.'us:"the.'-heads ;of-'a Bni;jtp': carry :put; his -wishes ;of, national- : 'isatidn?-./v.":'',;":':*;/■> ' : '77 7--7'.'' ;'''*:■-./;/ •.-•''-/; ; ,2. But hero' I ask cui. bono what evil it it/sought" to eradicate ?'■;;' What / good - for the • workers .to be gained? /If; it is land, to oc- ■ ' cupy: they'want, they can/now-get it.is 'holdjngs,. and on-terms- to. suit- them, with':hclj - ,to/ get on their /sections.' 'If :'it- isi...to":get better wages, 'I say/i that ./wages enter largolj .. into the cost; of, production,'and; ns'our pro- : duce is largely, sold abroad, wages must-h( . limited by what: production; costs.. And whe can-doubt that / individual / ownership;: mu_s< be far - more eenomical and allow/ a greatei ; .v/age margin, than agriculture; oarried on bj -the State or its /nominees? Wages :are al- | ready regulated by /law: I am almost afraic " too much regulated, but the " rccently-in- ' trpduced system, of oonoiliation- seems i t< , work well.. Is it-not better .'for the worker* to "bear the ills ..they have, than to fly. U \ others that they know not of"? I believ< the State already possesses the power. t< secure that no >'' monopoly shall prevent ai good wages being given as the competitioi : of -imports,/and the-state of outside, mar kets on which wo are dependent will per init. '; •'/ ./:; ; ,

3. It must bo remembered that our circumstances here are quite 'different ' from those at Home;'. ' There land has undoubtedly got into too few .hands, by* means of old feudal titles primo-geniture and 1 entails. Towns like Glasgow find it, difficult to get land adjoining tho city to build cottages, etc., and had to pay high '. prices for .what.'.they. get. I believe, a heavy land tax to, force subdivision is. imperative under/these circumstancos. I would have •no pity for the man who has. large possessions and sees his neighbour have need and does nothing to help' nim. ' Macaulay writes of-the bravo days of ancient Rome:—

, When none were for a party but all were ■ for the State, . , , . -. ' And the rich man helped the poor and tho .poor man loved tho great. That is an ideal to be longed for. . Later Rome crushed tlife poor. The golden' rule' that' we should db to others as would that tliey should dp to' us, is at. the, basis of all ethios. But it is also a corollary:-to this rule that no man should covet that which is his neighbour's. The worker is boupdto consider; tho employer, as the . employer is (wuhd to consider him. When; hatred, -malice, and all uiicharitablene-ss come in, - no true progress towards amelioration is made. Conciliation should lie the method on .both sides for; settling'.' differences. r . V .; ; 4. It is bccanse I am profoundly convinced that individualism is the rule of Nature for the briliging'out of that strenuous effort which has been described as tho struggle for existence, and'that it must be the. fittest who survive, that I cannot' em-, brace Socialism. But I am taught to believe that wealth is" a .trust, : that our duty is to alloviate tihough wo cannot prevent inequalities between individuals, btep. by step I think our Government:; and Legislature are doing this. I am convinced that no Social', istic theories can find produce/a state of things that-will mhlte strenuous effort, temperanco, and thrift unnecessary to the individual, or that will produce as much for the • general good and for the good of the individual himself as individualism. But there is a point where tho individual, heeds protection. and assistance, and it is then the State though cautiously and with the least possible interference with ; individual rights may. step in. , I doubt the wisdom of any "right-to-work" legislation, as it would encourage the loafer to mako-no qlfort. '■ But tlie State, when need arises, must do its utmost, it is not always very clear what,- to meet a need, and above all to provide some form of insuraneo to mitigate the fluctuations of industrial life as is now being done at Home. . 5. I have confined my remarks about land bo far mainly to agricultural land. I shall

in my next lmvo to say something about town and suburban land, which toucnos tho worker more closely in tine equation between rent'and wages, and suggests some difficult problems which require earnest consideration; 6. To sum up, I have maintained that nationalisation or. land in tho.soiise of taking it out of tho hands of tho individual-to bo worked by tho Stato is utterly impractioablo bec'auGe, 1 , .. a. Tho' power- that granted present titles 'is bound to defend them. ,b. That 'tho.'cost'.'.of extinguishment of these titles would bo utterly prohibitive. • 1 'c. That if 'it could bo done tho land could not be made in the hands of the Stato to produce anything lilco what- it. ■ does in tno-. hands of tho individual. ■ d. And that such assumption of power by the State;would mean ; the tyranny.of over, the minority^ e. That the function of the Stato is to see fair play to all.