THE LAND BILL.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 928, 22 September 1910, Page 6

THE LAND BILL.

' Sir,—The proposals.-in-the, liew -Land Bill for the compulsory. lea6e are so . uni-. .versally. condemned ithatVit is '.needless :to, further considerthem, but the proposals with regard to' the l:i.p.. tenants' tei'ms-of; purchase, being, a hesitating ad-, vance in' the right' direction, ■ is "worthy of some; remark. : Anyone dealing, with' this question in a ' judicial . spirit > must.' first 'of .all clcar. the ; air around .it by brushing away the mist and fog of political 'and party, mis-statements' with - which' it ihas become; obscured. ■ The question as to whether-.our., land policy. should bo a . leasehold or.' a freehold one is purely, a political ono, and I do not wish to .discuss,it; it . has nothing to. do 'with the' question of what is a lair and equitable bargain- for ,the; sale; of; the r freehold -'•'as" beta'pen;, the State , landlord, who has parted, with"the, landV for." '999.. 'years' at a lixed rental, and the tenant who is prepared to' buy -from them. •' 7 .. As a matter of fact, all ;that the' State .has, in this, case, for, sale is ..the capital Value of the rental, because, theequity of redemption in. 999 years' timers, not worth: 6ne farthing per acre'in cash, i Anything more; than this is a. profit to the State, and an exaction, from the tenant for the privilege of the" freehold.; How ■ the State likely to obtain: for this privilege? The tenant :holding .the lease for 999 years at a fixed rental has a .full right,.to..thc whole of the. increased value of the land he leases, and has in all cases of sale; obtained the . whole of it. The State ..could not -ask; for; .-any. •part of; it, and has never done So. That being the case, it.is useless;to ask a tenant to pay lor the freehold (which really,means the purchase of the rental) 25 per,cent of the increased value, which already belongs to him, and for whioh in many cases he has already paid an outgoing tenant. If, therefore, it. is the intention'of . our Government to adopt a freehold policy, and they really wish , the tenants to be- , come freeholders, it is obvious they must' offer the tenant terms which the.: tenant, as a sane, business man, can accept. Had' the Bill proposed to sell at 25 per ,cent above the. original value, it would '-' be nearer the. mark, and 'there might 'be some hope of business. being done, but with an addition of. 25 per oent of the present value. over. and above, the capital' value of the rental,.the;Government may bo quite sure no tenant will; buy, and the : Bill may as well be buried.—l am, eto.,' W. I. BIRCH. • September 30, 1910.- : . ■ . -