MARE'S NESTS & MISREPRESENTATION.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1680, 21 February 1913, Page 4

MARE'S NESTS & MISREPRESENTATION.

' It is becoming quite amusing io note the extreme anxiety of certain of ,tho anti-Reform ijournals to fiiid somo; cause for complaint with the' Massey Government. Tho eagerness' with . which. they . seize, oh "the man with a grievance" and exploit his complaint and- twist and-distort the facts iii an endeavour'to build up a case says a great"deal for their zeal and ingenuity, if it docs little credit ,to their sense of honesty and fair play. No doubt if they would exercise'a little patience they would find the Massey Government, like - all Governments, is liable to make mistakes, and they could at the proper tinio and with some justice enjoy themselves to their hearts' content belabouring the Ministry ; but they afo 1 feeling their position too keenly] to exercise the necessary self-restraint, and in consequence are making themselves somewhat ridiculous. One of their latest mare's ncsts4s in connection with the sale of a section • in. Southland. A few mornings ago a, terrific onslaught was made on the Government because in the case' of two men who balloted for a. section, one who already held certain.land was successful. It was sought to make it appear that the Government was favouring a flourishing landowner at the expense of an unfortunate'landless citizen, eager to take up a holding. The fa.cts have already been published, and the injustice of the attack exposed. The landowner applicant held certain, land which did not suit him, and he desired to change his holding. The law specially provides for such cases. If the landowner undertakes to dispose of the land he owns within a specified time he can compete in the Dallot for a new section, and it was quite, in conformance with the law, therefore, that the particular landowner in the cak: under review was allowed to compete. Moreover, as it happenod he was the more /suitable eettler, and, as the Commissioner for Crowii Lands has shown, it was better for the country that he should get this land than that his fellow competitor should secure it; and when the ballot resulted in the better man being successful it was a good thing for the country. Without stopping to inquire into the full facts, the ahtiRefortn journals shrieked furiously against the Government. Their conoern regarding this.small section was Almost pathetic, Nothing was bad enough for the Government—which, by the way, probably knew nothing of the transaction at all until it was comploted. And now it transpires that the Department did the very best thing possible for the country; that the law was fairly, and properjy administered; and, most amusing of all, that the offending "landowner" who secured the section had at the time all the fuss was being made already disposed of his previous holding, in conformity with the terms on which he took up the section. . The curious thing about the anti-Reform journals just now . is that they do not appear to realise that these tactics only discredit themselves and discount the value of such criticism as they might reasonably pass on tho Government. One of them—certainly tho most recklessly inaccurate of them all—informed its rcadors yesterday morning with reference to the rcccnt New Zealand loan that "wlion the ledger is carefully balanced we shall he lucky if we pet more than £92 or £03- for each £100 delienture, while tho interest and charges will not fall far short of five per cent." This assertion is the veriest noimeiMe, There is not a shadow of jimlJliealioi) for the opinions expressed. Tho l'oan will certainly cost less than 4 .J per cent., and in all probability leas than -1 1-3 per cent.; hut it apparently suits the purpose of the paper referred to to misrepresent the position to its readera reKardleM of tho exposure, which must in due course follow. Tho Re«

form Ministry will be fortunate indeed if it hns to face nothing worse tlia.n such stupid tactics as these.