The Dominion. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 11. 1913. THE FREEHOLD AND AGGREGATION.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1852, 11 September 1913, Page 6

The Dominion. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 11. 1913. THE FREEHOLD AND AGGREGATION.

While there may be room for differences of opinion as to details, the broad principle laid down in the Massey Government's Land Bill must meet with the approval of all who have given any serious thought to the lines on which the future development of this country must proceed. The principle we refer to is the settlement of the land in small holdings; in other words, the building up of a race of small farmers owning their own freeholds. It is the custom of the opponents of the Reform party to charge the members of the party with being the friends of the big landowners, anxious to prevent the cutting up of big estates. It is a parrot-cry which hasbeen handed down from a bygone day, and is persisted in despite the most convincing proof of its dishonesty. Tho Reform party, in and out of Parliament, has for years past declared itself to be in favour of tho freehold, with limitation of area. It has also declared itself in favour of the subdivision of large estates for closer settlement purposes where such subdivision can be advantageously carried out. Now.that it has come into office, the party is proving the honesty of its professions by carrying out its pledges. Last session this Government, which its opponents say favours the "squatters" and the holding of land in large areas, brought in an increase of the Graduated Land Tax, which imposed increased burdens on the big landowners. It also placed on the Statute Book amendments to the Land Laws of the Dominion, in every case favourable ■to the small landowner. In no single instance did it attempt to legislate in the interests of the owners of largo estates. It has now brought forward the second instalment of its land policy, and again in every amendment of the law which it proposes to make, it- is tho interests of closer settlement and of the small farmer—which means the (interests of the country as a whole —that have -been placed, in the forefront. The purpose running' all through the Bill is- to afford means of facilitating and encouraging the closer settlement of the lands of the Dominion.

There are many clauses in the Bill which aro calculated to prove helpful in this direction, especially in the way of making the conditions more attractive to those engaged in farming pursuits. We propose, however, on the present occasion, to pass over these, and to deal with two questions which are of very great importance, and which are closely related. Tliesc aro the granting of Crown tenants the right to the ireehold—as enacted last year, and as it is proposed to further extend this year to holders of lands for settlement leases—and the question of aggregation. One of the arguments advanced by those who object to the State selling the freehold to settlers on Crown lands is that the moment the State part-s with the freehold aggregation oommences. That is to say, the State sells the land in small holdings to the small farmer, and the bigger man comes along and buys him out, and possibly secures half a dozen adjoining holdings, which he converts into a large holding, and so defeats the policy wlncu is considered to be in the best interest of the country. There is always a certain amount of risk of this sort of thing happening. As a matter of fact, it has happened to a very considerable extent under the Continuous Ministry during the past twenty years. But the Reform Government in the Land Bill 'just introduced has made provision which is likely to exercise a very wholesome fcheck on aggregation so far as any lands which may in future bo alienated from the Crown are concerned. There again the lie is given to those who assert that tho sympathies of the Government arc wrapped up in the large land-holding class, and not with the small farmer. What practical steps did the Continuous Ministry take during its twenty odd years of office to prevent aggregation? The question of aggregation is, no doubt-, a difficult . one to deal with effectively, but the Massey Government has shown tho sincerity of its professions in the matter of limitation of area by introducing definite proposals, designed not only to enable the gradual bursting up of large estates to be earned out, but also to prevent aggregation. It lias answered its •critics vv miuuver \vl\ich discredits uVtalv) Uw. ca.u\\iaie,ft of misrepve- , smiUnAaow vu\d (ako.luiod vvtucA has Vieeti directed against the fand policy o£ the Reform party for years past, but wlwt is of move importance to the country, it has demonstrated beyond all question its determination to press forward with an active and practical policy designed to settle tfeo la.qdfl oi tho Dominion .with a

contented body of small farmers owning their own holdings, and producing from their land the utmost within its capacity to yield. No policy could better advance tho general prosperity of the people of New Zealand, town and country alike; and no policy is more calculated to enable the Dominion to maintain its place in tho forward march of nation;.