GOOD PROGRESS MADE.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1881, 15 October 1913, Page 6

GOOD PROGRESS MADE.

The Opposition are to be congratulated on the manner in which they settled down to business yesterday on the Land Bill. There was quite a lot of talk on some of the clauses, and much of it was on hackneyed lines, but it was not in the nature of deliberate obstruction. It is to bo hoped that this may be taken as an indication that the more moderate and reasonable members of the party have been able to convince the extremists of the folly of their obstructive tactics, and that, for a time at least, the business of Parliament will procced in a reasonable manner. The most striking feature of the_ progress of the Bill through Committee—excluding, of-course, the period of wilful obstruction—has been the size of tho majorities which the Government has had in support of tho various clauses of the Bill. It is most significant that, in spite of the efforts put forward to prevent the Bill becoming law, its opponents were hopelessly outnumbered whenever a test of strength in the division lobby took place. It is possible that the wild talk indulged in by some of the obstructionists may have misled some of the public as to the actual nature of certain of the clauses of the Bill. There is, of course, no attempt made in the measure, to abolish the leasehold. That form of tenure will still remain for the benefit of those who, having little capital, cannot purchase the freehold of the land they take up. What is provided is that all Crown tenants outside of those holding leases of endowment lands shall have the option of securing the freehold. The leasehold will still be used bv many as a stepping stone -to tho freehold. The policy of ■ the Government is, broadly speaking, to build up a nation of small freeholders. The opponents of the Government, of course, allege that the purpose of Ministers is to assist the big landowners. If that were'actually the purpose in view the Government have a most extraordinary way of going about it. They increase tho graduated tax; provide added facilities for the purchase and breaking up of big estates; devise a special provision to prevent reaggregation—and then are accused of being in favour of large holdings and anxious only to protect the interests of the large landholder. Unfortunately for those who persist in maligning the Government on the above lines, the Bill is a simple measure, and anyone who chooses to study its provisions can see for themselves how little truth there is in the allegations made. It is a curious thing that some of the leaseholders who are finite sincere in their belief that the form of tenure they advocate is the only one worth having will persist in falling into the error that if the land is disposed of as leaseholds future generations will be able to secure holdings, whereas if it is sold they will not. They appear to have a confused sort of idea that leaseholds can bo let over and over again to different persons. They do not seem to be able to appreciate the fact that if the land is cut up into small freeholds it will accommodate, just as many people as if it were cut up into small leaseholds, and that if provision is made to prevent aggregation—as is being done—future generations will have quite as man.v holdings available to them under the freehold as they would have had under the leasehold tenure.