THE LAND QUESTION

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 158, 29 March 1919, Page 8

THE LAND QUESTION

ANOTHER VIEW. Sir,—"X" in your issue of March 25 waxes wrathful over the fact that the .land values have increased by nearly forty-eight mill mils between the years of 11)13 and 11118. The fiict that land values have been boosted up by, say, oC48;000,000 during the last half' dozen years should lie good news for the Socialists, as it means the piling up of taxation on the land-owners, both for land tax and borough or county rates, whether the land is bringing in an adequate return or not. If handled in the' way that "X" advocates, then good-bye to any increase in values for the future, and consequently no further increase of rates and taxes, with the result that "X" and co. would ultimately find that they would have a greater burden than eve to carry. ' New Zealand does not owe its progress to the paid labourers as such, but to the labour of tile many settlers who havo carved out a home in the back-blocks for themselves and their descendants. These arc the genuinelabourors of tho country, and these are the workers whom "X" and his friends would dishonestly deprive of their homes aftc the death of the present owner. Does ho expect these people to meekly submit, to such a proposition? After confiscation of tho land "X" advocates the old gag of leasing with periodical revaluation. There is no need to go out.side of tho Dominion for an illustration. nf the fruits of such a policy. In Otago there are some millions of acres of pasloral Crown lands held under this tenure. These lands arc usually let for twentyone vcars, and it may be said that -luring tho last seven vcars of tho term thotenant practically allows everything to go back, so that he may not be rack-rented for the next term. It then takes another seven years or eo of the fresh term to pull up arrears, allow the grasses to recuperate, etc. What has been tho result of this policy ? Those lands to-day do not carry one-half the stock they nul fifty Years ago, and the rents derived are pro'bablv much less than half the amount of fifty'years since. This is one of tho causes' why Dunedin, once the leading cilv in the Dominion, is now fourth on tho list. The difference between tho freeholder and the leaseholder may bo snmmarised thus: A man who has a freehold tries to see what ho can make of it, whilo the leaseholder only holds the land for what ho can make olf it. Only Hie difference of an "f." but I hat little distinction means millions in the aggregate., wealth of the country in the end. All well-wishers of the country should enconr-a-o the subdivision of the unnecessarily lave estates, and the placing of as many workers on the land as possible under the most nttraciivo tenure. Every worker so placed is thus encouraged to do Ins liikl-, and is likely lo uphold the best interests of his country in a lime of stress.—l am, etc., .1. OIfCIftSTON. Wellington, March 27, 191 H.