PROVINCIALISM.

Dunstan Times, Issue 322, 26 June 1868, Page 3

PROVINCIALISM.

POLICY OF THE OPPOSITION. (To the Editor of the Dunstas Times.) Sir,—The Session of the Provincial Council having now terminated, it may be useful to take a review of its transactions, to glance at the results, and point out their probable effect ami innuenceon the prospects of the future. About manners of honorable members little need be said. The associations they suggest are so graphically characteristic that the idea "Bear-garden," " Rat-pit," "Dog-light" must occur spontaneously to every observer : nor about morals, because it is also palpably evident that senatorial virtue is too frail to resist the allurement of official fascinations, and view with impartial anil discriminating eye the real chalv.cter and aspects of political phenomena. In these respects commentis unnecessary, and I will therefore confine my rema\ks to | the consideration of the principles involved in [the proceedings their operation and consequences. Of the questions that have been agitated those having relation to the "Land Policy" are of chief importance, not only because these questions are of vital interest in all parts of the Colony, but because they are questions with which it is the legitimate ami espoeial function of Provincial Institutions to deal, and with the necessity for the consideration of which their existence is essentially identified. It appears to be generaMy admitted that the Waste-Land's Act inherits the common infirmity of all Legislative offspring—a coach and six can be driven through it—it can bo worked to any system of policy. This perhaps, urn'or responsible administration, is its principal merit, as it affons scope for liberality of interpretation, and a popular policy. Both the questions respecting proclamation of Hundreds, and those concerning the Wakatip Puns embody essentially the same principles, and the points of difference between the opposition or popular party, and the executive are referred to the question—on which of the two antagonistic lines of policy shall the regulations for the occupation of the public lands be framed ? The opposition on the one hand aim to establish universal commonage for pastoral purposes; and on the oilier, the executive government, pursuing its ordinary policy, contends for the appropriation to leaseholders of the rights of occupation. By one system, each flock and herd will have a right of run over the whole By the other, the range of each is limited—by prescribed boundaries to particular tracks. What says reason and experience on this subject ? In the early periods of Australian settlement, the runs were not defined not legally recognized as existing. Each proprietor of stock located himself, or fixed his station, where feed was abundant and unappropriated. This proceeding shows that naturally or necessarily a principle of localization was voluntarily adopted, and con. sequently considered politic or essential. So long as the public domain was only partially utilized, no evil effects resulted, but when flocks and herds increased in magnitude and number, and the whole territory came into requisition, there resulted a state of bucolic anarchy, which may be summarily expressed as "bellum omn'um contra omnes. " Such grasping of tracts of country and assertion of pastoral rights, driving off cattle, damaging runs, and interminable squabbles and contention rendered it necessary to define the limits of each stockowners' occupation and establish general

regulations.. - For-this purpose the Land commissioners were appointed and licenses for right of depasture were issued. Similar evil consequences will follow the application of the principle of unlimited occupation in this colony, with less probability of establishing remedial measures. The question of universal commonage for grazing purposes will become a political question, and how it will be settled it is not difficult to divine, when farmers and dairymen want free grazing ground, and diggers and colonists of all descriptions own horses or cattle, or goats or pigs, which have to depend on the public lands for subsistence. Of course the stock will pay an ''assessment, " and the public revenue be for a time augmented; but—mark the consequence. It depends upon a tax—a tax which at present is freely paid for the preferential right of occupation; but which, under the commonage system, will confer no exclusive priviledges, fand will become increasingly odnoxious, as the profits of stock keeping become less remunerative. Then will all the stock argumentsof popularity—hunting polit cians be arrayed against it. A tax upon production falling upon particular classes, pressing injuriously upon the smaller settlers, &c, and the dog having got a bad name democracy will hang hiin. The assessment on stock will be totally abolished. Thus the policy of the Opposition tends to annihilate that portion of the Land revenus derived from pastoral occupation. In a future communication I will take into consideration the character and tendency of the Land policy of the Executive Govern ment. I am &c?, COLONUS. Cromwell, June 22. 1808.