FARMERS’ UNION AND POLITICS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1591, 23 October 1905, Page 3

FARMERS’ UNION AND POLITICS.

QUESTIONS TO CANDIDATES.

FREEHOLD TENURE.

At tho meeting of the Gisborne branob of tho Farmers’ Union on Saturday tho President (Mr W. D. Lysnar) road tho following quostions forwarded by tho Provinoial Secretary, being thoso which tho Colouial Executive had dooidod to put to Parliamentary candidates

" (1.) Will yon voto undor any oiroumstances for leases in perpetuity, tenants being Ranted tho right of acquiring iho freehold at the original valuation, plus the addition of an amount to equalise I thole payments (with oompouud interest

added) with O.R.P. tenants? I " (2.) Will you vote against any alteraI lion to the prosent oounty franchise ? I " (8.) Will you press at every oooaslon I possible the necessity of Government asI stating tho Boards to further rural odaeaJ tion ?" I Mr Btrroll: Are these the threo policy quostions ? [ Tho Chairman : Yes. It would have boon more satisfactory if Mr Clayton had sent them a copy of what ho had roooived i from iho South. In reply to Mr Bllham, tho Chairman

said ho had understood the Colonial Executive fixed one question and the looal executive another. Mr Birroll said .be first question meant that if they got tho land at a popperoorn rental they were now to get the freehold for the same. Tho Chairman : I take it that the whole period of payments and compound interest will be gone into. Mr J. Price said they oould not deoido anything until they knew what the Hoaso

Intended doing in the matter. The Chairman said tho House had passed certain resolutions. Questions were to be asked of candidates. Mr Gallagher: The questions are to get the views of the people to place before tho House later on.

I The Chairman said the first question I was not very olear, and at his request, and with tho approval of the meeting, Mr Bell was deputed to go to Mr Clayton and ask for tho use of the original letter for a short time. On his return Mr Bell said that Mr Clayton would not give the letter, bat said that the one sent to the branch was a copy of the qnestions submitted. The Chairman said that as there was some doubt about the matter, Mr Clayton's reply seemed to him to be discourteous. There oould be no possible harm in letting them have the letter to I read. I

Mombers: None whatever. Mr Bilham : Who holds it baok ? Tho Chairman : Mr Lissant Clayton. Mr Bell r He told me those were the original questions in the letter. Mr Cameron : He would not give the letter ?—that settles it.

The Chairman : We aro entitled to it beqause the matter is placed in our hands and not in those of the Exeoutive. Mr Frioe asked if the letter had not been sent straight to the chairman. The Chairman : It was sent to the provinoial secretary. Mr Price : Is he not satisfied to let these letters.lie on the table 9 The Chairman.: They ore supposed to bo available for the Union. I spent a good deal of time myself over the matter. I went to his office, but could get no information. Voice : “ You'll get none there.” As to the first question Mr Walsh asked how could a man retain a lease in perpetuity if he were given the right of pur- j chase ? Why should they interfere with the Government in tho matter ? Why should they sanction the land being taken from the people of New Zealand for the benefit of the few ?

Mr Birrell: Robbing the people of New Zealand.

Mr Walsh said that, as Mr Seddon had pointed oat, if the State gave away these rights it would have to give away other rights. Take, for instance, the reserve on which a valuable building was being erected by Mr Hall. Wonld he not be entitled to ask for the same right as other leaseholders were asking for in the matter of the freehold ? When they commenced to give away State rights many questions were opened np. When a man by choice took up a lease in perpetuity what more should he want ? But when people fonnd they had got the best of it ( they wanted to tarn round and say the lands should no longer belong to tho State. .Mr Birrell said the first question was the real test; the others were very small. Could any right-thinking man vote for doing such a wrong to the people of New Zealand ? A contract should be a coniraot all the world over. These people went into it with their eyes open, and now when they were in a position to obtain the freehold, they deliberately asked sanction to break their contract with the people of New Zealand. He would never be a party to that for the Farmers' Union or any other union. It had been stated by odb of the candidates that it was a question for the farmers to decide. It was a national question in which everyone bad an interest.

Mr Parker said Mr Birrell seemed to think that it was proposed to grant these people some great concession. They paid the full value at the time they took up the land. Why should they prevent a man because he was perhaps unable when he took up the land to acquire the freehold now, doing so after he had spent so many years of his life in the backblocks ? He was a believer in the freehold; he believed it gave a man a much greater incentive than a leasehold. He did not see that any great concession was being asked for. He took it that the proposal applied chiefly to the backblocks. Mr Gallagher: The tiller of the soil should have the right to make it his own subject to oertain restrictions. The Chairman: Mr Gallagher has struck the nail on the head. Mr Birreil said he must not be under* stood as objecting to the freehold, but he did object to the original value being taken as a basis for giving these people a preemptive right to the detriment of their fellow-men. Mr Gallagher: We won't have that. Mr Parker: Piovision is made in the question that a man should pay on the same basis as on an original optional right of purchase. The Chairman said he thbught it would be made clearer if they had been given the letter and not moreljr the extract. If they assumed that it was proposed to give to a maD with a lease fa* p ; p uity the right to acquire the land as his ouu on the same basis as if ho had o iginaily had the optional right of purdiaso. nunc of them had I a right to cavil K t it if they brl-ved in the freehold, winch they were pledged to. It was idle to talk oi .obbing the people of tbc land whore these loaeci were grained for 999 yours. It was almost giviog the land away to lease it for that period. It had been clearly Bhown that if those 999 year leases were fipnyortsd into freehold it would be good business for fho State. He did not bold that tho freehold should be granted at the original value ; there should be something Deiween that and to-day’s value that would be fair to the State a 3 landlord and to the toDant. It had been stated the tenants-had gone into this with their eyes open sod were now agitating for that to which they had no right. It was not the tenants who had raised the cry ; it was tho outcome of Mr Scddon’s wretched Pair Bent Bill, introduced some years ago. It had beon complained that the tenants were getting too goad a thing, tt nd that there must be some alteration, The tenants then said :“ If you W ant to make any alteration give us the right of purchase." It had boen said that the small grazing runs should be altored owing to the queetion of rating and so on, I and people said if there wae aDy alteration there should be some kind of compensation in regard to the tenure. He took it that | there was no intention to break existing agreements. It was merely the fixing of a foie basiß on whiob tenants could acquire the freehold, or continue as they were. The question of county franchise was very important, and ha thought they would all agree to that. Mr Walsh: Arc we not to formulate some questions ? The Chairman: We are io the'dark unless we got that letter. He assumed there would be a fourth question, but they bod better leave that an open matter for the present.

The Chairman's suggestion was ogrood to,

On the motion of Mr 8011, socondod by Mr Gallagher, it wbb rosolvod that the dologatos meet on Wednesday ovoulnq, after tho Show.

' A qnoation wa* raised as to qualification, a fear boing exprossod that Bomo branches had recently organised simply for electioneering purposes. On the motion of Mr Walsh, seoondsel by Mb Stoelo, It was rosolvod “ that eiijf i branoh that has not already paid iLoie i contribution to tho oxooutivo oannot, ao-1 oording to tho ruloß, bo roprosontod at tho I conference," I

I Mr Piirltor: Will any resolution passed I by one branob bo binding on anothor ? I Tho Ohairmau: Yes, because wo aro tho I branoh moving in tho matter; it is not in I tho hands of tho oxooutivo. It is loft to I j this branoh by the colouial oxcoutiyo. I I Mr Steolo again brought up tho question I I of tho promisod Government grant for the I Haugaroa-Tabora road of £SOO. Ho had I not uotioed tho amount on tho Estimates, I ' Tho Chairman . said ho thought he had I soon it there, and tho matlor was loft to I tho Chairman and Mr Stoole to look up. j;