The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING GISBORNE, OCT. 18, 1906.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIII, Issue 1904, 13 October 1906, Page 2

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING GISBORNE, OCT. 18, 1906.

J The Qof/erh.ment has backed down on { its Land BUI. This is the most cheerI l.ug piece of news the country has received for maDy a year, for it clearly shows that the Ministry has recognised that its mein policy measure is opposed to the wishes of the country. In ordering the retreat of his party after the first skirmish, Sir Joseph Ward, like most other gonerals, will not acknowledge that thu compulsory movement was a defeat; buc although the Ministerial citadel has not been actually captured by the .opposing army, t he j fact that his retirement was, compulsory is sufficient to constitute a defeat. With the best possible grace tho urbane Premier endeavored to convince his faithful followers that ic

w«a merely a tactical mnvo with a view to ultimately encompassing the enemy anil defeating hi'! forcos ; hut, like poor Kniirnpatkin in Mauenuriu, w)io wan always “advancing northwards” when

'’yama’s forces woro chasing him, General Waul isronlly retreating frem the pursuing forcos of the anti-Billitos. ;V week or so ago ho was determined to show battle upon the floor of the House where hitherto ho had had an unbeaten record ; but tho alarming number of deserters from his ranks

that were daily crossing to tho other side mudo it impossible for him to hold tho fort, so with dexterous prudence

io deeidod to transfer tho battlo to

otlior plucos by a tactical retreat that is, as wo havo said, a dofoat in reality.

Having uttorly failed to maintain the solidity of his army, aud fiading himself (lesortod by many a hitherto staunch lighter, and with a further threatened stampede from his ranks, his plight was practically hopeless of success in a closo attack, so what could he do but surrender or adopt the tactics of DoWet, of which Now Zealanders know something ? 1 was a groat general; but whon ho was really conquered he would not admit dofoat or surrender, preferring rather to disporso his remnant of a forco over tho country and ovado capture if posnblo but to do all tho harm ho could meanwhile. Sir Joseph is now announced to omulate his deeds by peppering tho onomy from various vautago points on a stumping tour of tho country in tho hope that he may bo able to check tho stampede and gain new recruits. No doubt bo will bo pursued by his conquerors, and if Lord Kitchener’s block-house system

does not succeed in tho capture of the fugitivo genoral and his remnant of adherents, tliero are other entanglements to bo found in tho Land Bill that must ultimately cause his surrender. Puff, pulf, puff will now be heard from every hall and meetinghouso throughout the country in defence of tho fugitive force, and bomb, bomb, bomb from their pursuers, so the country is in for a lively time politically. In the skirmishing that will go on, as in actual warfare, there will be a great deal of feinting in order to delude or humor unwary voters; but the issue is clear and should not be lost sight of. It is one of freehold versus leasehold, and we have already shown that there is not a logical argument to be advanced against tho former. Tho very party that is dow pretending to be so solidly convinced that the leasehold form of land tenure is the right and only proper one, is the identical party that only last year cheerfully granted the freehold rights to one section of the people. What has since occurred to cause such a sudden and emphatic change of opinion ? Gan anyone give a satisfactory answer ? The only admissible answer is just simply nothing, and this is the only ammunition the Government party will have to fight with. In such extremities they will have to manufacture something tr make a pretence of battle, and the false allurements of a ninety per cent payment on a real leasehold is the new explosive they have manufactured under the name of a “practical freehold.” But will anyone believe it? Simple people may, but wise men, never. The real title of the Lind Bill should have been “ The Advances by Settlers on Crown Lands Bill,” for the ninety per cent would in reality be simply a loan to tho Government on the security of the Crown lands on what is called fiat mortgage, at a less rate of interest than the settler could obtain on other investments. Where then is the advantage of the Bill ? The advantage is all on the side of the Crown, and the only advantage to the settler would be the proud privilege of being allowed to call his temporary holding a “practical freehold” which it really is not. As a piece of class legislation, too, it stands out as a monumental insult to the country settlor, whom the Government party want to deprive of the rights which they granted only last year to town workers Wo do not believe that town workers are proud of the distinction either, or that they are so unfair as to thick that they should enjoy .legislative privileges which their neighbors in the country are expressly denied, for there are workers in the country also who want to make homes for themselves and their families, and who havo the sincere sympathy of their fellow-workers in the towns. Yet the terms “town” and “country” here used to fit in with the legal phraseology do not correctly express the position, for the distinction is really between tho cities (where alone workers’ dwellings are obtainable) and the rest of the colony. A worker in Wellington can obtain his dwelling

from the Government on freehold tenure, while the worker in Gisborne or New Plymouth will probably never get the chance. Was ever such arrant humbug conceived by the brain of man ? And yet this is the whole pith and kernel of the Government policy upon which they hope to subsist in a struggle against public opinion.