THE LAND BILL.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2040, 27 March 1907, Page 4

THE LAND BILL.

SPEECH BY ATTORNEYGENERAL. AMEN DM ENTS 11J N TED AT. The Attorney-General (the lion. Dr. Findlay) opened his Land Rill campaign boforo a largo gathering at the Theatre Royal, Now Plymouth. Ho said he proposed Lo first discuss the most prominent ot political questions—the land question touch on native lands, and the colony’s general outlook. Dr. Findlay said that the land question could no more ho settled oi elucidated by shouting ‘‘freehold than by shouting “laud nationalisation,” nor could it be settled by nonsensical cries that the existing 1 roeholds wore in a parlous plight, that existing rights were in danger, and that the Government of tho day woio a reckless pack of spoliators and icvolutionarics. The Government, he said, might have much to answer for, but in connection with the Land Rill, the head and front of their offending was that they would preserve tho unsold poor remnant of Crown lauds, and preserve it, mainly for the sake, in the days to come, cf those who had passed through a life of toil into declining years of poverty, and would preserve it for those who had the misfortune to need our hospitals and charitable aids, and for the equipment of our children for the race Of life.

A PERPLEXING QUESTION. The cry that the Government sought to destroy the freehold anti other alarmist predictions were, he said, idle nonsense, that settled nothing except the insincerity of those who uttered them. How best to deal with our national estate perplexed every statesman worthy of the name. It perplexed us to-day, and it porplexed us mainly because of the past mistakes. It had a history mainly of the sacrifice of the people’s interest. The .history might be read in all its melancholy lessons from the 52 Acts and ordinances in force in the colony, when the late Sir John McKenzie passed his Land Bill in 1892 and swept them out of existence. It was a history which gave the key to more social trouble, intrigue, and manoeuvre than any legislation that liad ever been passed in days gone by. Not once, but often, tho land question and our land laws had set class .against class, making the poor hate the rich, and the rich fear the poor. The record of our land legislation and land administration was in a large measure the record of mistakes which might well make ns pause before we agreed to part with another acre of the Crown’s estate. Ho referred to the munificent endowments in the shape of Crown lands which were handed over to the Responsible Government of New Zealand years ago, and to the loss and injustice to the nation which bad laws, tlio want of laws, and the evasion and maladministration of laws, made so possible and painfully visible. For generations yet to conic the people of this colony would have to pay for past mismanagement and the reckless disposal of the people’s estate.

“FUSS” AND VOTING ROWER. Their opponents, he said, do not trouble themselves much about the practice and history of the past, about the lessons to be gained, from tho results of early mistakes, or the mistakes of other colonies. They were practical men, and would let the future take care of itself, but a practical man on the land question was usually one who interpreted the State’s right and the future public needs by his own immediate interest. They did not halt between two opinions. They were cocksure, knowing well that what personally suited them must suit the country. Wo had just now the extreme nationalises shouting their cry, the extreme freeholders shouting that the freehold was in danger. They had Crown tenants clamouring for the freehold, but the biggest class interested in the land question were the landless people of this colony. They were doing little or no shouting, but the effectiveness of their votes would not be reduced by that fact. The whole number of rural freeholders in the colony holding more than five acres each, was under 60,000, although they owned all the best land and about one-third of the whole country, while the whole of the Crown tenants of every kind and class, who had not already got tho right to purchase, numbered 16,500. On the rolls at the last election there were 476,473 voters. They could not safely judge the numerical strength of a party hv the fuss it made, even though it .was a Farmers’ Union. One was often in inverse proportion to tho other. While he admitted that the mere possession of a majority was no proof of a righteous cause, the question / must be viewed from a national/standpoint, and not from that of any particular class. Tho. Government recognised that the farming ntteVest was one of the most potential in tlio colony, and it might have stayed ! its hand and let matters drifts thus making sure that it did not/run counter to the potential influence of! country parties. The /Government, however, would not have peace at a price like that, but preferred to face the question strenuously and courageously.

THE LIMITATION PROPOSALS

The desirableness of subdividing for close settlement, he-said, was now conceded. The only question raised was how should it be brought abofft? Tho Government were regarding that, and were frankly prepared to take advice and if necessary change the material-clause. It was said that the provision in the Land Bill that an individual owner holding more than £50,000 worth unimproved value must put the surplus on the market within ten years was clumsy, tyrannical, and inoperative. Mr. Massey had suggested an increase of tlio graduated land tax as (lie best means of limitation, and if the Opposition would join the Government in effecting that end they would soon have a subdivision of tlio large estates. The Government was going lo break up the big estates, and effectively prevent such accumulations in the future. The limit of . £50,000 unimproved value for future buyers was also said to he impracticable. He agreed that it' the Government's proposal was not effective, then by all means they should have a graduated land tax.

LANDS FOR SETTLEMENT TENANTS. I lie question was raised that tho Government ought to give tlio freehold to the tenants under tlio Lands for Settlement Act. He frankly declared that he could not support such an argument. In the first place the land was taken from private owners, in many cases wrested compulsorily from them, and it was illogical and unjust to sell this- land to others in a few years. (Applause and dissent.) The Government had done enough for those settled under the Lands for Settlement Act, and each of those settlers lost the country an average of £1200._ An evidence of how they had striven was'afforded by the goodwills being asked and paid to-day for these holdings. It was unfair to the rest of the colony and the landless to ask for still further benefits. The Land Bill offered these tenants the land at the price the unimproved freehold bore to-day. Had not the time come, he asked, to set apart reserves as endowments, apart altogether from the question of granting freehold to any man 7 Dr. Findlay went on to ask what were the different class influenced, prejudiced, or affected by the Land Bill. The big landowners feared the Bill, only because they did not want to subdivide their estates. Their object mainly

was a selfish one. Tho speaker warned the small settler that tho alliance proffered liy the big landowner, ostensibly in the freehold cause, was not a moral and true alliance. The land for settlement tenants had not the arguments of tho lease-in-per-petuity settlers to hack their claims. Tho latter asked for the freehold at tho original valuation, hut some of tlio freeholders were in favor only of tho freehold at the present value. Both proposals would ho defeated by the aid of the divided freeholders. Tho 999 years’ lease was to some extent a concession at the. expense of tho colony, hut they now asked for more.

“BILL WILL PASS IN SOME MODIFIED FORM.” Tho Land Bill, he said, would pass this session in some modified form. The repurchase system was rapidly reaching a. position of almost impracticable difficulties. The land could not he purchased at a true valuation through the Compensation Courts. Some other means would have to be provided for repurchasing, for the land for settlement scheme and the lease-in-perpetuity tenants were promised practically the freehold. The latter had four options—(l) To have the freehold, (2) to have the freehold for 00 years, (3) to keep the la ml for the present terms, and (4) a new lease for 66 years, with the right of renewal. The State was the great creator of values, and was entitled to have the interest of the unearned increment. Of five millions spent for the purchase of estates, three millions were unearned increment. He joined issue with those who said there could be no inducement to go oil the land hut the freehold. The State could give sueli a security as to encourage the host class of settlor to go into the haekldocks. (Most of those who were agitating for the freehold for the Crown tenants had no intention of going on Crown lands. The moving force was the big landowners. There would he during the next three years more freehold for small settlers than there had been during the past 20 years. (Applause.) This would lie accomplished to a great extent by bringing the Maori land into use. He concluded by announcing that the records of the public revenue this year were greater than ever.

A motion “That this meeting thanks the Attorney-General for his able address, and expresses its confidence in the Ministry, with the hope that the Ministry will materially modify the provisions of the Land Bill,” was carried after some discussion.