THE LAND BILL.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2121, 2 July 1907, Page 4

THE LAND BILL.

- ■■■ ; ———

APPROVAL, AND CONDEMNATION.

The -pronouncement oftho Minister of Lands on tlio decision of the Government to submit its land proposals in throb soparuto measures , lias been freely referred to in tlio 'columns oftho press. A few loading opinions on botli sides aro appended:

LYTTELTON; TIMES. It lias been open, secrot for Bomo months past . (says r tho Ly ttelton Times), that tho .Government intended . dividing tlio Land' .Bill into throe separato. measures. Indeed, in.:his speech at .Auckland on. the. eve of hiß . departure’; fori FLondon, Sir Joseph Ward indicated that this courso mould ho .followed. The. announcement Mr.i MoNab.made at Stratford, therefore, comes as lio-surpnso. Theendowment.proposals, and the limitation proposals will be removed from tho'origmaf Bill, and will bo -embodied in separate moasures wlioro they can’bo discussed apart from tho ton-Yii-o question and the minor amend-, merits to the existing legislation. Wo nood scarcely say that we entirely “approve of this arrangement. If it had Boon adopted in the first instance-it would- liavo prevented a good deal, of misapprehension concerning tho Government's intentions, and would have enabled the country to form a bettor idea of their direction and scope. It must not bo supposed that the Government has abandoned tho vital features of its policy. That gibe will be revived by the Opposition this morning with redoubled emphasis and energy, but it will'fall flat onough when the new position is understood by the electors. The endowment proposals and the limitation proposals will remain as much roalities as they ever were. . Tho substitution of a “stiff” graduated tax for the limitation clauses will get rid of more tlian half the objections that have been urged against Mr. McNab’s Bill. The Farmers’ Union will have to ro-writo tho best part of its pamphlet, and- Mr. Massey will have to prepare a fresh indictment without the assistance of the brightest intellects of his own side of polities. : Mr. Herries and Mr. William Fraser have both ex-

pressed tlieir approval of the graduated tax, the former most emphatically/ and they aro not likely to repudiate tlieir opinions, as some other politicians have done, for the” more sake of party. It remains to he seen what the Government’s “stiff” graduated tax will amount to, but wo take it that Air. McNab, having indicated lurid of the unimproved value of £15,000 as the maximum an individual should hold, will make that the point for beginning the soverity of the imposition. THE PRESS. Tlio first point wo (tho Christchurch Press) notice is the abandonment of the Minister’s bluster of last session about standing or falling by the Bill. He came down to tho House with tho air of one who had settled the land question for all tiino. As soon as tho crudoness and futility of tho Bill ; wore exposed in tlio House, lie very obediently took it back, us tho American politician did his principles, with the intimation that if it didn’t suit it could bo altered. During the recess he has anxiously scoured the colony for enlightenment, patiently submitting ; to snubs from the people who told him the Bill was no good, and hoping '.to devise somo means of making it more acceptable. Now he has cheerfully undertaken- to dismember his ownoffspring in the hope that lie may escape with at least some portion ;of the mangled remains with a view 'to tlieir subsequent embalmment in tho Statute Book. For our part we do not seo that this process of subdivision makos the Bill any more acceptable to the people. In regard to the limitation proposalswe have said all along that we do not object to the £50,000 clause, but we still think that there aro tho strongest possible objections to the £15,000 clauso. . . Dries 'Mr. McNab intend his endowment proposals in his new “triple ‘ expansion” measure to embrace all unsold Crown lands? If so, we do not see that the'absurdity will* bo in the least-degree mitigated, although it may be to'some extent disguised, by the process-of separation. The idea' that-it will reduce to waste paper the- resolution's passed at so many meetings'declaring that no Land Bill will be satisfactory unless it contains' the right of getting the freehold, is on a par with tho rest of Mr. McNab’s simple delusions. . . We believe that in Nature certain- lowly organisms do endeavor to avoid extinction by splitting themselves up into sogments. But they are very low down in the scale of creation. |A. fissiparous Land Bill is a novelty -in politics, and -n-c do not at all thiiilc the now departure will prove a success. WAIRARAPA DAILY TIMES. ;

The Wairarapa Daily Times remarks:—Some little time ago we asked a question as to whether the land legislation of next session would be a twin or a triplet, and at last we are called upon by the Hon. Mr. McNab to welcome three little stranS ers - • '• • We have frequently spoken in eulogistic terms of the high personal character of the Minister of Lands, and now we feel like praising his ability. In vain may Mr. James Allen, who delivered i a very able, speech at Milton last week, call upon Sir. McNab to appeal to the people, on his land legislation, because the obvious retort of the Minister of Lands will bo, “Which, shall wo drown?” The new triplot trebles all the old issues in coilnec-

tion with its predecessor. It is just a concrete conundrum, and does not give Mr. James Allen a fair clianco. If lie objects to three Land Bills, all Mr. MoNab lias to do is withdraw: the trio in favor of nine Bills for the following session. The Minister' of Lands has three lives now with his land legislation, and next session mav havo ns many as a cat. With nine lives in the ''ear 1908, he will be ablo to snare a few for drowning, purposes. . . Till the texts of the threo Land Bills are disclosed, we cannot say for certain that one :of them may bo worth saving but so far there is no evidence to show that oven ono of them ought to be allowed to survive.

THE RANGITIKEI ADVOCATE. The man in the street would probably say that the Bill-is supported ill the towns and opposed in the country districts, but if nsked for evidence in proof of his belief he would find it difficult to point to any spontaneous expression of feeling in favor of. Mr. McNab’s bantling. The fact (the Rangitikei Advocate says) is that with the exception of a few Socialists and land nationalises, the people of the .towns do not care twopence about the matter. The members of the House, Messrs. Laurenson, Ell, and Hogg, who favor the Bill have not attempted to stump the country, as they know that their names.are sufficient to alarm ;all moderate men. Even Dr. Findlay, though he paid, for his promotion! to Cabinet rank by making a couple of speeches on behalf of the measure, soon wearied of the uncongenial task. We cannot but ask: Why have a Land Bill at all in face of the general indifference? A strong Government would realise the position, admit they liad miscalculated the feeling of the country, and turn to somo proposal more likely to ensure general support.