GOVERNMENT LAND PROPOSALS

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2132, 15 July 1907, Page 1

GOVERNMENT LAND PROPOSALS

SPEECH BY MR. LAURENSON. THE PRINCIPLE AFFIRMED. About 250 people assembled at the Theatre Royal on Saturday night lo hear an exposition on the land question by Mr. (!. !am reason, M.H.K. of Lyttelton. The Mayor (Mr, J. Townley) presided and Messrs, iiluuidan and Sievwright oeeupied seat's on th ■ platform. The Chairman, in introducing U <’ speaker, said that as Clisl tonic lent i.et been favoured with a visit by the Minister of Lauds Mr. Laurenson s address should he very interesong The' question more or less interested all classes of the community especially at this juncture when there were so many in quest of land up u wl i.vi to settle. The speaker would doubtless remove some misapprehension which existed on the subject. Mr. Laurenson, who was cordially received, spoke for upwards 01. an hour. Ho is a speaker of the rapid, fluent and incisive order, with the linpiw knack of winning his way into the audience’s favour by apt homely illustration and storvette.

“I almost owe you an apology for asking you to moot mo on Saturday night, which I know is inconvenient,” lie commenced, “but it is the only night I could manage without neglecting my Parliamentary duties.” After making brief reference to Gisborne’s progress, and to the rebuke recently administered in the House so eloquently by Mr. Carroll to a slanderer. Mr. Laurenson got down to business. “I start off with the assumption that every man and woman has at heart LOVE FOR TI-lEIR COUNTRY,” he said, “no matter what their political ideas arc. You want to sec your country truly great, with as many happy and prosperous men and women living within its borders as can possibly do so. I will put the facts relating to this great land question before you and leave you to judge whether I am not speaking in the interests ol that ideal.” SMALLNESS OF AREA.

Did they realise what ttlie area oi New Zealand was by comparison? Spoa'king to the Premier o tQueensland recently lie had mentioned that the area of this colony was 66 millions. “That’s only a small area,” replied the visitor, “Queensland contains 422 millions of acres.” There is no doubt, said Mr. Lauren Son, Now Zealand is a very small country. Only the other day Canada was advertising that an area of 242 million acres in the North AVest Provinces was being opened for selection —an area nearly four times as large of the whole of New Zealand., whilst Queensland was nearly seven times as large as this colony. He asked the Premier of Queensland, “Would you, in our place sell any more. Crown land?” and the visitor emphatically replied “Not a single foot. A man who proposed to part with any more land than you have already alienated would be a traitor to his country.” (Applauso and dissent.) HOAV AREA IS DIVIDED.

The total area of New Zealand, the speaker explained, is 60 millions of acres, of which 7 millions cumpiise mountain toils and river beds. Of tin barren mountain tops and river beds. Of tho balance 9,000,000 acres are held by Natives, and there aro 12 millions reserved for public purposes, including Crown requirements, educational, municipal, and Harbour Board endowments, etc. For instance in Otago there is a reserve of nearly 3 million acres for a National Park. It is more or less useless for any other purpose, being rocky and wild country swept by storms and deluges of rain, but still a wonderlul place lor scenery. This left 38 million acres to be accounted for. Freehold disposed of by the Crown totals 16 millions. Of the balance, 22 millions, a large proportion is let by way of pastoral rights, and three of four millions only . is now left free in the hands of the State. Including leases and various other rights, continued Mr. Laureuson, there is still loft in the hands of the Government about 18 million acres, in round figures. “How old is this country? It is yet in its infancy, and we have only 18 millions left to us,” said the speaker. The colony was only at tho lieginning of its life. The Government had come to make tho people a proposition regarding this balance, and it ’ merited careful consideration. What was after all THE BURNING QUESTION to-day? It was the land question. Russia was red with blood over the problem. In Great Britain the public men wore calling each other the most opprobious names over it; the aristocracy were up in arms, the poor people were up in arms, politically speaking, and feeling was running as high as it had ever done m England since the Napoleonic wars. In America, also, it was a burning question anil in Australia the columns of the press were filled with the subject. Borne might say the land question only concerned the farmer. That was a great mistake. The question concerned every human being, the clerk at his be licit, the merchant in liis office, the labourer at his toil, and the professional man at his business; every human being was vitally interested in the land questiou.

HOW WAGES AltE AFFECTED. Mr. Laurenson quoted that when the first. Governor went to South Australia his instructions wore: “You will commence by selling the waste lands of South Australia as cheap as you possibly can and you will continue to sell lands cheap until you find the price of labour going up.” As soon as this takes place put up the price of land.” If to-morrow there arose out of the North Sea another fertile country like the Old Country, what would happen in England? Put the grasping landlord on one side and the effect would be this, wages would double themselves in England within 24 hours. A moment’s consideration would show that the supply or scarcity of land affected wages. Go into one of our public schools; we had something like 120 or 130 thousand hoys and girls in our schools in New Zealand. Out of these schools there came every year about 30 or 30 thousand hoys and girls who had received sufficient education lor the ordinary purposes of life. “These” said Mr. Laurenson, “say: ‘give us something to do for a livelihood.’ ” Those whose fathers had capital or owned land were independent, hut the others wanted employment to earn their bread. “What we want to do,” said the speaker, “is to see that no human being of this fair country of ours is allowed to monopolise land, because if you do allow monopoly you begin to build up in this country all the evils of the Old Land, from which most of us have come.” (Applause.) TOWN AND COUNTRY ALIKE

AFFECTED. I-Ie had heard it said that the question did not concern the towns. To prove that it did he quoted from return No. B. 20, presented to the House in 1903. This showed that there wore in New Zealand 115 thousand people -who owned the freehold title of laud. Of that number 71 thousand odd were owners of town lands, and the balance were owners of country lands; therefore the majority of land owners owned town lands. (A voice: What about the values?) The advantage again lay with the towns. He would reckon on the unimproved value because the capital values would heap up enormously in favour of the town. The unimporved value of seven towns in the colony was equal to one-fourth ot the total unimproved value of every foot of land in New Zealand. The unimproved value of Auckland city and suburbs was equal to the unimproved value of every foot of land north and ten counties to the south (of Auckland). How could it be said in the face of these facts that the nuestion.only concerned the country? If lie proposed land taxation he proposed to tax the man in the town as well as the man in the country. In Auckland a man had said to Mr.

Eowkls, ‘You i.o vn mon got off light- ! lv. compared with the country.” ‘•Do we, indeed,” replied Mr. Fowlds, who then C|nestioned the other man and found he had a farm valued at £•2.000, improvements £BOO, leaving £1,200 unimproved value. “You will ho taxed on C1,200f” asked Mr. Fowlds. “Yes,” said the farmer. Pointing to the 4ft door of his premises, fronting Queen Street, Mr Fowlds rejoined, “The unimporyed value of every foot of land fronting Queen Street.' is £BOO. I would pay nr, much land tax on my door as you nay on your whole farm. NO ABSOLUTE TITLE IN LAND As to the title of laud, lan’ was in a. different category from any other property. Anything manufactured or produced could ho given an absolute title hut they could not establish an absolute title to land. This dictum had been laid down by every Cliiei Justioo in England. Other property was made by someone’s toil. But by whose toil was land made. It was there thousands of years ago. When a hundred generations had passed away to their eternal aeeount' the land would still remain. .Nor eould it he affected in area; there was no way of increasing it. “The land is here,” said the speaker, “not made by man but made by Clod for ail tile sons o! man.” (Applause.)

AI j LEG ED M ISItFPItESKNT ATI ON. AVhafc did the Government Land Bill proposer' First and foremost ho knew that there had been a groat deal of misrepresentation. Mow it had been said they attacked the freehold, how it was going to take a man's root from over Ids head, and going to roh the settler who had carved out a home for himself and family. “All this because we say the Government should not part with the freehold of all its estate,” commented Mr. Laurenson. It was an old trick to tell half the truth and half a lie. indeed some people were so clever that they could tell the whole truth and yet present it in the form of a lie. A story told by the speaker neatly illustrated his point. “The men who sav we are attacking the freehold,” he said, “are grossly misrepresenting the position.” He recounted the case of a man named Stuckey who, interviewed by the "Wellington Post, said he had been driven out of Ids freehold by the machinations of the Government, that

bis freehold bad boon taken away from him iust as the place was boginning to pay. When enquiries were made by the Minister of Lands, it was elicited that in April, 1906. the land bad been put in the hands of an agent to sell. The Land Purchase Hoard made inquiries, as an officer of the Department reported that the 3.000 acres would be good land to cut up for closer settlement. After a lot of correspondence, and when the Hoard was prepared to buy the property, the agent, notified the Government that it; had been sold privately. It was also found, that Afr. Stuckey’s reason for selling was on account of ill health. The property bad been purchased some years ago for £9,669 and lie sold it to a gentleman for £60.000. That was a class of man to run down the Government—the noor badlv-used big landlord who said be was driven out of the country! Ho bad. moreover, made his living out of the place in the meantime. AVhat misrepresentation could not be expected after this instance?

GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS. Continuing, the speaker said tin; Govornmont asked that some of tlio national estate should he set ana it as a national endowment. Tliev asked that there should ho some limitation in the area one human being could hold in this small country, and also wished to abolish the 909 years leave and substitute a lease for a reasonable term. NICK I} FOR LIMITATION. Mr. La uronsoti proceeded to deal I with the need for limitation. He imagined lie heard some one say “Why can’t the small man pay the same price as the big man?” Suppose a man owned a block of 1,000 acres which lie had bought in the old provincial . days for £2 per acre, and tlu*re was a similar block for sale adjoining. The poor man came, along and offered £lO an acre, but the man already holding 1,000 acres offered £l2 and secured the land. “It might” he said in reply, “if it pays him to give £l2 an acre it will pay the smaller man.” This was a fallacious argument for this reason :-—The first owner had secured his original 1,000 acres at £2, and the second 1,000 at £l2, total £14,000 for 2,000 acres, an average of only £7. Therefore lie had a big advantage, over the newcomer. nnulil n.Mtmnfn wH.ll llim.

who could not compete with him. ]i>irther, it should bo remembered that, the original owner could work two properties almost 1 as cheaply ns one. The big man with money lying at fixed deposit could get it at 4-J per cent, and the smaller man would be luekv to get money at 5 per cent. The big man could always heat:the small man at buying up land, and heat him badly. (Applause.) The speaker instanced a ease down south. A farm of 100 acres on Hank s Peninsula was put up for sale, the Government valuation being £ll 10s. A man named Silas Harris was anxious to buy it for a borne, and offered £2.'! per acre. The people alongside owned £BO,OOO worth of liropcrty and they heat Harris by paying £26' per acre. “Our limitation would step in in a case like tills.” said the speaker. “Wo say to the big gentleman, “You stand aside and let. Harris get a home for his

family.’ ” (Applause.) COUNTRY REPRESENTATION. Quoting some Canterbury figures, Mr. Lauronson said that some time ago the Ashburton papers wanted to ascertain how it was every school in Ashburton county was "going down in numbers. Attendance dropped in a few years from 98 to 71, 37 to 30, and so on (places quoted). Wluit was the reply of every schoolmaster asked ; It. was this, “The cause is the aggregation of land into large estates.” From 1891 to 1906 the population ol Canterbury increased by 30,800 poo pie. Reckoning births and deaths the increase would have been 34,000 but he left this out. During the same 15 years the population of Timarti, Ashburton,. Wooston and Temuka, and Christchurch increased 31,100. To put the case plainly—-the total increase of Canterbury’s population was accounted for by town increases only. After fifteen years of unexampled prosperity the country population had decreased by 800. Was that a proper state oi tilings? No man could say it. was To depopulate the country would blast, and ruin the colony; town increase should not he at the expense of the country population. What had ruined I'higland? What had destroy oil her rustic population? Ruskin put it that England's supremacy was built up when "her fields were green” “and her face ruddy.” A great nation could not be built up upon town people. 11 is friend, Mr. Taylor, had told him that when he visited England ho was struck with the illustrious names in Westminster Abbey, and the fact that in the same great metropolis there were three million people living in such poverty as must degrade and ruin body and soul. He re marked on returning “I realised that whatever happened to England she could not maintain these social conditions and hold her own.” “It is to prevent this sort of thing, said 3b Laurenson “that we want limitation in New Zealand.” (Applause.) LARGE ESTATES. Some people said that large estates were put- growing. He would show thev were. In 1889 there were 1,10(1 estates in New Zealand each worth over tJO.OOO in value. The total rose gradually until ill 1902 there wore 1400 sue!i estates. It might he replied, he said, that values bad gone up. Well, lie would take areas. 11l ISS3 there were 430 estates of over 5.000 acyps in i area, in 1892 there were 438, while in l 1902 there were 447. This aggregai tion went on despite the land tax, The ! progressive land tax, and the -fact of . the Government buying up large esj tates. Big estates were increasing in l number every year. “The only thing , to stop them,” he commented., “is

l’urlinment, and Parliament will do it. (Applause.) COOK COUNTY FKJUHKS.

lit) would quote Homo figures near liumo, via., in tlie Cook County with Gisborne. This was a county one of tlie most nourishing and go-aheatl ill New Zealand. (Hear, hear.} The figures proved that it was, and people asking lor a good rising district were directed here. In 1901 the population ol' the Cook County with Gisborne 9,130, and by 1900 it had grown to 12,837. For the same period town of Gisborne had increased from 2,737 in 1901 to 5,6G4 in 1900. In other words'the total increase of the County (with Gisborne) was 3,709, whilst the increase in the town accounted for 2,927 of that number, showing an increase in the County itself of only 780 people. Ho was aware-that the town had taken in a portion of the area formerly in the County, but allowing for that the increase in the town was phenomenal, and the increase in the County infinitesimal. If the normal increase of births over deaths had kept up thi in the gain alone in the Comity would have boon 584. The speaker quoted that, in .England the number of people to every square mile was nearly 300, in Germany over 300. Compare this, for instance, with the Cook County which had only 6.5 human beings to every square mile. Yet lie found the* <•1 amour hero, as elsewhere, was for land. Everyone told him, “What we want is land for settlement.” If land monopoly wore allowed it would no! matter if there were only two people in the district, they could make a land famine. A very powerful article had appeared in the Bulletin of April 2.8 last on the same subject. This article so a fleeted a farmer friend of his. who had boon a prominent Farmers’ Union man, that he said. “I am for limitation after 11 1 is .?? This war mho of the most prominent on the Ashburton County. In Australia there was only one inhabitant for every four sepia re miles d territory. Yet there was a big earth famine in Tasmania, Victoria. New South Wales and Queensland. “As soon as you have monopoly there will bo earth famine, you can’t avoid it,” added the speaker. “When you stop monopoly you will give people openings to settle ” OPINIONS OF GONE©LEADEKS. The speaker quoted some remarks by the late All*. Kollcston, who strongly supported leasehold. Dealing with tiie proposal to give greater facilities for the freehold ho said, '•'That system will fail proportion! tely as it affords an opening to the capita lists and middlemen to step in and really become the landlords. Are wo going to establish a tenancy for moneylenders or are we going to establish a tenancy under the Crown . . The Crown should still retain its hold rather than allow the class 1 refer to to get possession of it.” (Hear, hear.)

Sir Hubert Stout, also accepted' as an authority, said : “ Their reserves for municipalities, for schools and universities are all founded on this principle, that instead of trusting to the taxation of the day the landed estate is given so that they can have a per manent revenue. So if wrong for the State to keep land under the leasing system it; was equally wrong to endow municipal. educational, and other institutions in the way they have done.” The late Sir Harry Atkinson had said, ‘‘l look forward to the time when every aero of land will belong to the State.”

The men above quoted, said Mr Laurenson were all men supposed to be on tlie other side of politics. He could oive many other quotations, but time pressed.

BENEFITS OF ENDOWMENT. Lyttelton had greatly benefited from endowments. The rates were only Is Gel in the £ on the capital value, which brought in about equal to the rents of the endowments. Had it not been for the foresight of the early settlers in endowments, Lyttelton would to-day have to pay a 3s rate. He did not know bow many endowments Gisborne had, but lie supposed if his hearers couhl go back they would see that it was well endowed. “Similarly, we are asking the people to give the nation a. lew endowments,” be added. He not only asked, but demanded, it as a right. If they had hearts they must look back and feel some degree of gratitude towards their forefathers, who had done so much to place the colony on its free and enlightened footing. “We conic before the people.’ said Ilr Lao renson, “a ml ask that as your forefathers have done something for you. you will do something for those who have to live in this colony after you and I have gone.”- (Applause.) LEASEHOLD V. FREEHOLD. Many extravagant things had been said a tie lit the leasehold, but were they justified ? It had been said in' effect, “Give a man the freehold and be will turn a desert into a Garden of Eden, give him a leasehold and he will tiirii the Garden of Eden into a desert.” (Laughter.) Yes, give him a had lease and lie would make poor use of it, hut give him a good one and it would have the opposite effect. t)n church property leases in Lyttelton, terms of 21 years’ lease with no compensation at the end ol the period, only wretched hovels were erected. In' connection with tile

municipal leases lie had advocated a 33 years’ lease, with compensation for every stick oi improvements. This course was followed, and within two years the Council had let every acre 'of the. town reserves fronting Sumner road. The houses were much superior to those on freehold property on the next level. A voice : The houses are newer. Mr Laurenson : They are not only newer, but bigger and better all round. The more secure the holder ma'kes his grip of the property the better for him at the end ol the term. (Applause.) He went on to point out the facilities leasehold gave every poor man dosring to take up Crown land. Suppose there was a block of 500 acres valued at £6 per acre. If it wore freehold the intending buyer would require to find at least- onefourth of the money, £750. He would not lie financed on less. Under the leasehold an applicant lmd only to pay 5 per cent on tile total value, or £l5O per annum. All he had to deposit was the first half-year’s'"rent, £75, one-tenth as compared with the freehold. The leasehold system was a stepping-stone for the small man. a cheap means of ultimately placing him in an independent position. To alienate the land practically destroyed all these stepping-stones so far as future generations were concerned. Did opponents mean to say there would be no poor men in 50, 100 or 150 years time? “We hope,’’ he added. “there will be fewer rich men and fewer poor num in the future. But history teaches us that men will still have to struggle, and we say if it is necessary to have these steppingstones to-day they will he in the years to come. Therefore we want to conserve these _ stepping-stones for future generations.” (Applause. People had said to him, would you not prefer the freehold to leasehold ? His answer was. “Certainly, if 1 had the money.” But if asked would he take up a 1.000 acre leasehold with £5.000 to work it, or 1 000 acres freehold with no money at all, he would prefer the leasehold. It had been said that a mail would not do justice to a lease: but provided it was a good lease where was the difference? Ihe great majority of farms in France were under freehold. Vet when the Government wanted to improve the system and methods ol agriculture in France, tliev sent men to the Botliians of Scotland, where every farm was a model to follow and was held under leasehold from private owners. There the latest methods were followed out. the object of each holder being under proper security of tenure, to farm the land to the best advantT|lK “KAP.TII HUNGUP.”

Supplementing his arguments tho speaker made reference to Uio earth hunger in New Zealand. For 19 term .sections in Oaniaru there eve re 021 separate applicants, and 1,209 applicants for 5 runs. At Airedale Otago, 11 sections attracted 460 applicants. It waS the same tale all over the colony, the people could not get enough land upon which to settle In view of this fact it was high time the CJovcrmnent did step in and say “Whatever we are going to tolerate in Now Zealand, we arc l not going to tolerate land monopoly.” (Applause.)

CROWN TION.VNTS. It had liocii said the Crown tenants wore crying out for tlio freehold. Air Laurenson contradicted this assertion There were. 15.G00 Crown tenants ir +ho rolonv, and about 18 months agr tiie Farmers’ Union circularisedd '• petition, ,in favor of the freehold op rion, and asked them to sign it. When the petition was presented to Parliament onlv 516 signatures were attach ed. That did not- look much of a “clamour” for the concession.

OPPONENTS CRITICISED. “Willi reference to the meetings reported as carrying freehold resolutions Mr. Laurensou doubted whether they were so influential as represented. At Middlorniarsli Air. Iloddie who was speaking against the Land Hill, addressed only twelve persons. “Why,” Mr. Buddie had remarked, “up in Taranaki we had a meeting to deal with the Bill and only lour, including the Chairman, turned up.” One ol' them, it seemed, read a paper denouncing the Land Bill and one of the audience of two moved a resolution approving of what the writer had said. The other half of the audience (laughter) rose up and seconded the motion, which the Chairman put and it was carried unanimously. By the aid of a friendly Press Association it was telegraphed abroad “At a meeting of farmers held in Taranaki. a resolution was unanimously passed denouncing the Land Bill. (Laughter.) “I will tell you who condemn the Land Bill,” said Mr. Laurenson. Mr. W. G. Sweat, a prominent Farmers’ Union man had said “We ought to got more subscriptions from the large holders, because after all it is their battle we arc fighting.” A Voice: The same here.

Mr. Lauronson: I am giad to he informed of it. Proceeding lie quoted ed that at Murchison resolutions, moved and seconded hy farmers, had beo carried as'king the Government, to proceed with tile Hill. The country districts were determined that whoever else should fail in their duty, Parliament shall not fail and that it must pass a land reform measure. (Applause.) • -

■•••■ (; l£NJilt A.U , Mi'. Belcher, the Jndmuf represcYP tativo, had recounted to him the stjualid poverty prevailing iji the large cities at Home, whilst not far away could be seen miles and miles of beautiful grassy country without a human being on it. Some would say, “Oh. ho is a labour member and of course prejudiced.” But no one could accuse Sir John Gorst, an ox-Cahinet Minister in the Salisbury Government oi being a Socialist, an agitator or anything of the kind. This distinguished man, on a visit after -10 years absence, in praising New Zealand as a vigorous young nation, remarked on the absence of poverty, and contrasted it with the appalling condition of the workers in England. Economists agreed monopoly was largely the Cause, Mr. Laureusun said, and it was a warning to a young country. A MEMBER’S DUTIES. In conclusion Mr. Lauronson spoke of his great interest in the question. He could, if it were his inclination, take his ease in Parliament, sit as a blind tool and do what lie was told. But ho conceived the duties of a member to be something beyo id that. They had a higher duty tin 1 moifiy representing their constitue my , he took it that they sat as trustees ’..u only for the jieople of to-dav but ; unborn generation. (Bond applause.) “As their trustee,” lie added, “i stand before you and appeal to you to give us a hand in bringing about .iand reform.”

“THE SOCIALISTIC TENDENCY.” Proceeding lie attacked the argument, “Wo don’t want any Socialistic Insinoss.” Our complex social syilrm demanded unity of action; the tendency of life was not indiv iduniisvie, Inn communistic. There was a :hnc in the stone ago when all were in livid-. alls is. but mankind realised that o:i v i.y combination ron HI g iod icsi.Ms conn; about. The whole ;t cur prbli' services, edueatio.ia 1 , hospital, aid (Id age pensions, etc., trie tin r ol the communist' - : i•* iiple In all this the people were following out. the precepts of Him, who spoke as never man spoke, “Bear ye one another’s burdens and so fulfil the law of Christ.” Yet- with all these evidences of Socialism in our everyday life there were asses—he could apply no other name to them—who decried all reform as being Socialistic.

AN IDEAL. Mr. Laurenson said ho had intended to speak on the incidence of taxation, but the hour was too late. As a final word he wished to say that the ideal he put before himself was not a country with a few wealthy men in it and a mass of poor people, but a country supporting a largo population, with the wealth equitably divided so far as is possible, where every man would bo able to live in peace and felicity under his own “vine and fig tree.” “AW are citizens of no mean country. It is a wonderful country, admirably adapted for building up a noble type of the race. I want to see that race built up. That is my excuse for coming before you tonight,” lie concluded. (Loud applause.)

QUESTIONS. Questions were invited. Kegarding native lands, Mr. Laurenson said that fortunately this t'roublo did not exist in the South Island. When the Commission's report came down he wanted to see the question settled on a basis that would enable titles to bo acquired without the prodigious and unreasonable delay incidental to Native Land Court business at present. The titles should bo clear, and whilst we. protected the native he wanted to , see white people settled on native land. Ho believed this or next session would see it accomplished. 11l regard to a further question about treating native land so as to satisfy tlio land hunger, the speaker agreed something should be done. No one was more desirous of seeing it done than he. Mr. Carroll had told them that there were six mil-

lion acres of good native laud, of which little use was being made. Southern members must be guided by the more experienced North Islanders, and be would vote for drastic measures.

Mr. Koliero asked what minimum should the owners be allowed to retain ?

Mr. Laurenson could not say. The country had no more business to rob the Maori than the white man. At the same time the Maori had no right to allow his land to remain unused. An ample amount of land should be set aside for every kainga in N.Z. “Can you tell us what is the value of the State’s interest now in a piece of land which it will not lie able to sell or in any wav alienate for 1000 years?” was a question handed in. Mr. Laurenson said the value was nothing, but the State derived on the capital value of the land interest at the rate of 42 per cent, (o per cent, with a rebate of 2 per cent.). The average cost of borrowed money was 3J per cent., so there was J per cent, more than the value on the money. Tie believed that when the debentures fell due in 2d or 30 years, the rate of interest would then he only 22 per cent, Commercial history for 100 years showed the whole tendency in rates of interest to he downward. It was easily accounted for. Owing to the increase of machinery and the increased power of man to turn out manufactured goods, the supply was beyond the demand, and capital was always increasing. Goods represented capital just as much as money did. If money dropped to 22 per cent, the profit to tile Government would be more than at present. If the Government sold the land it would lose the interest earned annually. Another question was, “Why do you address meetings' in the towns and not in the country, seeing that “lie country is the most interested?” Mr. Laurenson said this was incorrect. Durinn the past seven weeks he had addressed six meetings. Gisborne was tlie largest centre lie had addressed, and Mossriel, in Otago, was the second in size. Other places lie spoke at were AVaiau, Rotherham, Hawarden, and East Oxford. All these were townships in the centre of purely country districts. They wero representative country audiences, and at cacli place ho received unanimous votes, with the exception of two dissentients at one meeting.

Mr. Sicvwright. in moving ;i resolution convoying thanks to Mr. furonson, anil expressing approval of (lie, Governnienlvs land police said that it was the a Most exposition on the Land Bill lie had heard in the colony. Mr. Laurenson was a fellowconntrvman of his, who was devoting the prime of his life to advocating one of the greatest reforms in the history of the colonv. .All-. Cox asked that the resolution he divided. Whilst some did not upmove of the Hill, they wished to heartily thank the speaker for his uldress. The Chairman put the first part of the motion, convenin' thanks. Gai-ri<-d with hearty applause. As to tlie motion. Air. Joyce said Hie meeting had not heard what the land policy was. He agreed it was an able address. Tile Chairman said the points were limitation of estates and endowments, Mr. Joyce: We believe in that. The Chairman put'the motion ex-

pressing approval of the Government’s hi ml policy, which was carried by an overwhelming majority.

The Chairman.: There arc a fair number against it. 'There always is. A further question was* asked whether the \ i«\v.s of Mr. laitirenson corresponded in to to with Air. McNab’s policy ? Mr. Laurenson said the original provisions of the Jlill were that an owner having land over £50,000 in value should dispose, of the surplus within 10 years, and that in future no one* with £15,000 worth of laud, unimproved value, shou 111 lift all owed to aeon ire more. The leasing proposals were that the balance of the lands in tli<* hands of the Crown (excluding native land) should be dealt with as national endowments. He liad good authority for stating now, however, that the land proposals would he modified in the direction of increasing the taxation on all lands over £50.000 unimproved value. Th© nature of the tax would necessarily have the effect of limitation. The endowment proposals would he modified by applying onlv a certain number of acres (and not all the lands in the hands of the Crown) as endowments, nor would native lands be so a pplied. A vote of thanks to the Mayor for presiding concluded the proceedings.