The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1908. THE PROBLEM OF LAND SETTLEMENT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2364, 3 December 1908, Page 4

The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1908. THE PROBLEM OF LAND SETTLEMENT.

The Now South AYalcs Minister of Lands has boon making a hold endeavor to settle the vexed question as to the best method of promoting closer settlement in that State. Assailed on the one side by the freeholders and on the other by 'the leaseholders, Air. AToore ha s endeavored to

steer a middle course and his attempted solution is worthy at the least of thoughtful consideration. The Bill, which has already passed the discussion stage in the Legislative Assembly, gives to homestead selectors and settlement lessees Hie right to convert as uruelir of their holdings os, together with any other country lands they may own, represents ‘'homo maintenance area.” It lias to he admitted that the term "home maintenance area” is so vague as to allow of anomalies creeping in, just as they have done as the law stands already; but it is a vagueness imposed by the necessities of the case. Parliament cannot afford to bo more specific without robbing the lands administration of a discretion to meet the varying conditions which are 'to lio met with in an exceedingly large territory. No doubt there are many settlement lessees who will feel rather aggrieved that they arc not to be allowed to convert their entire holdings; hut when it conies t o’be remembered that settlement leases may be from anything up to rather more than 10.000 acres in extent, and that, with the expansion of population, and the increase of roil way facilities, the area originally selected may represent in a few years two or three “home maintenance” areas, the Alin inter has only consulted the rniblic interest in affixing .a limitation. But while doing this, lie conserves to the lessee all existing rights, inasmuch as he permits him‘to hold the excess area for the balance of the term a< a conditional lease.

So far, so good. But it is not in the permission to convert, but in the restriction of transfer, that the measure has the widest and deepest significance. In the first place, the right is given to homestead) selector or settlement lessee to make freehold a ‘iliomo maintenance area.” But having given him his freehold, the State says to him: “You may occupy this solely for your own use and benefit. You may lease it, or you may sell it; but if you sell, it must only he to an individual who, at the time of purchase, either owns mo other country land or so little as to make his possessions, together with what he proposes to acquire, a homo maintenance arelu.” This is where the Minister lands himself in troublous .waters and it is very doubtful if he will get his Bill passed into law and if hedoe s whether it will prove a prawCibablo solution of the land settlement question. The Sydr.oy “Morning. Herald” takes a complimentary view and while admitting that the restriction referred to discounts to «■ certain extent the selling value of the particular/land, says:—But, inasmuch as past experience has lahunidantly shown tliat unconditional freehold favors the concentration of. country lands) in few hands, and at certain limes the undue inflation of values, it iis clear tliat, in the interests of settlement and healthy 'yeomanry development, some check to this tendency must he .interposed. Crown leasehold, with perpetual residence conditions, has been proved ia failure, inasmuch as it conferred no nti-

got table title on which money could be raised. The qualified freehold proposed in the bill as the moan between two injurious extremes. It had already boon incorporated in the land system by the Closer Settlemeint Act and the Amending Land Act passed by Air Asliton. Air Alo ore’s bill, however, gives it a retrospective .action over more than 8,000,000 acres of desirable land —upwards of 6,000,000 acres held by 1837 persons under settlement lease, and 2,100,000 acres held by 5447 persons under homestead selection. AVe have, therefore, now established the principle —or we shall have if the bill now .in question becomes law —that any future alienation of Crown lands'," whether directly or by subsequent transfer, from the original selector, is subject to the provision that, practically speaking, only the landless are eligible to become purchasers. That does away with all the elaborate residential and 1 improvement conditions which previously attached lo Crown settlement tenures. What the Council will do well to watch .are the mortgage provisions. It is a good tiling that the mortgagee should he compelled ‘to realise within a reasonable time; but' we do not see any reason why the Ministers consent should be n ecessary to the execution of any mortgage. So long as the mortgagee is governed by the same restriction as to transfer as the individual holder, there seems to he no reason why the State should further concern itself; nor, again, should the transferee he subject to any residence conditions whatsoever. Ifc should he remembered that every unnecessary restriction upon the mortgagee discounts the value of the security, and makes financing the-more difficult. AVe should 'take care not to roimpose by this bill the very disabilities which it is designed to remove.