GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2587, 22 July 1882, Page 3

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. FbidAt, Jult 21. BILLS. The Wellington Harbor Board and tbs Corporations Land Act, 1870, Amendment Bill, and the Ashburton County Council Empowering Bill were read a second time. The Nelson College Act. 1858, Amendment Bill a third time without debate. MINING COMPANIES ACT. ' The'Mining Companies Act, 1872, Amendment Bill was considered in committee, and reported with several small amendments, THE HON. MB PHABAZTK. The committee which had inquired into Mr Pharazyn’s case reported recommending that they concurred with the opinions of the Judge and jury at the trial, that his voting twice was an honest mistake, and recommended that ho should be freed from all civil disabilities under which he ie now laboring. The Council rose at 4.15. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Fbidat, Jult 21. The House met at 2 30 p.m. QUESTIONS. In answer to Mr Tole, The Hon. Mr Johnston eaid the Government did not see their way to appoint a station master at the Ellerslie railway station, near Auckland. In answer to Mr Duncan, The Hon. Mr Eollhston said the Bill dealing with riparian rights was in a forward state, and would be brought down when the Land Bill was disposed of. In answer to Mr Fish, The Hon. Mr Johnston said the workshops at Hillside were too small to allow engines 2 and 9 being repaired there. In answer to Mr Fish, The Hon. Mr Johnston said the new railway station at Dunedin would be oommenoed so soon as the first instalment of tbe goods shed was completed. In answer to Mr Smith, The Hon. Major Atkinson said the Government could not promise to alter the regulation so as to allow 10 per cent, duty payable on Native leases to be paid yearly instead of in lump sum. In answer to Mr Kelly, The Government said a sum would be placed on the estimates for lighting the Parliamentary Buildings by electricity. In answer to Mr Kelly, The Hon. Mr Johnston said he recognised the absolute necessity for better ventilation of the buildings, and, therefore, the matter would be inquired into.

AUCKLAND UNITEHSIir COLLEGE BILL, This Bill was read the second time. THE LAND BILL.

Mr Bbaokew resumed the debate on the second reading of the Land Bill. He said, notwithstanding the adverse criticism to which the measure before the House had been subjected, he thought it was a cheering sign of the times to find a member of the party of retrogression possessing the courage to bring such a Bill forward. The nationalisation of the land was a question which was agitating the minds of some of the loading thinkers of the present day, and, therefore, the subject was worthy the consideration of the House. The movement was looked upon by many persons aa merely a wild theory which could not be put into practice. But when the idea of the steam engine and telegraph was first mooted those who believed in the potency of steam and electricity wore regarded as idle dreamers and wild theorists. The mistake made by these who opposed the system of leasing arose from the belief that land was as much private property as a man’s hat or his coat. This was an exploded notion, for air, water and land were not the products of human toil, and therefore could not be regarded as the property of any individual. They were given for the use of all, and no man conld claim them as bis own. The Slate should never have parted with an acre of the land, and even now it was not too late to resume possession of it. Some hon. members might be inclined to imagine that it would bo impossible for the State to get back the land, but if a man, who set! out on a journey discovers, wnen ne has travelled a long distance, that he has taken the wrong way, would it not be wiser for him to retrace his steps than pioceed further on the road which takes him away from his desired goal. It was never too late to mend, and he hold that the wisest policy even now would bo to make an endeavor to regain that with which they had foolishly parted, taking care at the same time that no injustice should be done to those who had purchased lauded properties. This scheme might be called revolutionary, and no doubt it was revolutionary, but what groat reforms had ever taken place in the world’s history that were not revolutionary. They owed all the liberties they at present enjoyed to revolutionary schemes. It was argued by some that the nationalisation of the land would have a tendency to crush out independence and industry, and they were told that the sentiment underlying the possession of a freehold binds the owner to the soil, and induces him to beautify and improve his home and grounds. He was of opinion that this argument would also hold good in the leaseholds where the tenants would have the right at renewal. The argument to the effect that town tenants would take all the good out o2 0 ha land and than throw it up, was, in his E»ied, a fallacious oao. It would be to their interest to improve and beautify their farms and homes so long aa they were guaranteed ample valuation for such improvements. If they desired to give up possession of their holdings it would be to the interest of the State to do all in its power to promote the welfare of its tenants, and it would be to tha interest of the tenants to promote the welfare of the State, but there was another aspect to look at this question from. Take the case of a tenant refusing to pay an increase of rent, who was replsoed by another who willingly pays the advanced valuation. Whore would the money go ? Would it go into the pocket of a private individual ? No ; it would go into the State coffers, and benefit tho entire community. They heard a great deal about individual rights, and he held that the thrifty and industrious should be privileged to enjoy tho fruits of their toil, but the rights of the entire community wore paramount to the rights of the individual. They should remember that the farmers alone wore not the only people. The merchants, tho traders, the artisans, the laborers, and even the sailors, were each a part of the State, and must subsist on the products of the land. In the argnments used against State leasing, individual rights occupied too prominent a place. He did not believe in the levelling system, for he knew that there would always be a lazy and an idle Iclass, who must keep at the bottom of the social ladder. The rights of capital should be respected, but they should not forget that labor had its rights also. By the State becoming tha solo landlord, both capital and labor would be benefitted. Whenever the leasing system had been tried it had proved a great success. In Liverpool and other British towns it had been put into practice with most beneficial results, and coming nearer home that we found that tho Dunedin Corporation have put it in force with advantags to the whole community. Taking tho case of Wellington, there were properties in that city bringing in from £lO to £2O per week, which were purchased a score of years ago for a few pounds. Tho Corporation of Wellington had issued leases for forty-two years to forty-three tenants. Those tenants had the right to terminate their leases at the end of twenty-one years, and they wished to retain them for tho other twentyone years. They had to pay an advance of 50 per cent, the amount of rent for tho first twenty-one years was £2047, and for the second twenty-ono years £3071. If the State had retained posses sioa of those properties and leased them, evin at a small rental, what an immense revenue would be pouring into the Treasury at tho prerent time. Why, they conld now do without Custom-houses, and they would not require to go a-begging for fresh loans. Why should a man who in the early times purchased property for a mere trifle be permitted to hand it down to his posterity, that they might profit by it for all time. Land that was almost useless at the present day might be worth tons of thousands in twenty years’ time. They had no right to take up the land in such a manner that future generations could have no voice in its management. A great revolution in thought was sure to take place, and a new order of things would come about within the next half century. There was a great deal of truth in Tennyson’s lines, “ The old order changeth, giving place to the new." The difficulty which would be experienced in the collection of rents was raised as an objection to

the leasing system. This was easily disposed of. The very same machinery that collects one taxes at present might be used with advantage on a better organised basis. There was or.e more point in connection with the land question to which he wished to refer. He alluded to the subject of immigration. He submitted that there was no use in opening up the lands unless they had the proper men there to cultivate them. They wanted real live working men brought here, and no insore duffers. They wanted men who could truss hay and build stacks, men who could plough and sow, and reap and mow; men whose hearts were in their work. If the Government would only endeavor to bring such a class here, and would also make an effort to develope their mineral resources and foster local industries, they could do without the benevolent inquisition which the hon. the Treasurer sought to establish here. Mr Flam thought that the debate should have closed after the excellent speech of the member for Belwyn. The Government were not unanimous on the measure, and it was introduced for clap trap popularity. He held that the deferred payment system had not been a failure. The present measure was a most revolutionary one, end would create a system of landlordism of the worst type. Mr FitzQbeald supported the Bill, which he considered was a progressive measure, and severely criticised the conduct of the late Premier in his speech against the measure, Mr Holmes said he would support the Bill, but had it been made a party question he would have voted against it. The House adjourned at 5 30. EVENING SITTING. The Speaker took the ohair at 7 30. GOVEBHUEST BUSINESS.

The Hon. Major Atkinson moved that the House on rising to-night do adjourn to 730 on Monday for Government business. Agreed to. THE LAND BILL. Mr Holmes resumed the debate on the Land Bill. The Government could, by appointing officers, see that the conditions of agricultural leases were fulfilled as at present enforced in the cases of mining leases. The proposals of leasing in tho Bill were fair, compelling residence on the land and preventing mortgaging, and would tend largely to promote a real settlement of the lands. This provision in tho Bill was a very valuable one. In this measure there was no attempt at the nationalisation of the land. The result of the deferred payment system was very satisfactory. Out of every ten selectors nine had been successful, and this, he thought, was a very hopeful and satisfactory result. He approved of the principles of leasing, and knew many men who were prepared to take up land under the Bill. He opposed the system of disposing of the land by auction, and would give his hearty support to the principles of leasing in the Bill. Mr Winn-WilliaMß said the lands of the colony had fallen into the hands of the very class that the founders of the colony intended they should not. Lands were falling into the hands of large capitalists instead of being held by the people of the colony. The principal difficulty of the Bill would be to get the lauds into the bands of the proper people. He saw nothing to provide against undesirable persons getting tbs land, but thought, however, the system would act admirably, and if a man carried on his operations prsperly, he would have his land in perpetuity, and have his capital to conduct operations with. The measure was an attempt to do a great benefit to the colony. This question should not be made a party question. He would support the Government, which brought in a measure to stop the nala of lands. It was almost too late in the South Island, but it should be carried out, especially in the North Island, where much of the land had not been sold. He regretted what fell from Sir John Hall, and concurred entirely with the Bill, and hoped members would sink party feeling and help to carry the Bill. Mr Pexbib congratulated the Minister of Lands on the introduction of the measure. Some members 'had pronounced it Utopian, but they had not considered it thoroughly. There were defects in it, bnt there were defeats in all Bills introduced to the Legislature. He considered there could not be a better landlord than the Crown. It was to the interest of the Crown that tenants ocould

k. -J , i. (i -a - a.. p.osper anu so increase tne revenue sou. the tenant in time of depression. The land should be protected for the State and protected for the people. He did not agree with the proposal to lease with a purchasing clause, and would have supported a much bolder scheme than the present one. He hoped a Bill would before long bo introduced providing for the repurchasing of the land for the State. Had the land not been sold there would be no need for Customs duties, and it would furnish revenue for the country. In some places 640 acres would probably be too much, aud too little in other parts of the country. This was a matter to be considered and altered in Committee. He failed to see the force of the arguments about lessees coming to the Grown as beggars. There was a serious defect in the Bill, and that was the appointment of the Land Boards. The people should be fairly represented on the Board es well as the Grown. He trusted the Minister of Lands would try to meet the wish of the majority. He thought if the House in this matter opposed the auction system the State should fix the price of the lands, and lota should be drawn for the sections. He would support the measure to hia utmost to seo it passed with some slight amendments. Mr Peabsok congratulated the Minister on introducing the Bill, and regretted the Bill did not deal with all the Grown lands of the colony. Some reasonable objections had been taken to the Land Boards. He would support the Bill. Major Habbis was in favor of giving a grant of land to persons of the ago of eighteen aud upwards, and would not allow leaseholders under the Crown to vote. He would in Committee make several alterations. Mr O’Oaliaghan did not think tho assertions that there had been failures in the deferred payment system were any arguments against the Bill. The possession of freeholds had not in many parts prevented tho deterioration of the land. The love of freehold did not tend to make the farmer preserve the value of his land more than if be were a leaseholder. The people now were really Grown tenants. The good farmer would always increase the value of his land, whether leaseholder or freeholder. He considered the time would soon come when the State would not allow largo estates, as at present, to stand in the way of settlement. Mr Seddon said the Bill did not provide, as was stated, for the settlement of the people on the goldfields. The present law was in this respect better than the proposals of the Bill. There was no sincerity in tho proposal of the Government. This measure was dust thrown in tho eyes of the public. He could not support the Bill, aud thought the Government would after a fow days in committee drop the Bill. The Bill was not a liberal measure, or even intended to give tho people of Now Zealand the leasing system in its fullest extent. Mr Montqombby said there had been many good speeches on tho land question. The main object of dealing with all lands of the Grown was to hold out inducements to men to settle upon the land, and at the cams time not to be encumbered with debt. Grown land should be sold at a moderate price, and should be in moderate blocks of 330 or 340 acres. The State should derive no money from this disposal. The land should be the ‘•home” of men, and so arranged that payments be deferred to allow them to pay. It had been said that the men would not pay for the land they would do so became they would obtain it at a lower price than its real value to them. Perpetuity would oniy bo secured under this Bi l if the leasee paid whatever rent was fixed on tho land. There had bean a very strong feeling in Canterbury to secure freeholds. Home 990,000 acres had been sold on deferred payments, Tho holders of this land exercised a great influence in the Legislature, but what would their influence be when the number was so very largely increased as was proposed. The man who was a freeholder would have a higher social grade than the leaseholder. That the leaseholder* would insist on becoming freeholders there could be no doubt, and the sooner the better for the country. There would be a disturbing element and agitation throughout the country until leaseholders became freeholders. The deferred payment system had been a success. If a new system was to be introduced the old one should be swept away. He took it Cor granted the leasing system would be carried into effect. In Auckland, under the homestead system, people could go on the beet land on such conditions that there they certainly would not prefer to lease the land. The leasing proposal in the Bill would not be much adopted. ‘ There were objection® which he would not refer to. He had tried to steer ' clear of party feeliugi, bat he felt bcuud tc

vote agaicst the principle of the Bill. There was a strong feeling in the House and country a* to the large estates, which were being held till they increased in price. There wonld be a question to consider whether these properties should not be taxed. He could not approve of the principle of tfce Bill, bnt would not retard its going into Committee. Mr Beetham bore testimony to the success of tfce deferred payment system. In Wellington district payments were coming in olowly but surely. Ho would support the second reading, but would speak again on the Bill in Committee.

Mr Swanson would like large estates to bs broken up by abolishing of the law of entail or by putting a tax on them. The mechanics, miners, manufacturers and laborers were the backbone of England, and these town classes should fco studied as well as farmers. He wonld heartily support the Bill, but wonld mate slight alterations in committee. He hoped the leaving clauses would be kept intact. He did not see that there could be any difficulty in getting in the rente, as was feared by some. Mr J. B. White hoped the House would pats the second reading of the Bill. The Hon. Mr Kollesscn acknowledged the many valuable suggestions made by members during the debate, many agriculturists having spoken on the measure. He brought the Bill down with an earnest desire to deal with a question which he felt should be dealt with. He had during his past life in tho administration of the waste lands striven to do so on a liberal basis. The Bill on the whole fairly represented the feelings of people on the land laws. He felt that the majority of the House agreed that this measure should be adopted. Ho regretted the difference of opinion between himself and Sir Jahn Hall on this question, which they bath had at heart. He was prepared, if it was thought advisable to do to, to extend the time of the lease beyond twenty-one years. Tho business of Parliament was to offsr facilities to the people with bone and mmole, and ready to work the land and to go upon it. It waa for the individuals themselves to consider the question of being able to pay. In the proposal under discussion ho hsd the interest of the settlers at heart, and also the future interest of the State in view. Ho did not think it likely the State would make the leaseholds into freeholds. He had no fear of a Minister acting in the direction indicated by several hon. members. In committee he should have no abjection to the whole acreage to be leased being limited, and would agree to the suggestion that the land to be set apart for leasing should not be more than, one third of the total. If the country was to progress as it had been progressing, faoilitits be offered to the people to go apon the land, and to prevent the lands falling into the hands of speculators. He had placed 640 acres as a maximum, and was anxious to have the Bill passed, and in older to pass it he would agree to any reasonable alterations in Oommittee, He wished to see leasehold properties as easily transferable as freeholds, and would agree to clauses being inserted providing for an affidavit being made that a breach of the Act was not being committed. The disjointed dealing with the reserves was wrong, end the Bill would remedy difficulties in this direction. The proposal in regard to the d eferred payment settler would bo greatly to bis benefit. This Bill would promote the settlement of the country, and would prevent large estates being created; and if it had fair play, it wonld be a blessing to tho country. The Bill was read a second time on the voices. The House adjourned at 1.20 a,m.