LAND PAYMENTS FOR ROADS,

Grey River Argus, Volume X, Issue 843, 10 April 1871, Page 2

LAND PAYMENTS FOR ROADS,

[to the editor.] Sir, -In your leader of Thursday, you state that your grounds of objection to the idea of alienating the waste lands of the Colony for the purpose of road making are — First, that it is uneconomical ; and, second, that it is likely to interfere with settlement ; and you endeavor to prove your first objection by the assumption (for it is only an assumption) that "no contractor would accept land at LI an acre as cash ;" and a little further on, you assert that the land along the line of road would " probably fetch double the price at open auction." The italics are mine ; for, before going further, I may point out that you must have forgotten to refer to the present Waste Lands Act, as in it it is provided that all rural land, open for sale as such, can be purchased for LI, and cannot be put up to auction. I may in this place be allowed to question the legality of the W.*ste Lands Board selling any blocks of rural land less than 20 acres by auction or otherwise, although I know that the Jaw was, on a recent occasion, stretched so as to meet what may only be an omission in the Act, which does not provide for the sale of smaller sections than 21) acres of land in tho blocks which have been proclaimed rural land. In the case referred to, the land was called suburban land, which may be sold in quantities less than one acre ; but the lots sold were all more than one acre, arid if proclaimed suburban land, must have been, of right, demanded at L 2 per acre. I have shown this error to prove that the waste land of the County, under the present Act, cannot, as you appear to assume, be sold by auction,, save under the ; conditions I have pointed out.

Now, as to your assertion that no contractor would undertake .to make roads on the proposed terms, unless at 30 per cent, premium (rather an arbitrary per centage). I cannot tell, anymore than you, how contractors might be inclined to deal with the Government in making a contract for roads, but this I know, that the Government would not be bound to enter into a bargain to get any work done, unless they were satisfied that they got reasonably good terms, such as would justify them in entering into the contract ; and I see no reason why the contractor, if he chose,, should not invest his money in waste lands as in any other property. We have not in Westland ever tried the experiment, that I know of, and are therefore, so far in the dark ; but I do know that it has been tried in the Province of Canterbury, and in more thau 19 years' experience in that Province, I liavs not (till you asserted it) heard of any evil consequences arising therefrom. I should certainly like to know what the evil consequences are, which you refer to as having been so severely felt in Canterbury, by this feature of land disposal, which, to me, an old Canterbury colonist, is a novel and startling assertion. Your second ground for objection is that it would be lively to. interfere with settlement, but this assertion you appear to deem to be so self-evident as to require no argument to prove it ; but I fail to see it, and am of opinion that the sale of land is more likely to foster settlement than to prevent it.

You admit that the road which. I propose as one on which the experiment might be tried (that hence to- Ross) would be a great advantage, but you say that it is not of urgent necessity. I will give you the grounds of my reasons for saying that it is : they are principally based on Dr Knight's report, from which I will take the liberty of making some quotations. He says : "Except the means of transit along the sea beach at low water, neither Ross to the southwardnop G/reymouth to the north, are, connected with roads to Hokitika. There can be no doubt that a trunk road, uniting these two main centres of population — Hokitika and Greymouth — ought to be constructed as early as possible. These works— the roads from Greymouth to Greenstone, and from Stafford to the Arahura— would complete a trunk; road from Hokitika to Greymouth. They are all urgently required, and if constructed, would bo a great boon to a large mining population." The Doctor might have said they would be the means too of securing the permanent settlement of the country they passed through, I find, too, that Dr Knight appears to advocate the principle of getting the road from Hokitika to Ross made by paying for its construction in land, or partly inland and partly in money. I find my letter has extended beyond reasonable limits, but as I have some more to say on this subject, in order tp show that there is a possible plan of inducing contractors to undertake the work, I shall ask^cu to allow me to continue this at an early opportunity. 1 am, &a., Frank Guinness, M.C.O. April 7, 1871.

[Onr reply is withheld until Mr Ghu £ ness has concluded his argument.]- JEd.