LAND PAYMENTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS.

Grey River Argus, Volume X, Issue 844, 11 April 1871, Page 2

LAND PAYMENTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS.

(to the editob.) • Sir — I wish to make a few remarks in reference to your leading article of the Ist inst. with regard to the action of the Government in disposing of lands for the construction of railways, &c. Doubtless the expressed wish of that eminent statesman, Mr Yogel, to imitate the example of our American cousins has induced you to bring the matter forward. The conclusion which you wish your readers to draw -would be more applicable to most other portions of this island than those alluded to, viz., Westland and Nelson. The reasons for the above are as " follow : — 1 understand that it is not to the interests of the Provinces to give land in exchange for the making of railways, &c. It is to agriculture we owe the neces- i saries of life, a distinction not to be overlooked, notwithstanding the slight exceptions which can be alleged against it, whereas many of its secondary wants cannot be had without commerce or manufactures. It is acknowledged that the greater portion of the land in the above-named Provinces' is of little value for agriculture, consequently it cannot be made use of to any great extent for the necessaries of life, therefore it will have to minister more particularly to our secondary wants. 1 presume it is immaterial in which way we gain a subsistence, whether by ministering to the comforts, or the necessities of our fellow men, if not by the former it must be by the latter. I put it in this light to show what must be done for the future. Presumably our legislators do not legislate merely for the present, but also for after generations. Such being the case it behoves them to look a few years in advance on the passing of any important measure. For the time must assuredly come, and that at no distant date, when this County will have to look to something besides gold mining for a subsistence as at present, for their resources in that respect are not altogether exhaustless, and as that cannot be agriculture, it must be

those secondary wants, already referred to, of what description it would be for them to decide. In the meantime we must act according to the natural order and fitness of things and the means placed at our disposal, so that we will best benefit both the past and future. By disposing of land in part payment as at present — not so quixotic as to give bonuses — a heavy tax will be saved, and at the same time dispose of at present comparatively worthless land.

1 can hardly think that companies w#ild be harder to deal with in the matter of the' land being re-purchased than the present land laws are, for most bargains are made now-a-days with the object of having quick returns^ consequently a company would have that object in view in dealing with the Government to dispose of the land proportionately cheap. It may be questionable policy on the part of the Americans to dispose of their land so indiscriminately, but they have gained their object, which was to open up the country by a vast network of railways, and gained the advantages which have accrued therefrom, and can now afford to change their policy. There can be but one question of the advisability of our doing so, who ljave everything to do, what they have already done, and also the comparative poverty of our land as compared with theirs. I think Mr Guinness, in his letter on this subject, has not taken the matter of bonuses in the light you wished it to be understood. It does not require much to see— as he has taken some trouble to express in his letter — that bonuses and part payment are totally different, or to put it more concisely than he has done ; one is an inducement held out by Government to capitalists to construct certain works which usually in the long run more than compensate for ijhe gift, and the other is an easy way of paying liabilities.

But the question re3olves itself into this form. Alienation by bonus and alienation by a part payment are identical, in either case the alienation is complete, so he has made a distinction where there is no difference. Whichever way would be preferable I imagine it wilt be very difficult on the part of the Government to induce capitalists to invest in undertakings of thiß sort for the description of land which these two Provinces more particularly have to offer. I am, &c, Sam Slick.

[to the editor.] Sir, — In considering whether paying for roads in land is or is not economical, there no doubt exist many difficulties, as we cannot hope to get roads made in this way unless several contingencies are provided for. First. What land have we to alienate for the purpose, and is it of a nature to induce speculators to take it instead of cash ? Secondly. Is there a probability of. (supposing we can find the land) there being spare capital available for making the roads? Let us suppose these two difficulties overcome, the.question arises, Will the capitalist invest the necessary amount in land required to make the road ? And this question appears to me one which can only be answered by calling for tenders ; and if tenders are made, there could be no difficulty in estimating whether the cost of the road would be reasonable, or whether it would be economical to make roads by paying for them in land. Therefore I say, until we are in a position to judge, from the result of calling for tenders, we are not justified in asserting that the plan would not be economical. But we are not in a position to call for tenders to make roads, the cost of which would be more than could be paid for by 5000 acres of land, and all I ask for is to have power given to the County Council to call for tenders for making such main lives of roads as are clearly wanted. If the legislature cannot place confidence in the discretion of the County Council to this extent, then the sooner the County Council is abolished the better, for it ought to be the fittest body to judge of the necessities which exist in the County for roads, and best able to look after the general interests and economical working of any plan proposed for carrying on such public works. Let us now see whether it is not possible to bring the plan before the public in such a manner as to induce almost everyone to take an interest in it. 1 would premise that the road of most importance' to the inhabitants of Weatland or at least to the majority oi them, is

that to which 1 have already alluded, the ! trunk road from Greymouth to Ross. * In^ | Dr Knight's report we have the following estimates :— " A metalled road, 3| miles long, 14ft wide, from Arahura to Stafford Town, L3OOO. (To this must be added the amount of compensation to the present Tramway Company). From Stafford Town to Greenstone an excellent road has been completed, next from Greenstone to; Marsden, six miles," L 7600. From Marsden to Greymouth, 12 miles, . L 11,400. The total cost of roads, therefore, ' to complete a coach road from Greymouth to Hokitika would be L 20,900, and the distance, including the road already made from Stafford Town to Greenstone, 43£ miles. This road, we are^told by Dr Knight, is of urgent necessity, and that it would be a great boon to a large mining population, and connect all the centres of population between the extreme " points. The mails too could , be delivered daily along the line with certainty, and at a much less cost than at present. I need not point out how such sf road would benefit all persons who are engaged in mercantile pursuits, and I feel convinced that it would greatly increase the desire for permanent settlement, by inducing persons to resort to farming pursuits in consequence of increased means of finding access to a market. I think I am not overestimating things' when I say that the capital invested in building and other improvements at Greymouth, Hokitika, and other centres' of population through which this road would traverse, is L 500,000, and I put it to those who have made this investment of capital whether they would refuse to invest five per cent, more on it to purchase land along this line of road for the purpose of getting it made? You, sir, and probably many others, will heap ridicule on me for this scheme ; ; but if it is practical, ridicule won't. destroy it, and I believe it is capable of put into s : operation if properly taken in hand arid ' carefully worked out. I must again sayv ■ that if this road can be made by some . such means as I suggest for L 25,000, the benefit conferred would be cheap at , the money, as it must be obvious that such ' a road would work a vast change in all existing commercial affairs, and would, certainly tend to enhance the value of all property in the district. In conclusion, I will only add that if it is desirable to effect an alteration in the -present Waste Lands Act, the sooner it is made the better, and I cannot <wncur with the reasoning of the County Chairman, who told me in the Council that we had better not ask the General Assembly to alter the present law so soon after getting it passed.' I believe the sooner errors are amended the better, as they have less time to do the injury which . errors must produce. I am, &c., Frank Guinness, M.C.G. April 10, 1871. . ; '