To the Editor of the Hawke's Bay Times.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume II, Issue 41, 10 April 1862, Page 3

To the Editor of the Hawke's Bay Times.

Sir, —Some two years ago, our ruuholders sought to alter the Land Regulations of this Province in a manner that would have effectually and irretrievably locked up in their hands nearly all the public domain; but after passing sundry resolutions on the subject through the Provincial Council, and that with hut one opposing voice (Mr. Coleuso’s), they fortunately failed to get their amendments legalised by the General Assembly. Since that time, they have virtually had their fling at the public property, and have, in spite of the hard terms under which they as tenants of the Crown suffer, bought tens of thousands of acres of land at the low rates of five and ten shillings the acre. Strange it may appear, but it is not less strange than true, they are not satisfied with their success in appropriating the public territory ; and, because a few who do not belong to the privileged class have dared to contest the purchases in some cases, they again seek an alteration, in the shape of sundry restrictions on would-be competitors, and their chosen champion throws down the gauntlet by tabling another string of resolutions ; on this occasion, however, Mr. Ormond had reckoned without his host, and found his views would not go down ; even Mr. T. H. Fitz Gerald, who, as pro. tem. superintendent and aspirant for a seat in the General Assembly, undertook to advocate the cause of our distressed and ill-used runholders, now, as leader of the opposition and aspirant to the seat he once filled so satisfactorily (to himself, if not to the Province), ventures to amend Mr. Ormond’s amendments. Had Mr. Ormond’s resolutions been simply negatived, as they ought to have been, the matter might have rested ; but unfortunately the amended resolutions were carried, and possibly may be acted on by the Governor in Council without reference to the General Assembly. The distinguishing feature of the proposed alteration is the doubling the lowest upset price of land, and that I submit is a very illtimed measure; although two years ago it

might, and probably would, have been decidedly advantageous to the public. It is too late to lock the door now, when probably four-fifths of the available land has been alienated. It is very much like presenting several thousand pounds to certain of our largest landholders. To one monopolist, whose name I need not mention, it would be raising the market value of his tens of thousands of acres fully 100 per cent. Above all, it would still further complicate the native land question. If it is decided that the natives are to enjoy all the privileges of “ freeholders” without paying even the necessary expenses of the change, all the advantages of public expenditure without contributing in proportion, all the advantages and revenues of landed proprietors without the corresponding drawbacks, costs, and duties, surely it is unwise to arbitrarily increase their advantages twofold. If our largest proprietors are not rich enough, then let us double the value of their possessions. If the Maories are not exacting enough, are not sufficiently imbued with a high opinion of their own consequence, by all means let the alteration be carried out. They at any rate will appreciate the change, and not neglect to, turn it to account. Their next epistle to their dear friend Governor Thomas (Fitzgerald) will doubtless contain some allusion to the change. Our dear friend (they may say) if our land was worth Is. Gd. to 3s. Gd. the acre yearly when you wrote to us, it must necessarily be worth twice as much now, as the Crown land is worth the doubled price. Perhaps it will be argued by some, that as we must raise a revenue, the doubling the price of land is politic. But is there, no other method of providing the funds to carry out the peace at any and every price policy to which the colony is committed ? Is it advisable to put difficulties in the way of those who desire to invest in land ? Why not allow them to buy at the same rate as others have done, and so put all on equal terms ? and when, as appears to be certain and inevitable, the expense of supporting the army of tax-eaters that are being saddled on us, and of bribing the natives to allow us to reside on our territory, leaves us no option, we shall have to resort to direct taxation ; then all who have acquired land from the Crown will be, both legally and equitably, equally liable, and there need be no dispute as to time or place of purchase, the necessary rate per acre only needing to be calculated and levied on rich and poor alike. I trust his Excellency will not, by now doubling the price of land, reverse the most successful of all the measures he introduced during his former administration. Yours, Pluto. Ahuriri, 4th April, 1862.