SOLDIER SETTLERS

Hokitika Guardian, 27 January 1922, Page 4

SOLDIER SETTLERS

NON-RAYMENT of rates

! FORFEITURE POSSIBLE. [ WELLINGTON, January 24. • The failure of some soldier Bettlers ! to pay their rates was mentioned in the House of Represntative s to-day by Mr A. D. McLeod (Wairarapa), who said that certain local bodies in his own district were being embarrassed by the loss of revenue. The local bodies had to maintain the roads and the water-races, .which were used, by the soldiers, but they were being deprived for the time being .of a part of their revenue. Some of them' had tP pay the interest on special loans fpr works that were benefiting the soldier settlements. Mr MoLepd ashed if the .Gcivernjgierrt could give dome assistance to the local bodies. The Minister of Lands (the Hon D. H. Guthrie) replied that the question was a very wide one. The payment of rates was a condition of th'e soldiers’ leases and agreements, and the land of the men who did not pay their rateß was liable to forfeiture. The case in the Wairarapa district was a difficult one, but there wa s another ,side to it. The sold'iers had been fighting to secure the reduction of what they regarded as excessive valuations, and in the meantime they were not paying their rates. They had been notified that they were making themselves liable to forfeiture. Some of the local bodies, continued tho Minister, had accepted a quarter of the rates from the soldier settlers. He thought that if local bodies would meet the men in a reasonable way something might be arranged. Some of the men were two years in arrea now. The Government could not possibly undertake to pay the rate ß on behalf of thes settlers. If he did this in one case, he would 'have 'claims from all over tho country. The rates question was a matter between the local bodies and the settlers. If he did this in one case, be would have claims from all over the conn try. The rates question was a matter between the local bodies and the settlers. The Government would assist the local bodies to collect the rates by impressing upon the soldiers that they were liable to forfeiture of their sections if they did not pay.

“I know that the Minister would not forfeit the section of a man who could not pay his rate, and I wd(ulid like him to say so definitely,” said Mr G. Mitchell (Wellington South). “He left an impression that those not able to pay their rates would lose their sections. A number of men cannot pay their rates. Others are not trying to pay, and I have no sympathy with those.”

The Minister replied that he had not said the sections would he forfeited. He had said that if the rates were not paid tho sections were liable to forfeiture. He liad not forfeited one section in New Zealand for non-payment of rates, and he hoped that it wohild never be necessary to do so. Men who were trying had nothing to fear; the Government would stand by them, and members would find when they examined the Discharged .Soldiers Settlement Amendment Bill that the Government was extending its powers to assist the soldiers.

TRIBUTE TO POVERTY BAY SETTLERS. ? GISBORNE, January 24. b A fine trilyute to the Poverty Bay s settlers was paid to-day by Mr W. F. . March, Commissioner of Crown Lands. . He referred particularly to the courage of the soldier settlers who had taken up land since the war. “The men we have to dea] with are a really good type,” said Mr Marsh, “and they show that they are not averse to buckling down and sticking to their places through the trouble that has come on the country generally. They are bona fide settlers, and as such are entitled to the sympathy of the Government.” Dealing with the prospects of the settlements, Mr Marsh remarked that in the end things must right themselves. The markets could not always stay down, and the r ent paid by the 'soldiers was not such as to bind themj down. In regard to Homebusb, purchased at £IOO per acre, he was particularly emphatic in his prediction of success. Here were men with good J land on a main road within easy reach of town, and principally' in the suburbs. The value of the land would never depreciate for flat land was not. so plentiful that it could be neglected in New Zealand. It might he said speaking from the point of the present markets, that the land had been bought too high, and the soldiers were paying for it. In this connexion, however it had) to- be remembered that the money soldiers were using was cheap and that the men had the opportunity of making the places their own. The rent did not represent a tithe of what could Ik> realised from the holdings by , application, and, on the whole, the soldiers who held the property were clearer as to their standing than were I the general public. There was one remedy for the present had tunes, hard work and the men were applying . it. Tlie settlers on the larger properties were perhaps in wdrso case, but here again, in their demeanour, there was no indication that they were losing heart. They were emulating Olie fight of the settlers of many years ago, who, when they took up their sections, were faced with conditions no better than those of the present day, but had forced success by unremitting work, and application. The spirit of emulation was a most desirable one, and should receive the utmost encouragement.