HAURAKI PLAINS SOLDIER SETTLERS.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4382, 24 February 1922, Page 3

HAURAK I PLAINS SOLDIER SETTLERS.

the revaluation petition. PAYMENT OF RENT POSTPONED. UNTIL PRICES ARE STABILISED. FULL PARLIAMENTARY REPORT. The following is a full Parliamentary report of the discussion of the petition by Hauraki Plains soldier settlers for a revaluation of .peat lands, which, they contend, are too > highly valued. Parliament agreed to a po&tponemept of the payment of rent until sucli time at prices are stabilised, and to an ultimate' revalua- . tion: Mr E. Newman (Manawatu) brought up the report of the Lands Committee on the petition of Walter Mclnnes and twenty-three others* and Thomas Stichbury and one other, praying for a revaluation of their sections ih the Hauraki Plains area. The Committee was of opinion that the time, was not opportune for a revaluation, as the land required time before it cpuld become fully productive, and that a coni tinned postponement Of rent- in the meantime was a satisfactory policy. He moved, in accordance .with: the recommendation of the Committee, “That the*report do lie upon the table, and be referred tp the Government for consideration.” Mr Veitch (Wanganui) asked the honourable genfcleman if the report of J the Committee referred to soldier settlement lands. Ifl it did, he wished to draw the attention of the Government to a phase of the soldieP-settle-ment problem which $ had been brought under his notice recently, which he thought warranted further consideration of the matter by /the Minister of Lands in conjunction with the Minister of Finance—he was re-' ferring to a number of settlers on the Wanganui River, on' a settlement known as wliich was one of the largest returned soldier settlements in the North Island; The land was entirely sheep land, and th© settlers there could not go in for dairying and bring in a little cash as some'-of the other soldier settlers had , beeh permitted tp do, with .the result , that they were short ofl cash. The position was that there hras practically no cash coming in.. Those who had. sold their wool had. just as much cash coming in as those who had not sold it, and the Prime Minister would' understand the reason for that. Most of the soldier settlers had paid out their last shilling to meet their liai bilities to/the Lands thus showing clearly that they were anxious and willing to do their best. He had seen some of the party-on the settlement, though not as much as. he would like to have seen, but it was perfectly clear that the qualify of the land in the Mangapurua Settle-, ment was particularly good, and if the settlers could be helped .through the present difficulties they would make a great success of -the settlement. They were just about the best type Of s.oldier settlers in the Dominion, hut their present difficulty was a very serious one—namely, that some of .them were 'completely out of cash. They had not even the cash to buy the necessaries of life for their homes. He had met one of them In Wellington a few days ago who had , informed him that his wife was dangerously ill and unable to return to the settlement, and he had no money to provide for her away from 'her home on the settlement. The settler had to go back, in order to look alter his stock on, the settlement and keep the farm going. He had worked very hard, and it required t|he whole of his time to look after the farm, with the result that he could not accept employment off his land, except to a limited extent, even if such employment were available. The settler had practically no cash, left to meet rei quirements and) to purchase food to keep the home going. Mr Speaker : T do hot wish to interrupt the honourable member, but I have just had the petition placed In my hands, and find that it deals simply with the Hauraki Plains. The honourable gentleman will understand that when a petition deals with one particular subject he cannot discuss a general question or any particular question which’is hot embodied in the petition. Mr Veitch saiid he accepted Mr Speaker’s ruling, but had said praci tically all that he desired to say, ex- ' cept that he wanted the Minister *o give his attention to the matter he had referred to, because the soldier settlers mentioned were in a very difficult position and were worthy of sympathetic treatment. Mr Poland (Ohinemuri) said he had presented the two petitions at the commencement of the session, and he regretted that the report of the Lands Committee was not more favourable, because if ever there was a petition presented to the House which had merit on its side it was that ofl these twenty-six returned soldiers, who had been settled under the Discharged Soldiers Settlement Ac® on the Hauraki Plains, and who asked for a revaluation of their sections or remission of their rent. Of course, the Hauraki Plains district had a high reputation throughout New Zealand, and it might appear strange to honourable members that returned soli diers, within two years of having taken up these lands, were petitioning Parliament for relief, but the circumstances were such that these men had no option but to ask /or either the revaluation of their sections or a remission of their rent... They were placed on the sections in 1919, when land in New Zealand—whether on the Haurpki 1 Plains or anywhere else—was valued very highly. Mr Sykes : Then it was the Land Board's mistake in the first instance. Mr Poland said that the Land Board —or whoever had valued the, sections —had overvalued them. He had been satisfied upon tfiatl point at the time of the ballot, and had wired to the Minister of Lands asking that the lands should be revalued, but the Minister declined. His (Mr Poland) knowledge extended back tb the time before the Government took over the swamp for settlement, and he had

taken a keen interest In the district since 1907, and had a good knowledge of the values. Among the twentyt-six petitioners there were two who had taken up a section of land which in 19.10 was valued at £1 5s per acre. The man who had drawn this section had thrown it up, then another got it and threw it up, and since that time the land had been lying idle. No farther money was expended on it, except to survey it and divide it into two sections', and it was disposed of at £lO per acre. This land was ini eluded in the twenty-six sections to which the petition referred. This section of land had been put up and sold to the. soldiers at £lO an acre, though when first valued it was valued at £1 5s per acre, and was considered too high at that price. No improvements had been effected upon the land. For the other land near Patetlonga the soldiers in 1919 had been asked to pay up to £2O an acre ; this land was peat country, over'2oft deep in places—deeper into the centre of the swamp ’ than land which in 1915 had been sold to civilians at £6. £7 and £lO an dcre. Mr Mclnnes, who had given evidence on behalf ofl the petitioners before the Lands Committee, and who had given splendid evil dence, had stated that he thought ne himself might pull through; but he was ,a single man, whereas many of the petitioners were married. He had £4OO when he took up his section, whereas many of the others had little or nothing. He stated that he had bought cattle twelve months ago, witn flhe idea of feeding them and making money out of them. He had paid £4 10s each for them, but at Morrinsville last September the highest offer he could get for them was £1 10s« That had been his experience. Other settlers had been misled, and through ignorance of the true nutritive value of the weeds and rushes they had bought battle with the idea of milking, but they had found that it was impossible to milk cattle or. graze them there with the land in its prer sent state. ■ One man had taken up 150 apr.es, valued by iljhe Department at £2O an acre, and he w'as asked to pay interest on the £3OOO represented, by that value, but if he worked the land and employed labour to assist him .he would not be able to get any return for at least four years. How could such a man be expected tp pay his rent? The fact of the matter was that the land was not in a fit state to be opened up when tfhese soldiers were settled on.it.

The Hon. Mr Guthrie : ,Tou forced our hands in regard to the matter. Mr Poland said ihe had not forced the hands of the Government in. regard to the opening up of this land. The only Hauraki Plains land which he had urged the Government to settle was tlie Awaiti Block, near Netherton. The Department refused year after year to open it up, buit} ac last its hands'were forced,, the land was.opened up, arid it wa,s now a most prosperous settlement. He was quite prepared to say that the Minister of Lands was sympathetic in' regard to all soldiers on the land, but he had been misled in this case; and whoever ■ induced the Land. Board to put the present values on the land had misled it. If the Minister could only see the sections for himself he would say that the land was overvalued. Some of the men had lived there for two years, and were now in an absolutely hopeless state, and required' relief urgently. The witness.who gave evidence before the Committee told, him some of the settlers had said to him, “Don’t you think lit is better to give up the two'years we have put in and get out while we ,are able to get out?” And ihe said itl.was, unless some relief was given. The same' told the Committee that he went over some of the sections in 1919, be-, fore the ballot, and he would not apply for them. Several young fellows from Paeroa also went over the place, and would not apply for the land. Mr Mclnnes informed the Committee that if he was offered some of t)ie worst sections for nothing now he would not take them. That man was a practical farmer, and .was born on the of the Hauraki Plains ; he was on the survey party that put the survey of the railway across the Plains. He knew the land, and fie had put in two years of bitter expedience since He was successful at tlhe ballot, and he said to the’Government, “You must remit the rent, or half these settlers will fail.” The men did not ask for a remission. of rent in- the petition, and the reason, for tfhis', the witness said, was that they had already applied twice to the Land Board and been turned down, and their pnly recourse geemed to be fo apply for a revaluation. His (Mr Poland) own opinion was that ,the Government should have given the land free of rent for three or four years to men who would live on it and endeavour to bring it into a productive state,. and he believed now that a similar provision to that of the Bush and Swamp Crown Lands Act should be applied to the land the Government was at; present opening up on the [Plains. There were a few rich areas to be opened up yet. Next year the .Government- was opening up near Kerepeehi a very fine .block of land ; but the fact remained that for the' last eleven years it had been steadily opening up tlhe best and most acces-, sible land, and gradually working into the peat country, until; now there was little of the Hauraki Plains left which was not deep peat country. It would be some years before that country was productive. At the beginning of September, the men said they wished to petition Parliar ment, he said ihe would have a look at the land personally and see whether a petition was justified. An Hon. Member: What about a fire in that land ? Mr Poland said a fire would not be started until the land was very wet. He went over several oif the sections, and found it impossible to walk through some of them'; a person who attempted it would sink out of sight, and one had the greatest difficulty and had to dodge to a firm spot and walk along the drains to get throughHow were men with 150 acres of tihat land t'o pay interest ? Tf they had 50 acres they might gat it Into a productive state in three or four years, but hbw could they get 150 artres fit that

kind of country into a productive state without considerable capital 1 The land should never have been opened in such large areas'; it should have been given free of rent to the ■ s for tihree or four years, and it should have been sold at a fair value. It should have been given to them for at least three or four years free, provided they lived on it and showed they were bona fide settlers. These med were returned soldiers. While they were away civilians were given better land alongside at £5, £6) or £7 an acre, and when these men came back in 1919 they were asked to pay £l6, 17, £lB, or £2O an acre for land in a lessiiprepared state. Men with areas of 72 to 80 acres paid £2O an acre for it in .1919, while sections adjoining had been sold in 1915 at £6 ian acre. On the Mangawhero Road there .were sections of 165 acres and 176 acres sold in 1919 at £lB and £l6, respectively, deeper in the peat country than £;hei land opened up in 1915 on the same road at £lO ; and on the Tramway Road, where the sections were 96 acres each, and opened up at £l6, £l7, £lB, and £2O. they adjoined sections opened up in 1915 at £5 an acre. Ohei man on a £5 section had been there nearly seven years, had built a house, erected, a milkingshed, fenced his section, partially drained it, and had endeavoured to grass it; and he now valued it at £lB an acre, but could not sell it at! that price. And that was the price at which the Government sold these un'improved to the returned soldiers. The prayer of the petitioners had not been recommended by the Committee. They asked for a revali nation; they would be glad to get a remission of rent; but the Committee recommended tlhe postponement of rent. Mr Mclnnes told the Committee he, had been n.otifled that an applicar tion for postponement would be considered by the Board, but he stated that he would* not apply for [it.. The petitioners, did not want such a sword hanging over their heads. A postponement woul/' be no good; it only delayed the evil day. ■ And the Lands Department held'that they could not revalue for thr,ee years after the land had been taken up. An Hon Member: They can, get a revaluation under another section o" the Act. Mr Poland said that was correct, but according to this report they still had to wait three years for another valuation. ‘The Land Board took up this attitiide towards these settlers, and said, “You ask for a postponement of your uent. We will capitalise it and add it to the amount the land is valued 0 now, and bring the price up anothert £1 or £2.” The Hon. Mr Guthrie: They never advocate anything of the kind. Mr Poland replied that they did ; and He had known the rent to be capitalised by the Land Board on several occasions. f The Hon. Mr Guthrie: That is not ( the policy of the Department. Mr Poland did not know what the policy was, because it varied so greatly. But the settlers in question felt that the postponement hanging over their heads gave them no heart or inducement to improve their, seci tions and’ enable them to pay their rent in the future. It was all very well for the Government or the Land Board to say,, “We will not be hard on you; if you will make an effort and do your best on your sections, and lo not meet with much success, well:, we will postpone the rent.” That meant that if at a subseqxient date their ■position improved they would have to face the heavier burden of the double rente.. Let them take the case of a man with a capital of £6OO, who cpuld perhaps farm for four, or five years without any return. Ultimately he made a success of his venture, and then was, faced with the postponed rent and the current rent. But his neighbour without capital, who was not a successful farmer, had his rent remitted He would be the better treated of the two. He (Mr Poland) urged that the rents o|f the petitioners should be remitted, and the position of the settlers in question recognised by the Government. The land (Continued on page 4.)