CORRESPONDENCE.

King Country Chronicle, Volume I, Issue 30, 17 May 1907, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—l note that in a speech at Tamvhare, Mr Bell denies that he is paid for his time and servicer, end calls me names for referring to him as a paid agent, instead of stating' that he, and others, were only receiving out of pocket expenses, which information is not furnished by Mr Bell, but by Mr Duxfield in his letter in srour5 r our issue of May sth- These gentlemen are very tender on thi£ subject, but as subscriptions had been solicited by the Farmers' Union, for the purpose of prosecuting a campaign against the Land Bill, it was reasonable to expect that the labourer was worthy of his hire. The same extravagant language, and mock heroics indulged in by Mr Bell, may sound well at a Farmers' Union meeting, but they play an ill part in every-day politics. Far better to have tried to show how the proposed legislation is going to destroy the freehold, and take away our birthright, etc., etc. I have failed to see anything in the Bill to do these dreadful things. Mr McNab has stated that the surplus Native lands would be disposed of under the optional tenure. Mr Bell told us he did not believe him, and quoted something from'the Labour Journal, written by. someone else. Mr Bell suggested that the loyal and patriotic are freeholders. Who fills the ranks of the army ? Are they freeholders ? Who formed the largest proportions of the contingents that left this country for South Africa? Were they free--, holders? The most important part of the Land Bill is barely dealt with by those who oppose it. If the remaining Crown lands were set aside for endowments, we should, undoubtedly, see far more activity in the settlement of the surplus Native lands. If the Bill passes, the farmer who entered into a l.i.p. will know that he has to stick to it. or compete for it in the open market. If a large amount of the money now invested in mortgages, was available for developing the numerous industries of the land, we should progress more rapidly. If we recognise that the landless have some right to speak as well as the freeholders, we will be able to see some good in the Bill. If we are prepared to say that we do not want any more endowments ; that they are unnecessary ; then we will vote against this Bill; but, if we_ recognise that endowments are required, we will be honest and support the Bill, and help to make it a better one.l am, etc., BEWARE.