King Country Chronicle Wednesday, April 10th, 1912. KING COUNTRY AND CRITICS.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 455, 10 April 1912, Page 4

King Country Chronicle Wednesday, April 10th, 1912. KING COUNTRY AND CRITICS.

A peculiarly weird feature of the native land question is the uncanny fascination which it exercises upun people. All that appears to be necessary to incite a person to rush into print over the matter is a total lack of knowledge concerning the conditions which govern the question, and a profound ignorance as to the manner in which Europeans in districts where native land abounds are affected by the operation of the special legislation which is applied in the interest of the natives. Obviously such legislation is intended to be in the native interests, otherwise the laws which are found suitable for European owned hinds would suffice. The attention of a single tax advocate in Auckland was recently devoted to showing that the state of affairs in Te KuiU, ami other King Country centres, in :m way differed from the state of affairs in Auckland and its suburban districts. In this instance it was merely an ex-

emplification of the old saw that "any stick is good enough to boat a dog with." The advocate referred to is ever alert for an opportuniy to rush into print when a possible chance occurs to give prominence to his own particular fad. The term fad is used in the broad sense, as whatever virtue attaches to the cause which i\lr F. M. King espouses, enthusiastic hielel' in it is confined as yet, to a small circle. Mr King's effusion was replied to by two Te Kuiti residents, aial ; according to the New Zealand Times, the writers merely succeeded in demonstrating the truth of Mr King's contention. The treatment of ihe. matter by the Times is merely a superficial support <'f k '<')!:: '" !li;i ;uiv °-

eaey of rating on unimproved value::. ; Some iijca of the writer's knowledge j of t'ne position may ho gleaned from : the concluding parargaph of the ; article -vhich says : j "Ah to t.lio. diluculty of lf-\vinfX rates on the Maoris, of which Mr End- : .lie and Mr Jones both make :?o much, j that eouid surely be very readily met ■ by requiring 'ho Maori Land Hoard lo ! pay the rates as trustees for the j Maoris, ihe funds needed for thai pur- j pose to be raised by the hoard leasing \ at. least as much of the land as would j yield enough to pay the rales. Where | there's a will there's a wav." i I There we have it ! .So simple and I easy of solution is the whole question | that it is settled in a few magic words. ; ! The depth and profundity disclosed by i the above will he widely appreciated ; by the residents of ail King Country centres. Asa plain matter o\ fact. the adoption of rating on unimproved. values by Te Kuiti would not affect the natives in the slightest decree.

for the simple reason that no rates are paid by the board. Moreover, there is not the slightest chance that ihe board will pay rates. In addition, it does not matter two straws, as far as Te Kuiti is concerned, whether the board pays rates or not, all the iownship lands having been dealt w;th. Furthermore, the old grievance in connection with the rating of native lands which are. held by the natives

themselves, and not by the board, is in a fair way to a satisfactory solution. The person who has a grievance in this matter now, under certain conditions, is the Maori. An article dealing with the point appeared in the last issue of the Chronicle. This does not alter the fact that for years a very real grievance did exist, and it was only after strenuous and continuous agitation that the Government was induced to apply the remedy. It is no/eworthy that it was not applied in the terms recommended by Mr King, nor was the method suggested by the New Zealand Times adopted. The grievances of the Europeans in respect to native owned townships have deeper root than'either of the authorities referred to realise. People who live m the King Country, when writing on the subject, usually credit outsiders with some knowledge of the position, and in so doing, possibly take too much for granted. The result is criticism and advice which miss the mark, and raise a controversy on a side issue. Verily tin 1 bateshave been unkind to the King try ! A convenient enthusiast has always arisen to start a crusade on a side issue, and divert attention from the real question, when there was a prospect of something definite being accomplished. In ihe recent criticisms by Mr King and (he Tinas, much was made, of the fact that European landlords equnlh with Maori landlords were willing to allow tenants to make all improvements and ilo nothing to assist. That most, landlords would bear such an indietion in a spirit of cheerful resignation is widely admitted, but the comparison Would only be just providing (he same laws'governed Maori and pakeha landlords. How would a European landlord fare if he attempted to lease or sella township without making mo vision for elementary requirements ;n the shape of roads? In the case o! Auckland and its suuurhs, or any other town and its suburbs, the European landlord would be forced lo road his land very completely before the sections could be dealt, wiih. In ihe ease of Te Kuiti the only existed on the plan, and the European ie'-see was compelled to undertake the formation worl: from the start. In many instances swamps had. to be drained before a mad could he started. At (hat. time much of Ihe township land ws.s held by the .Maori Land board the remainder being leased to Europeans, and. as the board lauds were unratable

it: can be imayimd what a lask confronted t!u' Ifuropean population, which was naturally desirous of carryin:; nut improvements ami making lift' \\orlh iiwm; iii -be town. No alleviation of I he position was erantod, mid 111 ._• thanks o\ the Kuropo.ans 1m the hoard in eouscemenoe are not, enthu.'iastie. Tha, ihe prmmpie of the natives assisting in tnc do veUipmen! nf {'no native-owned townships was doomed equitable hy (ho natives {hem solves was evidenced by the dnvrrn-niei-t, (ha!, {ho Taumarunui natives, on their own initiative, offered iodrvole a considerable amount of capital from accrued rents toward;' a loan tor the pnrposo of toe, n i mprovomeu! s. ilad ia.il: an almost, unprecedented expansion taken place at 'he Kuili the lessees would have boon in. a very bad position. Tim exist mice i<\ mirstadh lands controlled by the board won id have retarded progress ami intiicitd an intolerable injustice on (he tain paying lessees. Hy promptly disposing i)t; the lands to bona tide settlers or speculators as the emu- happened to lie and making them ratable, the board prevented an ebnox inns principle .from obtruding itself ioo prominenliy. The adoption of the system of rating on unimproved values would not have alleviated the position in the slightest decree. I'ossibly it would

have acted detrimentally in preventing Kuropeano from taking certain section;., which hecatne ratable afl spoii as they were taken up. Mr Mosiyn ,loner' contention is that from a public standpoint it is more ndvanw.geous for the land to be held by a European speculator, who 18 liable to rates, than by a native speculator whose land is unratable. If ihe Times can arrange matters 80 thai, the board shall pay rates there is no; him: more iv be said. By accomplishinj: so much it. will also win a high place in the regard of King Country n-sidents. "Where there's | a will there's a way." There are i various other aspects of the case which ' might be refeired to, but the criticisms of Mr King and the Times were i confined lo the question of rating. j There will probably arise other opportunities, for these authorities to Hir i ;heir knowledge of the native land