THE NEW LAND BILL.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 510, 19 October 1912, Page 5

THE NEW LAND BILL.

SECOND READING DEBATE. SUPPORT FROM BOTH PARTIES. [BY TKLKJKAI'II. I'BICSS ASSOCIATION.] Wellington, This Day. The debate on the second reading of the Land Bill was resumed in the House by Mr Sykes, who upheld the freehold tenure. He considered it would be a good bargain for the State if all L.I.P. Crown tenants acquiired the freehold. Mr Buxton urged that the Government should take steps for the cutting up of private estates by providing that the Government would guarantee the purchase money for which private purchasers had made themselves responsible. Ho also urged that the chances of an applicant at a land ballot should depend to a certain extent on the number of his children. Mr R. W. Smith considered holders of small grazing runs should be given the freehold under the easiest possible conditions. The proposals of the Government were all in favour of the wealthy land owners. Mr Hanan said he was convinced the Bill was not going to give satisfaction to the majority of the members in the House. It was apparent the Bill did not bear out the promises made on the platfuorm by members of the Government when it faced the country as an Opposition. Mr C. K. Wilson complained that the great trouble to-day was that j country boys were coming to town. On the other hand people in towns had not sufficient facilities to settle on rural areas. He wanted "a right to hold" for city people. Mr Laurenson urged the doubling of the land tax on bachelors. This Bill would not prevent reaggregation. H« agreed with the sale of the L.I.P. lands, but it would be a betrayal to sell renewable leases. He considered the suggestion monstrous that the Maori should be subject to the same laws, in relation to land, as Europeans. Such a procedure would be a blot upon the national honour. Mr Mander thought that if the Land Board' could place unsuccessful balloters upon land as was done in Canada it would be an improvement. He thought it would be a good idea to exchange or sell endowment lands if it benefitted the State.

Mr Bradney advocated freehold with limited area.

At 12.34 Mr Craigie announced to a bare quorum that he was going to be against the Bill, which he describe as reactionary, and a measure in favour of property and wealth. Mr Massey replied juat after 1. He said he believed the Bill, when it came into operation, would stop the exodus of our young men to Australia. He intended to give tenants of settlement lands the freehold at the original value. He reiterated the statement that the natives had offered 250,000 acres to be cut up. He knew that a lot o£ sharks, Doth European and Maori, were fattening on the sale of native lands, and the Government intended to put an end to it. Regarding fruit industry, it was intended to start canneries and cooleries as soon as the money would permit. The divisiun list is as follows: For: Allen, Anderson, atmore, Bell, J. R. Bollard, Bradney, Buchanan, Buddo : Buick, Coates, Escott, Fisher, Praser, Guthrie, Harris, Herciman, Herries, Hine, Hunter, Lang, Lee, Mac Donald, McKenzie, Malcolm, Massey, E. Newman, Nosworthy, Okey, Pearce, Pomare, Reed, R. H. Rhodes, Scott, Smith (2), Statham, Sykes, Thomson (2), Wiiford, Wilkinson, Wilson.—43. Against: Carroll, Craigie. Davey, Forbes, Hindmarsh, Isitt, Laurenson, McCallum, Dr. Newman, Payne, Rangihiroa, Robertson, Russell, Seddon, Sidey, "Veitch, Witty. Clark, J. Bollard, Dickie, Mander, Ward. Against: Brown, Colvin, Parata, Hanan, Ell.