The Lyttelton Times.

Lyttelton Times, Volume IV, Issue 163, 18 February 1854, Page 6

The Lyttelton Times.

February 18, 1854. The price which shall represent the just payment to be made by those who wish to purchase freeholds out of the Waste Lands within this Settlement, is evidently a question which must occupy the attention of our representatives in the Provincial Council as soon as that body obtains the power of dealing with this important national property. From having been brought up in an old country, we can with difficulty divest ourselves of the idea that land in itself must be valuable. Let us inquire then how land acquires a saleable value ? For a little reflection will show us that in itself it often is valueless. For this purpose let us imagine a district so isolated as to be inaccessible to all approach, and inhabited by a scanty population. Land so situated, however fertile, would evidently not be worth a farthing per square mile. What was the value of Robinson Crusoe's whole island as long as it remained unvisited and unknown to any but himself? Such is the condition of land in most countries inhabited by savage people ; —such was once the condition of the whole of these islands :—so that there was plenty to feed the original inhabitants, the rest was of no value to any body. But suppose such a district or country becomes accessible to the rest of the world, either by a route to it being discovered, or by its inhabitants becoming more civilized, then the land, if it will produce any exportable produce, immediately begins to be worth something. Still the value may be very trifling-, for the climate may be so pestilential, that Europeans can scarcely live there, as on the W. coast of Africa; or in-

security of life and property may result from the savage nature of the people, as in Caffreland ; or even if individuals of the European race can live there, there may be few appliances of civilization within their reach —such as medical assistance, religions ordinances, or education for children. Let us now, as a contrast to the above picture, suppose a piece of land so situated as to have all the advantages we have mentioned, and many besides, in the greatest perfection, so that any person dwelling on it, shall have the most ready access possible to every other part of the world, far or near ; shall have the utmost facility for letting out his labour, or disposing of any sort of produce, and- an abundance of churches, schools, medical men, tradesmen, &c, round him ; in short, let this piece of land form a portion of a flourishing town like Melbourne, —what may it not then be worth ? . Thus we see that the very same piece of land which but a few years ago may have been utterly worthless, may now, by being within reach of certain advantages, be worth a fabulous price. It was thus that in the scheme of the Canterbury Association, the price charged for land here (supposing all the contemplated advantages to have been secured by 'the payment of £3 pev acre) could not be called high; whereas without these advantages, and before the establishment of this Settlement, a few years' purchase on the rent at which the bare heibage is let to stock-owners (say 20s. per 100 acres), might have been about its value. This examination of the subject seems at least to justify us in asserting that any a.vbitrary price, such as 10s. an acre, affixed by Sir Geoi-ge^Grey indiscriminately to all the land in these islands, is an absurdity. The several Provinces of New Zealand, when they obtain the power of dealing with their Waste Lands, may be compared to the same number of landlords, each with a large family to provide for, and having each a property more or less improvable to make the most of for the benefit of their respective children. Now the landlord of the Canr terbury block, i.e., the people of this Settlement,, conceive that they have a property as valuable as that of any of the rest. We think we have as fertile a soil, one as easily cleaved and cultivated, as healthy a climate, as good a harbour, as good roads, as many advantages in our social position to attract to us purchasers of our property, as the inhabitants o^ any other Province can boast of. Why then should we n't make the most of our position, and of the advantages of our public property? The more we can get for it the more good it will do all of us; the more it will increase the value of every man's property amongst us, by affording a larger amount to be applied to public works and in various other ways. It is not merely, be it observed, the actual amount received year by year from land sales which will benefit us, but the credit with capitalists which we should obtain by being able to point to a regular revenue arising from a well-ordered system of land-sales, on the credit of which we could borrow consider rable sums. The capitalist, on the contrary, would look with suspicion and distrust upon a people so improvident as to throw away at a mere nominal price property so valuable. This would indeed be to kill the goose which laid the golden eggs, instead of having patience to let the eggs develope themselves, and come forth gradually and in due season. A contrary course, which should open the door to the unprofitable possession of land merely to lie waste, with the expectation of its improving in value, and being hereafter retailed at an advance, would seriously impede our progress. Let anyone observe the effect of even a small

tract like the Town Reserve around Christchurch, being shut up from public use. A stranger approaching Christchurch from Papanui would observe with pleasure, on each side of the road, enclosed and cultivated fields, stacks of corn, houses, cottages and gardens, and would naturally expect that the nearer he got to the capital, the more these signs of improvemect would multiply. He would, therefore, be not a little disappointed to find all these signs of industry and prosperity suddenly cease, and a dreary tract, still in a state of nature, lying before him. Here is a small specimen of what the state of the whole country would be, were all the cultivated parts interspersed with tracts of waste, monopolized by speculators. The industrious small capitalist, wishing to become a proprietor, a would thus find himself'excluded from road frontages and from the neighbourhood of. markets, unless he could purchase his land of the jobber at a great advance on its first cost, and yet this is what is popularly called " cheap land !" That this is no imaginary chimera, but a real danger, will be seen by the statement made by His Honor the Superintendent at a late meeting of the Colonists' Society, at Lyttelton, as reported in our number of Feb. 4, that " negociations had been going on with gentlemen in that town, for the purchase of £150,000 worth of land with Australian capital." It was very encouraging, therefore, to hear a confident expectation expressed by the head of our Government that there was no necessity for our sacrificing valuable property at less than its fair value. His Honor, on that occasion, assured his hearers that " the price of land would soon be regulated by law, and be it what it may, your land-sales will go on. I am certain that surplus Australian capital will find its way hither at a high, as well as at a low price ; that your sales of land will become regular and steady ; that your immigration will revive, and funds be supplied for public works. lam quite certain that all this will shortly come without any sudden or violent interference with the present land regulations." And now one word to the labourer, many of whom we trust will not have been deterred by the length of this article from reading it with attention. Such a man, who has saved a little capital, purposing to invest it in land, may say that we have only had in view the case of an Australian or other capitalist buying land, and the effect of this upon those who already possess property in the Settlement. The case however of the labourer, or other small capitalist, it appears to us would be exactly provided for by a suggestion made by His Honor in the speech to which we have above referred, viz. : that the Government should be enabled to let land on lease at a low rent, with a clause securing the right of purchase to the tenant at a fixed price. Such a tenure as this appears to us admirably to meet the requirements of the valuable class of small capitalists; and thus the interests of all concurring in maintaining a fair price for our public land, we feel assured that the community in this Settlement will not rashly sacrifice their valuable patrimony from impatience at a temporary cessation of Land Sales.

Resident Magistrate's Court, Lyttelton. Feb. 3. Edmund Norman was charged with drunkenness, and sentenced to he fined 10s. He was locked up for 24 hours in default of payment. William Hickihan was also charged with drunkenness, was lined 10s., and in default of payment was imprisoned 24 hours. Feb. 6. Tuson v. Kirhy. This was an action for assault. The defendant was lined £l. with costs. Feb. 10. Baker v. Shalders.- Chas. Baker sought to recover fr.nn Harriet Shalders the sum of £2 Os. Gd. for goods sold and borrowed

property damaged. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs. Feb. 10. Salt v. M iQuin. Henry Salt, a boy about 15 years of age, charged Archibald M'Quin, of Ellestnere Station, with assault. It turned out, upon examination, that Salt had been an extremely impudent servant, and that M'Quin had corrected him for very disgusting language used to him by plaintiff. - The Court was of opinion that Salt had deserved what he got, and dismissed ihe case. Feb. 13. Taylor v. Scott. The plaintiff sought to recover a clock of his which the defendant had retained for some time in his possession. The defendant said that he would give back the clock as soon as he had completed some repairs. The plaintiff wished to get the clock at once, as it had already been for some months in defendant's house. Order of court for delivery of the clock, defendant to pay the costs. Feb. 14. Two Maories, Eli Sara and Joseph Tumutu, were fined 10s. each for being drunk. .The, fine was immediately-paid. The prisoners stated in their evidence that they had got rum at Davis's house. Besident Magistrate's Court, Christchubch. Thursday, 9th February, 1854.— Present, Cap. Simeon, W. G. Brittan, Esq. Sutcliffe v. Campbell.- —This was an action to recover the sum of 19/. 6s. 2d., on two returned cheques which had been given to plaintiff by the defendant. On the case being called on, the defendant (who is the late Commissioner of Crown Lands for Canterbury) objected to Mr. Brittan sitting on the Bench on the ground that he was one of the Directors of the Bank, whereupon Mr. Brittan withdrew. Bichard Sutcliffe sworn, stated, —I produce two cheques, one dated 10th January, 1854, for £10, the other dated 24th January, 1854, for £9 6s. 2rf,, both signed ' Jas. Campbell,' drawn on the Agent of the Union Bank of Australia, in favour of R. Sutcliffe, or bearer •, I am the holder of those cheques. On Monday week I entered Col. Campbell's Office, —I said "I am sorry I have a returned cheque of yours," and asked him to take it out of my hands. He said, "he would make*arrangements in a few days, but could not then." I asked him if the second would be dishonoured, he said he suspected it would. On Friday, I.got notice from port that the second was dishonoured. The plaintiff was cross-examined by the defendant, and Mr. John Williams called, but the only fact elicited was that the amount of the cheques had been offered by Mr. Williams on the part of the defendant that morning, which was refused by the plaintiff, as the costs of the action were not included. Judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed and costs, which were at once paid.