The Lyttelton Times MONDAY, JAN. 9, 1882.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LVII, Issue 6511, 9 January 1882, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times MONDAY, JAN. 9, 1882.

When a certain daring Bishop ventured to suggest that the object o£ the campaign of Parihaka was to throw dust in the eyes of the people, at that important period for popular vision, the general elections, the Government became very angry indeed. In their wrath they and their supporters talked a great deal about the wickedness of imputing motives which it was impossible to prove. Now, admitting that motives cannot be proved, we have yet the sanction of law for believing that they can reasonably be inferred from results. And that the West Coast excitement did result in the raising of much dust can hardly be denied, seeing that wo have a confession from a member of the Cabinet itself, that for a

time it obscured the right and absorbed the attention of the Minister of Lands on the very weighty matter of thereleasing of the Otago runs. It will bo remembered that shortly after the southern elections had gone so far against the Government as to return some seventeen or eighteen Opposition members, a mooting of these representatives was convened by Mr Vincent Pyko. In the absence of a formal Parliament, the elected of Otago constituted themselves into an informal one. Tho irregularity of their proceedings rendered their notion none the less worthy of attention. Prom what passed it appeared there was reason to fear that tho Cabinet did not mean to deal fairly with tho Run * question. Two of those present declared that a distinct promise had been given by a Minister that tho pastoral leases should not bo finally dealt with until after the meeting of the new Parliament. This promise, if made at all, had been forgotten. The old leases were to expire on the last day of February, 1882, and the Government undoubtedly meant to settle the whole matter without waiting for the meeting of a new Assembly. Under these circumstances, the Otago members —and we cannot blame them—flew to the conclusion that Mr Hall and his colleagues had another big job in contemplation; that the re-leasing was to be hurried through daring the recess, in order to enable existing run-holders to obtain their leases at slightly enhanced rates; and that the country in general, and intending applicants for leases in particular, were to be victimised to secure the Otago squatters for another decade. The subsequent action of the Cabinet, as we shall presently show, has done much to clear away these suspicions. At the time, however, they seemed by no means groundless, and the meeting was led by them to pass several resolutions condemning the imaginary policy of the Government, and praying for a delay of the whole business. The next act in the drama was a letter in reply to all this from the Honorable Thomas Dick. This document contained the confession on the subject of the Farihaka affair, referred to at the beginning of this article. Mr Dick commenced by apologising for tardiness in laying Government proposals on the Run question before the public. This slowness he attributed to the fact of the Taranaki disturbances having left his colleague, the Minister for Lands, no leisure to attend properly to the work of his department. To enlarge on the moral of this is, we think, unnecessary. Mr Dick then went on to inform Mr Fyke and the other members whose names were attached to the memorial, to which his letter was an answer, that the Government proposals had been forwarded to the Otago Lands Board. To this body the executive business of the re-letting was by' law entrusted, and to prove the sincerity of their wishing for a, fair settlement of the question, the Cabinet, at this stage, wisely appointed Mr Robert Stout to a seat on the Board.

Henceforth Mr Pyke and his fellow? representatives disappear, and the Lands Board comes prominently forward. Before it; the Government scheme for the disposal of the pastoral land —since published in extenso in these columns — was in doe coarse laid. Exhaustive it undoubtedly is, Nor, after a careful perusal, are we prepared to find serious fault with its details. The two million and three-quarters of acres to be dealt with are divided into two classes. Of these the smaller, amounting only to some few hundred thousands, are to be sold on deferred payments to small settlers. Better still, the sale is not to he rushed on, but to be spread over a period of twelve months. Needless to say, this is as it should be, and will probably have the effect of bringing a good price for <he land in question into the public treasury. But with regard to the other two million and a-half acres, which are not to be sold but to be re-let, nonsuch breathing-time is allowed. Two months is all the space allotted for intending speculators to complete their financial preparations. The reason —or shall we call it excuse —given is that the leases expire at the end of February, and that the Grown has no authority to make temporary arrangements for bridging the gap between that time and the meeting of the General Assembly. Eeally such a line of argument strikes us as slightly puerile. New Zealand Governments, as a rule, have not shown themselves afraid of doing acts which have called for a subsequent Parliamentary whitewashing, least of all would one look for nervous timidity from the Oabinet of Mr Hall. Were we not told that the suppression of Te Whiti would be carried out —law or no law P Was not the Governor to be, if necessary, defied—law or no law? Surely the men who could swallow twenty thousand acres of Paribaka should not strain at so very small a legal gnat in Otago. Who is there to blame the Oabinet for taking such a course P Not the Opposition, for they demand it; nor the Ministerial supporters, for we have had too complete an experience of their powers of endurance to expect at the worst more than a protest from them. This excepted, there is, at first sight, no pther strong objection to be taken to the Government recommendations. The subdivision of the present runs into some hundred and fifty sections is only in accordance with the repeatedly expressed wishes of the public. The suggestion to the Lands Board that tjie terms of years for which the different divisions are to be leased should vary from ten to seven, or even less, seems equally wise, for it will prevent a repetition of the present scramble. The assessment of rent will be such as to ensure a good revenue, without levying an exorbitant rate; and the statutory powers reserved to the Board of taking land in the future for sale, without compensation, ought effectually to prevent the looking-up of country. From this it will be seen that it is to the manner, and not the matter, of the Government scheme that oar objections have been raised. Whether the Colony will suffer from their precipitancy, is perhaps doubtful. But this is certain: the

present leaseholders will oot so suffer. One point more, and wo have done. Ministers and the Lands Board are nliko acting on tho assumption that the wholo question of tho re-lotting of tho runs is governed by tho Lands Aot of 1877. As a matter of fact there aro important exceptions in this statute with regard to the Otago and Canterbury runs. As the Dunedin Herald has pointed ont, the pastoral lands in these two Provinces aro expressly left subject to tbo regulations affecting them previous to tho passage of the Land Aot. Now, those regulations in Otago enacted, amongst other uiattcro, that runs should be re-let with their areas unaltered, and that full compensation should be paid for improvements by the incoming tenant. That these two things are quite incompatible with tho Government scheme is at once apparent. Wo believe, however, that the attention of the Lands Board has been drawn to the difficulty. What they think we shall soon know. Mr Stout, at all events, is not likely to commit! himself to illegalities. . ;