Manawatu Herald. TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 1892. Village Settlements.

Manawatu Herald, 23 August 1892, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 1892. Village Settlements.

A good deal has been said and written about Village Settlements. A ,few years ago Mr Ballance allowed his zeal in the organisation of these settlements to outrun his discretion, and placed them in most absurd positions, besides spending many unauthorised- thousands of pounds to bolster them up. Because the absurdity of his action was shown up, the present Government party try to brand the Opposition with a prejudiced objection to such settlements, but this has been cleared up to the members of that party, hy the speech made by Mr J. G. Wilson on the Financial statement. He showed that I" as long as they are properly conducted, we shall support them " but he instanced the settlement at Pahiatua and Levin as exhibitions of the errors of judgment for which the Minister of Lands is answerable. In Pahiatua he asserts that the Premier and Minister of Lands, only inspected one allotment, the property of their host for the night, and the only man on the whole block who has been successful. Coming nearer home he mentions the errors of judgment made in the Levin settlement which have but to be read to be admitted. Mr Wilson says, that he cannot see " how it can succeed under the conditions upon which it has been established. The land is standing bush. There are fairly good roads to it, and there is good access to it— that is to say, the railway is closo by— and the place is particularly suitable for a village settlement, But the unfortunate thing was that the valuation placed upon the land was too high— so high indeed that it was utterly impossible the settlement oould be any use at all. They charged the settlers for standing hush £15 an acre. You will see what the cost of this will be when tho village settler gets his land into grass. Let us say it is a five-acre section. The occupant is charged £75 for that ; then, the felling of the bush and fencing will cost him £4 an acre more - £20 ; building his house and making his garden will cost him about £70 more : or a total of £165 or £33 an acre for this land. How village settlers are going to succeed under these conditions I cannot understand ; and I hope the Minister of Lands will take into consideration the fact that these settlers cannot thus benefit themselves or the community, and consider whether he should* not reduce the charge, he has placed on the land."

We would draw attention to how these settlers are also further handicapped oy the enormous value placed upon their land. In the first place a village settler has to reside upon his property, he must necessarily improve it to its utmost extent by falling, grassing, fencing and building, as mentioned by Mr Wilson, so that he has no loophole out of the fact that his property has cost him £88 an aore and is therefore fairly entitled to be rated on thafc amount. Around him are many larger holdings, which are not so highly improved, nor built upon, for which roads are as necessary. The County and Road Board rates are three half-pence- in the pound on the value of the property, and on £33 the village settler would have to pay four shillings an acre, whilst his larger neighbour whose land is only valued at fifty shillings per acre, would only have to pay three pence three farthings per acre ; over twelve times as much rates for a lesser benefit. In seven years time the road rates paid by the village settlement would represent the cash value of almost adjoining lands. Village settlers are not likely to be a successful body of men when handicapped all through life in this manner, and this illustration shows what little practical knowledge the Minister of Lands has of the life and troubles of the small working settler. The extortionate charges o the government more nearly resemble those discount offices business of which we so frequently read about, than an earnest attempt of a statesman anxious to help the small settler. We feel sure our readers will admit thafc the Opposition are right and the Government wrong in this question at anyrate.