SIR F. DILLON BELLAT INVERCARGILL.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 266, 10 April 1874, Page 3

SIR F. DILLON BELLAT INVERCARGILL.

Sir F. D. Bell met his constituents to tell them what he thought of,the last session .does 'to have haa much to teil,,-so in his usual plausible style he alternately, praised and blamed the. Ministry. . .1 To was,not veryclear, or the telegraphist has not done him justice, in his condemnation of the Provincial .Borrowing, Bill. He said it was surrounded by sufficient safeguards ;■ that property, could only -have been, taxed to the-amount of one shilling in the ' potihd for local improvements, and therefore'ample security would have to have been given for any loan ; but yet he opposed-the Bill; and should do so again. When Sir Francis said the opinion of the country was adverse-to"the-"Billy we""are'nof "prepared" to say it we believe; if' that be true, the reason is that the country not only did not understand 'the Bill, but that it did nut 'suit'meri of-the class to which Sir; Francis belong?; and they, like the Roxburgh people, fancy they have interests apart from those of-the public That' was why the Legislative Council rejected it, and why,. he opposed it. The plausibility of Sir F. D. Bellls politics showed itself in the manner in which he alluded to the land question. "Straws show which way 'the v?ind blows, and Sir Francis' floated a straw in the air which" seems to have suited his hearers," but'which should prove a, ; note, of warning. We do,.notknow -whose , system of colonization Sir Francis has been studying, but he told ■his audience:—" Nor could there be any sound system of immigration, unless at 'the same 1 time they reserved agricultural land for settlement by people coming out. from home Land was fast passing into private hands without any provision for this. Tiiey could not'do without revenue ' from land sales'"' but lei them sell pastoral'! land to produce revenue, and keep agricultural land to secure settlement. Next | session he should try to bring forward ' some practical proposal to give this el- i feet." In other words, he , .meant let the large runs now producing an smnual arnual revenue of some jg6o;ooo.'become the property. _.jf .the _run-holders, as it would pay them better to pay' a pound an, acre for them, than to pny the grazing rental and sheep assessment. Wherr pastoral country can be let 'at between six and seven per {cent per annum,on the value of the fee ' simple as fixed by the land regulations, men who, like Si) F. I) Bell, can command capital on mortgage at Lbout 4 per cent, at Ilome wo.uldmake a

very handsome profit by the purchase of the whole of the pastoral land in Otago. But if itj be .worth a, .pound an. acre_ to. them, it is worth it to the Province, and" that fact would have become patent enough had the Provincial Borrowing Bill passed'' th'ei Council-.'-' The'-value- of -the --Provincial "estate is ■ worth considering carefully. A few years ago we sold thousands of acres at a price that, after deducting compensation.-cost of survey and ; other expenses, only left the Province 14s". 6d , 01; thereabouts, per acre,.... Estimating the probable value the grazing rights would have realised, if relet at Is per acre, that would have been about 6J per cent. , per annum Had the Provincial, Borrowing Bill passed, and a- -railroad- or. other im-. provementsbeen required on that property even at that low- valuation money wouldhave been easily obtainable for the purpose,' on Bell considers it right to sell it—of course, at a pound .an acre, deducting compensation and cost of survey,:. <&c.— ; ' Dunedin .Star.' ,-

Referring to the late speech at Invercargill of Sir F. Dillon Bell, the ' Waka.tip Mail' says :—lt is the old tale over .agaia Professions of a s'lunH' and "liberal. land policy which ends in proving a delusion and a mockery "to the bona fide tiller of the soil, adds acre to acre to already unfairly acquired vast estates Another reason given-in- favor. ,of selling the pastoral lands\was!-''if;,Government would sell, instead of leasing, the pastoral lands of the Colony, .then the squatters 1 would care Jess about buying the ,agr t icu!-' tural land,- which could be .reserved, for the uses to which they ' were adapted.'". This is as 'cool a piece of self-interested argument' as \ve have met with for * sonie itime past. The proposal to. set apart ■blocks of land to sell to intending immigrants at home is a further illustration of a plausible'profession of liberality united to a system which shall be hurtful 'to those now here, who are vainly endeavoring to procure a farm upon.the equitable terms of improvement, settlement,' and deferred payments. They must be punished for their clamor. ' ,The suggestion is characteristic- of Sir Francis. Who does, not remember his professed fiberalitv in ' the I louse, t > give. up • a block of his "land in the Ida' A"alley, upon surlr.jiberal terms that his amazed'partner-, "the hon. Mr. •Stafford, could not understand it at first?, 'How, eventually, it'proved but' a" hollow : pretence, and ended in a row. in which he charged Mr. T. L Shepherd with un-. ;:folij.ided statements. Sir' Francis 'obtained J ' his' broad acres, and likewise all he wanted" at the/time—*i character ' for' professed liberalism. Hi's, late remaks on the land 1 question, divested of the dress he adorned ! them in, are utterly selfish and reactionary. The best arguments we can give in .support of th'is'statement is'another quotation from the speech:—

The Province of' Canterbury 'had, if he might use the expression been completely "gutted," and almost all the land -which had been and was being opened up in- Otago for the benefit of .small settlers had fallen, into the hands of .capitalists and squatters. He (Sir Francis) was himself a squatter, and he did not blame the squatters for buying the land, as' . they, were bound to protect themselves, and he did so far as he could himself; but he blamed the land laws, which made it possible for any one person to ' buy up large blocks of agricultural land, which should be reserved • for purely, agricultural purposes. \ \ ■

■We need not go further. Did not Sir Francis do all he could in Committees of the House to make these" laws he complains about so one-sided ?' At least that is the constriction-the Blue Books enable, us to place upon his conduct,'while " Hansard" records' his noble professions of liber- ' ality in his seat in the Assembly. We shall take up the speech again. In a po-. litical sense, the speech v. ill be comparatively valueless, but there can be no doubt of one thing,, .that it indicates" that mis-' chief is brewing, and that'we. shall see a little more ot the' member' 'for Mataura in his congenial element of opposition to his whilom friends. -As a private citizen, he has the tact of making friends, and his character .stands high ; but, as a he is shifty, dangerous, and unreliable.