THE Mount Ida Chronicle SATURDAY, MAY 16, 1874.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 271, 16 May 1874, Page 2

THE Mount Ida Chronicle SATURDAY, MAY 16, 1874.

As Mr. Reid was, so he is, and always w.ll be. We were hopeful that it would not be so. When the Turnbull Executive made audi a lamentable self-col lapse, and let all their so-called cherished principles—opposition to which they so unsparingly.denounced last session— go as a straw to the ' winds, we were hopeful that Mr. Eeid | would not ally himself with such unstable elements, but have formed,, as he might have done, a stro ";g Government, from the Liberals who, for so many years, have followed his lead—a Government which could not have commanded the-confidence of all in the House, but, at the least, might have commanded their respect. It was not to be. The first action taken by that gentleman was to secure, apparently aa colleagues, the overburdened selfsacrificing couple who so shamefully neglected the business of the Province during the last six months, leaving everything to be done as best it might by one active colleague and the Superintendent. This bashful couple—not over coy or diffident—at once agree yet. a»ain to sacrifice themselves at the call of duty: they rush again, with galled shoulders, into the Ministerial, ranks, thoroughly happy if only their too popular ex-colleague can be excluded. The Government was thus formed, with the addition of the name of Mr. Stout—engaged cl.iy and night at the Supreme Court, in the celebrated libel case of Macassey v. Bell, and unable to attend Executive meetings, preliminary or actual, and consequently totally in the dark as to what he had consented to join—with also Mr. Lumsden, representing Southland, the sworn devotee of no land sales at any price. The Government thus formed, there shall be no delay in.stating our policy. Accordingly, next day Mr. Eeid at once, before the Council proceeds to the orders of the .day, makes u statement. This statement was a general encomium upon the land policy of the former Government, and a consequent inference of the stability of his consistent views. Consistent in what ? In nothing but evil. "With a slight touch of his old, dogged fire,, he. states to the Council that any 'Government coming down to thp "House and pretending to carrj."on the public works of the Province without having to sell pastoral lands .would be unworthy of, confidence. He would look upon such sales as a last resource, but he warned the Council they would be asked to : give power to the Government to make : such,sales should the necessity arise. ■ That is, to do exactly what Mr. lieid ! did some few years ago—viz., propose 1 that the Government should give power to the Executive to aellpastoral I lands in blocks—which resulted in the i disastrous sales to Clarke at Moa Flat, to Cargill and Anderson atTeviot, and to Campbell at Maerewbehua. It is true in this latter case Mr. Keid ! : - ad the go.id' taste tp support a motioni of want o£ confidence in the Govern-.

pleling the sale lie had initiated, excusing himself from blame on the plea that he was led by the Lou'icil. Still, he proves his consistency by, the very first day on which he again is placed on the Treasury benches, bringing down a proposition to repeat this mistake of the past—a mistake that he condemned when it suited him, last year. Consistent indeed! "No public works can " be carried out. without such sales." What a fallacy is this ! If an individual owns 500 acres of freehold, cannot he raise, at easy interest, within a fraction of its present value?—much more can the country do so. Land is rising in value at the rate of about 50 percent, every three years—lan lis the best security capitalists can be offered,—yet we are told that it must be sold to the pastoral tenants, at whatever th?y choose to give, to perpetuate our immediate public works. Better than that would it be to suspend the Provincial works altogether. Supposing the Council were to be so guilty of their responsibility to .their constituencies as to agree to this proposal, what would follow ? Why, sim • ply this—tli it the way would be paved for the acquisition of all the interior land by the present pastoral lessees. We have before shown the fallacy of (he statement made by Sir V\ 0. Bell and the High Street clique that they do not want the agricultural land: " Let the poor man.have that;" " sell us the pastoral land, otherwise in self- " defence" we have to buy the other." Now, a great po:tion of the interior so-called pastoral land is, as we have reiterated over, and over again, very good second class light agricultural land on a friable loam subsoil. This land will gradually be opened for settlement, and the success of such settlement will altogether depend upon the offering to the holders, under, public competition, of small blocks of pastoral leasehold—we meanbonafii?pastoral, i.e. unploughable, land. If fat ilities are not given to settlers to keep stock it is impossible for them to take more than two or three crops off the land, which would speedily after be abandoned as unprofitable—the final effect being that the pastoral tenants, then under Messrs. Heid and Turnbull's patronage, become pastoral freeholders, would secure the light agricultural land. at their own price, and every vestige of the innovating cockatoo\vould be swept away into oblivion.

If a contrary course be adopted—if specific' blocks are set apart in pood lcca'ities, on or about where the lines of branch railways 'must eventually extend, and these blocks »iven as security for a loan to construct such lilies of railway—the whole of.ihe land in such opened up country would be doubled, in value, and nearly trebled. ■ Then, if thought proper, sales could be made', in sections, of ploughable land, and leases be offered for competition of workable blocks of what was rocky aud unploughable. We have not left ourselves, iii this article, any space to remark upon Mr. Weid's entire omissiun of the very important matters affecting the Goldfields at the present time. Property is depreciated and rendered uncertain to the extent of many thousands o\' pounds. . Kiver pollution, and the ultimate adjustment, on an equitable basis, established on sound first principles, of the conflicting rights of several great, interests, deserves the closest and gravest consideration at the hands of the Provincial Government.' Tet of this we hear not a word. This total silence confirms us in our opinion, long ago expressed, that 'Mr. lieid has failed, during the whole of' his career as a public man, to arrive at any just conclusion as to tbe importance of the mining interest.