THE Mount Ida Chronicle THURSDAY, MAY 17, 1877.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume VIII, Issue 422, 17 May 1877, Page 2

THE Mount Ida Chronicle THURSDAY, MAY 17, 1877.

! The Waste Lands Board, in a fit of virtuous determination, hava elected to travel ia couples, and explore the runs for themselveß. So far this is good, but great care will be necessary to avoid this personal visitation drifting into one of the many odious forms of classification of waste lands so disas- [ trous to the best interests of any CoI lony that adopts them. The arbitrary j division of runs which at present gains favor with the Board is, we fear, likely to defeat the purpose the majority have in view. The cutting up, renewing, or other disposal of pastoral leaseholds as they expire, is a question of policy. It is j evident that the present Board is acj tually, as well as from its constitution, I unfitted to deal with the political aspects of the land question. The classification of parts of any run, irrespective of the capabilities of the respective parts for homestead settlement, is sure to discourage settlement. Whether wisely or foolishly, the land selector likes to choose his own future home, although Mr. Arthur or Messrs. Maitland and Butterworth might choose far better for him. So foolish is he that, rather than be driven on to a small block, where all future scope or expansion is denied him, ho will refuse to settle, and take his small capital to swell the ranks of the over-trading classes in the towns. No run should be released, in whole or ia part, without ample provision being made to enable any person wanting land, and willing to pay for it, to take it with the least possible circumlocution. Under the threatened classification, which the public seem inclined to approve, simply because i'j seems likely to keep out the present tenants, no such provision is likely to be made. If the whole change arrived at iB to settle three squatters in the place of one, on conditions of tenure not justifying substantial improvements, the change, instead of being for the better, will be for the worse. Should this be so, in self-de-fence the Assembly will have to sanction free selection on non-auriferous lands. New Zealand requires a good homestead law, applicable to all claee-

ea and interests. Even without free selection every man ought to have a right to purchase a small homestead on Crown lands, whether leased or unleased. All men do not aspire to be farmers, and perhaps, however high their aspirations, hare not sufficient means to follow them up. Yet our land administrators seem to imagine, if they cut up a run into three parts, and re-let two of these parts, reserving the third for 200-acre agricultural sections, they have performed an act of virtue, to redound to their credit to the end of time. A homestead law is as much required in New Zealand as it is in England. The Auckland fifty-acre system was the nearest approach to what is needed. The area was, however, unnecessarily large. Fifty acres, in moßt parfcß of Auckland, was too small for a farm, and too large for a home. At the same time it tempted settlers to devote all their time to their small farms. There are few men earning their living by working for wages, or in mining, but what would be improved in position by being in possession of ten acres of land enclosed at their door. The land would reduce the cost of living. It would enable a co«v to be kept, garden produce to be raised, while the pigstyes and poultry-yard furnished their own contributions to the family larder. Emigrants from England have a right to expect some provision of the kind. This right, at one time recognised in all Provincial land laws, has lately been allowed to drop. Besides emigrants we now have a rising generation of New Zealanders, to whom it would be policy on the part of the Government to settle on their own homes

All sorts of arbitrary classification defeat a homestead law. The classifier says—No man can live on less than 200 acres of land, therefore he shall be delivered from temptation; all sections shall be 200 acres, or as near that area as may be. To attempt classifying lands by altitude, distance from markets, or other considerations, is to attempt the impossible, It is equally foolish to attempt to say what amount of land any man can extract a livelihood from. The only safe classifier is the public discernment, which takes up land and judges of its value by an unwritten code, the factors of which—time, markets, communications, and wages—are ever changing. These factors are at present all combining to favor settlement upon lands hitherto despised.

OccabionaMiT we notice in newspapers supposed to lead public opinion in Otago startling paragraphs indicating possible danger to the Provincial land fund. If any of the writers of these paragraphs really believe that the Provincial land revenue is localised we entreat them to study the public accounts for the quarter ending March 31st. A Colonial land fund is now established, into which all Provincial land district revenues are poured, be they small or great. Out of this Colonial land fund subsidies upon rates are paid to all local bodies throughout; the Colony, whether the Provincial Districts they are within have furnished any land revenue or not. Although such contributions are poured into the Colonial land fund a separate account is kept as between the respective contributors. An account is also kept of the respective liabilities of each Provincial District. These two accounts are kept side by side. For instance, for the quarter ending March Slat— Liabilities Contributed charged to Colonial against Land Fund Land Fund £ . £ Auckland 40,069 1300 Wellington ... ... 23,628 10,500 Weatland 9049 783 Canterbury ... ... 45,88* 166,787 Otago 37,383 29,410

The balances are also shown and brought to either the Dr. or Cr. account of the extinct Provinces. If the balance for any year is a credit one it is divided in certain proportions among the local bodies within such happy Provincial district. This, on the face of it, seems an equitable arrangement. Yet it is full of fallacies kept alive after discovery to deceive Otago, and to pay a debt of honor to Canterbury. First let U8 Bee how this arrangement works out in the light of the public accounts. Canterbury, for the quarter, alone shows a credit balance. All other Provinces are to the bad, and as they cannot pay up their deficiencies, having no existence, and the local bodies into which they are divided having no responsibility, the differences between their liabilities and cash receipts poured into the Colonial land fund are returned in every case in the shape of proceeds from Treasury Bills. In proportion to their debts eo are their receipts. For this philanthropic purpose the Consolidated .Fund has made a present of £IOO,OOO to the seven Provinces, and by so doing has liberatad £IOO,OOO for payment presumably as surplus, but in reality as an advance payment of a debt of honor to Canterbury. The figures stand thus for the quarter : Proceeds of Treasury Surplus Bills debited Land to Provincea. Revenue. & £ Auckland 36,300 —— Wellington 17,100 Hawke'B Bay 6300 Neleon 11,000 Weetland 9600 Otago 13,4,00 Canterbury 100,000 Is, then, Canterbury's land fund in the aggregate greater than Otago's ? By no means, for Otago has more than double the acreage of unalienated lands. Will, then, Otago get her eur-

plus revenue in subsequent years ? No ; for her land laws do not permit of a svholesale alienation of land in any one year. The payment of surplus is confined to results in any one year. Canterbury, for her prodigality, is apparently rewarded by the "gift of £IOO,OOO. Otago, for her conservation of land, is not only not apparently rewarded, but is actually fined as a first instalment £13,400 (for in Ota"-o's case it will be worth while to chalk up the debtor balance for some little time —clause 9 sec. 1, Financial Arrangements Act). Then what benefit is Otago rearing from so-called loealisatisn of land revenue ? None ; for the same subsidy upon rates out of land fund is paid to all Counties, whether in Hawke's Bay, Nelson, Auckland, at Otago. There is no pretence in any other way to localise land revenue. From this it is obvious that Otago's position is worse than if the land fund were avowedly common, and the fiction of Treasury Bills, of which Otago must redeem three-eighths, exploded. Canterbury's debits under her land system will not commence to be chalked up until she has no fund to be impounded to meet them, for her land fund must steadily decrease; and, as we have pointed out above, the Counties—which take the place of the Provinces—are not made responsible for Provincial debtor balances, although endowed with any amount of receptive powers. But is this £IOO.OOO given to Canterbury all gain to the Counties, in whole or in part, in that district ? Certainly not; for Canterbury too must bear her share in the redemption of these £ 100.000 of Treasury Bills. J There is a still more subtle juggle ! underlying this financial arrangement, | by which it appears that Canterbury i herself is deceived. The Provincial Council of Canterbury, in its death ! throes, voted £,100,000 for Timaru Harbor. ' This wasjn some way impounded at Christchurch, and has actually been spent on Lyttelton Harbor, very much to the advantage of Canterbury. Timaru was to be paid back by money raised in London upon Lyttelton Harbor debentures. The debentures s-ould ; not float, and, after an abortive attempt, they were taken off the London : market, and remain among the Provincial archives of Christchurch to this | day. To continue the story, a Bill was ; introduced into the Assembly last sesj sion and passed, enabling the Timaru Harbor Board to receive the £IOO,OOO I appropriated by the Provincial Coun- | cil. Renewed power waß also given to .Lyttelton Harbor Board to borrow, under the old style, on debentures, to construct Harbor Works (already contributed), but not to exceed £IOO,OOO of debt. As an interlude in the story, we must remind our readers that the first few weekß of last Bession the Canterbury members waited on the Yogel Government, and obtained a pledge that Timaru should have its Harbor—at least so telegraphed the correspondent of the * Timaru Herald,' naming those who formed the deputation. Last month, immediately subsequent to the close of the quarter's account, £IOO,OOO was given to the Timaru Harbor Board out of Land Fund. The debentures still remain unused in Christchurch. The appropriation of the Provincial Council has thus been doubled—Lyttelton has spent the £IOO,OOO, and Timaru has got it to spend. By the happy timing of the payment £IOO,OOO is available fop division as hush-money to the respective Counties of Canterbury, who, in the first joys of possession, do not see that their second 'instalment is advanced to Timaru. The Hon. E. "W. Stafford is now content to let the Land Fund go in peace. As the North is already practically in possession of the substance, it need not haggle with Ota:go over the shadow. The Land Fund i was therefore not a leading topic at the j late election for Auckland City "West. i To the Counties of "Waitaki, Yincent, I and Lake their is an apparent gain. To Canterbury, as a whole, there is a loss. To prove this it has only got to be remembered that, under the old system, with such unprecedented land sales, the sums available for local expenditure would hare been very much greater than the sum now divided as surplus, and that this later payment to Timaru will be deducted from any surplus thai; may bo credited to the Provincial district's land account during the next few years. That surplus will not be <- great, as, juggle as Ministers may, Canterbury cannot, at the same time, both sell her lands and retain them for future sale. This is New Zealand states, manship. If it is to continue Otago members would do good service by insisting up»n a common Land Fund, in word as in deed. There would be more economy, and no excuse for lavish expenditure in the North to balance the supposed riches of the South, as contained in iheir localised Land Fund.