BIG LAND CLAIM

Manawatu Standard, Volume LX, Issue 242, 10 September 1940, Page 2

BIG LAND CLAIM

£120,000 FOR iMOUTOA BLOCK

COMPENSATION COURT

The price, claimed at nearly £120,000, to be paid by the Crown lor an area of 4505 acres at Moutoa, extending on the Foxton side of the Manawatu ltiver from near the Whirokino trestle bridge almost to the old Shannon bridge, and owned by Mr F. S. Easton, of Foxton, engaged the attention of a special sitting of the Compensation Court at Palmerston North today. His Honour Mr Justice Smith presided and there were associated with him as assessors Messrs M. F. Rourke, flax-miller and exporter, of Wellington, and W. R. Birnie, accountant and land valuer, of . Palmerston North. Mr M. Bergin appeared for claimant and Mr H. R. Cooper for the Crown.

The area was taken by the Crown by a proclamation under the Public Works Act for flaxgrowing purposes, and at the hearing to day a claim was made for £119,754 8s as payment. In the statement of claim, which was amended slightly as to acreages owing to erosion and accretion by the Manawatu River, the sum of £104.548 15s was claimed as the value of 4181 acres, more or less, at £25 an acre, and £15,000 for 438 acres, more or less, at £34 4s an acre. Loss of benefit, for ploughing, was set out at £205 l3s, making the total of £119,754 Bs. In outlining the case for claimant, Mr Bergin said the land was suitable for either fiaxgrowing or farming, and was in use for both purposes when taken by proclamation. From 1903 to 1936 the area was used solely for flaxgrowing. It was all rich and alluvial soil, as fertile as any to be found in a similar block in New Zealand. Most of it was subject to flooding by the Manawatu River, but a reasonable expenditure would make this land better lor farming than surrounding land because claimant had a greater proportion of higher land. Since 1927 no account was taken in Government valuations of j the flax growing on the property. The i proclamation was issued in November, | •1939, and the Crown’s servants entered j the land in December of that year. | When the proclamation was issued, ; claimant estimated there were 60,0001 tons of miilable flax on the property, I and at that time a Foxton ttaxmiller was paying 10s a ton, net to the. owner, for green leaf which he was cutting off the land. Actually the average price from 1918 onward was much higher than 10s a ton. There had been a. vegetation survey made by the : Public Works Department of 2313 acres assessed to carry 21 i tons of ; flax per acre. No account was taken of land carrying less than five tuns of flax and no account of flax gruiwiig! under the fringes of willows. The smaller area, the Piaki property, was bought by claimant in 1912 for £12,000 cash, or £27 12s an acre. Claimant 1 milled flax and farmed the Piaki pro- | perty until 1925, when he sold it tor j £27,000 —£65 an acre for the flax-] covered land and £55 an acre for the : clear land. In 1938 this property re- ; verted to claimant. The property was now more valuable, by reason of improvements and the growth of flax since the land reverted to claimant, i I than the £l2£oo paid in 1912. There ! were now 9800 tons of green leaf on '< the property, and if the fringes and I low-producing areas brought 200 tons, i the flax alone would produce £SOOO. j I u successive cuttings the property would be paid for by 1948, *at current • flax prices. The larger area, the Mou- | toa, had been held since claimant, bought it, with two partners, in 1902. i In 1930 40i acres were sold at £32 an j acre. From 1903 to 1936, for the three j partners, Messrs Easton, Stevens and j Austin, the area produced a net pro- | fit of £195,000, or an average of over £5900 a year. This included £IOO a year for interest on the land sold. From 1930 to 1935 losses of over £BOOO were suffered. In the last 20 years the average profit had been £SOIO. this including £l3 a year interest.

Speaking of the flax on the Moutoa area, Mr Bergin said the vegetation survey fixed the amount at 48,400 tons. If t'he edges produced 1600 tons there would be 5000 tons of leaf and for a quarter to be cut each year 12,500 tons would be produced annually, or £6250 a year at 10s a ton. Only about half the property would therefore produce £125,000 in 20 years. Claimant bought out the other two interests in the land on the basis of £45,000 for the value of the whole area of the Moutoa block, within the last decade. CONDITION OF LAND.

In summarising the case for claimant, Mr Bergin outlined that the property also had a potential value. Claimant had proceeded to develop the area and in the last four years had spent £4241 in this way. The lowest level of the land was on the same level as land on which claimant grazed bullocks. Tlie area had an added value when taken in relation with claimant’s other land, nearby. It was flood-free and could be lightly stocked in winter. The whole was served by the Moutoa drainage system. . T'he average unimproved value of surrounding land was £2O an acre, but the selling value was greater. Nothing had occurred to justify any reduction on the 1918 valuation. The land was the only large area carrying a big expanse of flax in the Dominion, it had been taken only after a survey had been made of all other areas in the country, and after 24s an acre had been paid for years for a part of it for flax research purposes. Further, it was the only area large enough to supply the flax-weaving industry and, simultaneously with the proclamation, t'he Government had decided to invest £200,000 in that industry. There were even now 2313 acres of flax available for milling, capable of producing 60.000 tons at 10s a ton. There was a steady and continuous market now for flax fibre instead of the highly sensitive market previously existing, which had been known to rise or fall £5 or £6 a ton in a night. For the last 20 years the Moutoa estate had produced over £SOOO a year as the average net profit. Finally, claimant was entitled to consideration for the loss of income he must suffer in. the reinvestment of such a large sum of money.

The 'hearing of evidence wa.s proceeded with. J. Olds, a clerk of the Valuation Department, Wellington, was the first witness and gave valuations of district properties. Claimant gave evidence for a short period before the Court adjourned at 1 p.m. for luncheon.