The New Zealand Times. SATURDAY, MAY 10, 1919. LAND AGGREGATION

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10276, 10 May 1919, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. SATURDAY, MAY 10, 1919. LAND AGGREGATION

W© are hearing much about the aggregation of land. It is a very long time since complaints of increasing aggregation were first made. Nothing could exceed the vehemence of denial -with .which;,-these complaints were • met-.-' Eater on,-when the proofs of aggregation became beyond resistance, nothing could exceed the fervour with vAiicli Ministers promised to end the horrid dangers of aggregation, which all Ministers of all colours equally hated and were alike determined to suppress. The accounts oi aggregation multiplied, abounding in descriptions of schools .closed,.’ townships failing, farm steadings falling into ruins—all the marks, in fact, of tho desolation which follows the footsteps of the shepherd when he ousts l*ae farmer. And the fervent declarations of war to the knife against tho aggregator multiplied in proportion, until every farm absorbed by its neighbour had a fighting champion at its side vowing punishment for the past and prevention for the future. As when two stars in their bright career come into what the Bickertonian theory terms “Partial Impact, ’’ there is a tremendous blaze of light to advertise what has happened in i*.io world, so, whenever two farms underwent this fate of “partial impact”—which appears notwithstanding its name to have been pretty thorough—there was a tremendous blaze of Ministerial wrath to let the world know that such things are regarded in high places with detestation and a firm determination of prevention. '

In the sidereal system the partial impact ends with tho blaze, and, so far as we can follow scientific teaching, the impact becomes permanent. Is it the same in tho terrestrial system ? To answer that question, we turn to the last volume of the Official Year Book, for information on the occupation of land. There is a table of “Occupied Lands’’ showing holdings. The latter are classed in acre areas—from 1 to 10, 11 to 50, 31 to 101, and so on up to over 50,000 — and the number- of holdings in each class is given for a number of years. From the table wo extract tire following:—

Holdings in Acres. 1909. 1918. 1.001 to 6,000 .... 4090 5623 5.001 to 10,000 .... 458 665 10.001 to 20,000 .... 235 , 291 20,(Kll to 50,000 .... 151 185 Tire trail of aggregation is here very broadly marked. In ten years the number of each class of the larger properties, from 1000 acres to 50,000, has steadily increased. There is no necessity to labour tho point by repeating the figures. They show at the first glance how solid has been the increase between tho first and tho last year. Tho largest number of increases is in the 1001 to 3000 class. This increase is the largest not only numerically—ls33—but _ also proportionally, for the percentage is 39, the highest on tho list. The answ'or to the question, then, is that in tho terrestrial system and in the sidereal tho sequel to “partial impact’’ (otherwise aggregation) is tho same. In both, impact or aggregation bccomo permanent, and, of course, in both tho tendency to partial impact or aggregation is a cardinal feature of the system, and that m spite of tho tremendous blaze of protest or light which follows tho impact. The curious thing about the terrestrial system is that the most systematic attempts have been made, to ensure the blazing, determination . to bring the fateful fault to rapid ending. In 1912, tho yesr in which the 'first libform Government signalised its advent to power by placing tho Civil Service outside the control of I’arliainent,

there was passed an amending land ! law which contained a chapter regulating the subdivision of lands by their owners, in agreement with the -Minister for Lands, as to terms ana tenures, and the construction of roads and bridges. Tho chapter gives a very wide choice of terms, and when it was placed upon tho Statute Book a great deal was expected from it in tho way of subdivision of estates. That chapter, in fact, was to have balanced aggregation by subdivision. Tho idea seemed to follow the jiractice of Nature, according to which the encroachments of the sea on the domain of the shore in certain places are balanced by the encroachments of. the land upon tho sea in others. This was followed up next year by another chapter, also in an amending Land Act, on subdivision. The first one had not worked as expected. It had proved to bo like those hoardings which tempt superior persons only to scorn. The second chapter was devised to give compelling force to the first. • Tho chapter empowered tho Minister to notify owners of land that their lands are "required 1 for purposes of settlement,’' ordered the owner to reply, selecting some particular method of subdivision of these provided by the first chapter, with sundry others, and in the event of neglect on the part of the owner, provided for tho taking over of tho "laud by the Government without more ado, under conditions duly provided by the Jaw. Tho Government, in fact, showed its attachment to tho principle of subdivision by getting power to present a pistol at the head of every owner showing any unreadiness to satisfy the just earth hunger of the people. Could I there be a greater proof of sincerity and determination ? The answer is the table of holdings from winch we have quoted. It is corroborated bv tho absenee of any record of the use of that wonderfully sincere pistol. JJut that pistol, sincere and wonder- *“*• ?, llseless as it; was. did not stand alone to prove tho sincerity of the enemies in high places of aggrega- , ~l n the sa,ne Land Amending Act, that of 1913, there is a chapter dealing with aggregation. This was intended, evidently, to amend the analogy of the.sea practice. Whereas in the year before the Government thought it sufficient to balance aggregation in one place by subdivision in another, now they thought it necessary to aim a blow at aggregation itself. The consequence was this new chapter empowering tho Government to acquire by notice all land aggregated, as soon as proof of aggregation was received. Details required reports from the Land Purchase Board and embraced other provisions, but the main object I was to stop aggregation by taking all aggregated land promptly out of the ! hands of tho aggregators. An even greater proof of sincerity! But the table of holdings turns it down just | as much as tho other shining proof of I firm goodwill. In fact, it marks the whole of' this land policy as so much humbug; as made for polemic use on platforms, not for touching any land ; a gorgeous, reform inotorcav on. which not an ounce of paint will ever bo chipped or dusted by a move outside tho garage. The moral is obvious. To deal with aggregation, the need is not of Governments who will pass Acts, hut of Governments who will not only pass Acts but will work them. That was the case in the old Seddon-AlcKenzie days. It is not the case now, as is proved by this dreary story of humbug we have ‘Been dis'cu'ssing.' r The sooner "the old, honest consistency is restored, the better