THE HOUSING PROBLEM

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10606, 3 June 1920, Page 5

THE HOUSING PROBLEM

QUESTION OF POSSESSION CONTINUED PROTECTION OF SOLDIERS URGED. Tho action of certain property-hold-ers in evicting from tenements returned soldiers or their dependents was strongly condemned by Mr \V. Perry (Wellington) atl tW conference of delegates of tho N.Z.U.S.A. yesterday. This was consequent upon a remit, from Christchurch, “That in view ot tho acute shortage of houses the Government lie urged to continue the protection giveai to returned soldiers by the War Regulations Act of 1014 against, ejection from rented dwellings for a further period of twelve months as from August 2nd next.” Mr Perry said) that if tho regulation was necessary during the war period it. was doubly necessary now, because the shortage of houses wils more acute at present than at any stage during the war period. There was a growing feeling amongst land agents and houseowners in Wellington against the continuance of tlie protection. He knew this from his experience in court work. Every Tueisday and Thursday the greater part of the day was taken up with the consideration of tenement cases. If any individual in the country was entitled to protection that individual was the returned soldier. For four or five years soldiers had stood up to their knees in mud fighting for those who were slcexfiug in beds at home, and now these latter would, if permitted, keep tho soldiers put of their homes. He thought protection should bo afforded them for one year or such time as the shortage exists.'

“Thereis only one remit on the order paper more important than this.” said Mr W. E. Leadley (Christchurch). Ho knew of a case where the wife of a soldier on active service was ordered to give up possession by tho landlord. She refused, whereupon tho landlord cut off supplies of gas and water in the hopo of farcing the woman out. He was unsuccessful.*The matter came to the ears of the local association, which moved to such good purpose that tho landlord saw reason. Ho was not prepared to face public opinion. “Tho regulation is a bugbear to land agents, but it i s a godsend to soldier and their dependents,” concluded Mr Loadley. He hoped the conference would pass the remit with no uncertain voice. Tlio Rev. W. Walker (Christchurch) cited the case of a landlord securing possession on the ground that the property had not been, kept in good orderThe garden had not been: looked after 1 The evicted tenant was the wife of a soldier who was in hospital awaiting an operation. He thought the protecting regulation -hould be clear and definite and not left to tho discretionary power of a magistrate. The remit was adopted unanimously.