EDITORIAL NOTES AND COMMENTS.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVI, Issue 10065, 5 February 1909, Page 1

EDITORIAL NOTES AND COMMENTS.

At the meeting of Athenaeum subscribers iast night the President •nil! free (Mr T. Begg) referred reading boom, to the lack of interest taken in the institution by the public, as exemplified by the decrease in the number of subscribers.- We are convinced that the Rev. Mr Griffin stated the cause of this indifference when he inferred that the free reading room was not sufficiently attractive. This resort of the poorly paid and casual reader has deteriorated sadly, until one can depend upon little more than reading the local papers under far liom luxurious conditions. The Committee probably- have good reasons for retraining from making the free reading room too attractive ; but by allowing it to decline to utter us'elessness they are shutting out a good deal of public sympathy. There are not a few who believe that the Athenaeum is provided for only a certain class of readers, and there is little in the appearance of the free reading room to encourage any other belief. We understand that in point of enterprise in obtaining new books for its subscribes the local institution is second to none in the Dominion, but no inducement is held out to the casual reader, and it is largely from that source that the subscribers of the near future might be recruited. There are at present loitering upon the streets night after night numbers of young people who might gradually be attracted to the free reading room were magazines and the best periodicals provided for them, and there is no reason why any more destruction should be apprehended than that which takes place in the subscribers' reading room. If any damage has been done in the ■"free" department of the Athenreum in the past it is because everything has looked so cheap that "ho value has been placed- upon it. Although the amplification of the newspapers may have in some part contributed m the decrease of interest taken in the Athenaeum, we. feel sure that were the free reading room kept up to a fair standard' in regard to periodicals, and were the public encouraged to take an interest in the new enterprise, there would be less cause in the future to complain of lack of support.

There will be joy amongst the Northern laud-grabbers over the tiie freehold announcement that

- steal." 250,000 acres of land which has just been alienated from the Natives is to be disposed of by the State on the optional tenure. This portion of the Native landed estate has cost the country more than the price which has just been paid for it by the Government. It was this and other Xative lands that were the occasion of a prolonged and costly racial trouble which involved the borrowing of several millions, whilst propitiation by gifts and the maintenance of a Xative Department cost several millions more, all of which was borrowed. The Xative land which the State has acquired has cost at least 20s an acre. But the cost of all the processes of colonisation—the railways, roads, and bridges, and ;- 'mndred and one other things which the people of a new countrymust provide in advance of settlement—must- be added, and yet it goes without saying that the price of the sections will be no more, perhaps they will be less, than is represented by the loan money which lias been consumed like hot cakes with object of securing and retaining the Xative area in question. It is a far cry from the old and bad days of a Xative rebellion which was all the fault of thatsame European cupidity which has led to the contemplated sacrifice of these 250,000 acres to the land gluttony of the worst enemies Xew Zealand ever knew, but if ever we were inclined to forget what j the struggle cost in men, money, and principles, there are imperishable reminders of the event which one would desire to have buried in oblivion. This enormous atsl now belongs to the people, who ha-ve paid for it over and over again—who nought it by lighting for it and by the cost of bribing the Xatives; who bought it a second time by the construction of railways, roads, and bridges, without which it would be next to worthless; who bought it a third time by paying the Xative owners for it. We will leave our readers to judge as to the righteousness of our contention that such lands as these should- not be alienated from the people—the rightful owners—by disposing of them under a system which means freehold. If the property we are discussing belonged to a private owner who paid so much for it and had done as much to make it valuable, would he dispose of it on the 6ame terms as those which are to make a gift of bags of the people's golden money to men who have forced the Government by malign political influences to bestow it upon them? If Mr Massey owned the laud would he dispose of it on the terms which he has, by the most unworthy and disloyal political procedure ever adopted in tbis country, terrified Parliament into approving? Xo. He would say: "A man likes a bit of land he can call his own," and he would leave it, or put it up at auction when it had reached its utmost value. Will anyone explain why the State should' part with its land for less than it is worth—or why the whole people should sacrifice their property for the especial benefit of a section of themselves—any more than men should be expected to give anything to anybody as a matter of right? If a- plebiscite of Xew r Zealanders were taken as to whether the 250,000 of the people's property should be sold, or leased, they would decree that it must be leased — leased so that Ihey should not be robbed of those advantages which perpetually accrue in connection with the possession of land. We hoped that the Government would have courage enough to shew- contempt for the demand that Xative lands acquired by the State, as well as all other lands belonging to the State, should be thrown to the land wolves of the Xorth to appease their ravenous appetites. The Government's acquiescence in this spoliation has narrowed 1 the gap which once separated the Liberals from the • Opposition, and it is not the Opposition that has given way this time. Where are now our sturdy Liberals who stood by John M'Kenzie and won the land resumption and settlement scheme? One half of those who masquerade under the Government banner are not Liberals. It is they who have polluted the sources of truly popular and beneficent government. They are the political waifs and strays who live on their wits and' the prostitution of principles. But of what avail is it to deplore the prodigal waste of the State's landed resources which " freehold " means ? There are too many even in the South wdio will not look at the question with an unprejudiced eye, and who are helping Northerners to perpetuate the freehold "steal." If it were proposed to seize the Southern secondary education or other endowments for the general benefit they would be filled with indignation, and yet they will not see that- if endowments contribute to the benefit of a community they must be equally beneficial to the whole country and that the more they are multiplied the greater the advantage. Besides, there is no desire to do any injustice to anyone in offering land -under the leasehold tenure. Crown leaseholders constitute the most prosperous and contented of our settlers. Why then part with these 250,000 acres for a song, with all the prospective increments?