Untitled

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8731, 4 February 1907, Page 4

"(Continued from Saturday). I

The Premier and the n « tcr 1 for Lands have stated that v,*? 8 ® proposals are in. no sense * J menace to the Freehold, hut they | too clearly hear the imprint oi i • Henry George’s' ■$ impracticahlo | (and, if given effect to— ruinous) | theories. The Bromier may not bo a believer in Land Nationalisation, hut members of his Ministry are, and in the Bill they are exactly carrying out the proposals of the Socialist Party in this country, viz., to first make the principle apply to Crown lands not yet taken up, then to followup by making them apply to ail Crown lands through the medium '<i of a Fair Rent Bilk to leases that were taken up prior to the passing of this Bill: and when this is accomplished it is considered an easy matter to make it apply to all freehold' lands. In the Land Act of 1892 tho principle of State landlordism was affirmed m tho Lease-in-Perpetuity, but it did not satisfy the Socialists, becau?n the land was locked up for | 099%i-ars. The renewable lease J goes the step ■■further ; that isj, to affirm, the principle of btate I ownership to' ths .unearned mere- j ment. The lease is, however, for la longer terra than they de- ' .-ire, and an effort w to . made eto reduce ,H { to 3J years when the Bill was | I read a second time last session.! I Having once succeeded in. making j I this principle apply to all Crown 1 Leaseholds, ©it will bo a simple j matter to bring all _ Freenokla ! under the same principle. j-Jo j J workman begins with tne thic.c I cad of the wedge. By simply j charging a rent (or land tax) on I the 'unimproved value of Freei 3 io ] t l lauds, such Freehold be-1 comes a perpetual lease, subject j to periodical re-adjustment oi the rent (or tax), and although the present Government disclaim any intention of making this principle apply to all land, they have gone as far as-they have been asked to go at present. © It is, however,! probable that the next Parliament would be called on to go one step further, and so on, until the dream of tho Socialist Party has been realised. It is, therefore, time all farmers, freeholders or leaseholders, realised fully that this measure docs affect their interests, although perhaps indirectly. If they wish to protect their children, and at the same time study this colony’s best interest, they will do all they can to defeat this measure, which can only end to the detriment of onr prosperity. There is another objection to this proposed Land Bill that ousht not to bo overlooked.^\Vo have in this country an area as large as England (including Wales), Scotland, and half of Ireland, with a population of less thaiT.pue million, and at tho same time we believe pur little country to 1)0 ouc of tho beet in the world. This being so, how arc wo going to keep this country? We are doing our best by legislative means to prevent the peaceful- invasion of the colony by Asiatics and to keep it a “White Marts land”; wc know that certain Asiatic nations arc i’.-roking forward to tho dominion of ihc Pacific, and p.i a time when ;t might; be necessary for Britain” to “withdraw the sheltering ant of her Navy. At such a time, how arc wo to make this country impregnable against the invasion of what wo should now consider an overpowering Asiatic horde 1 Only by keeping our own rural population, and encouraging others of our countrymen from distant parts of our Empire to como hero and settle with us. But what inducement aro wo offering? sThc best a G 6 years' lease can bo called is a least! for life, on the understanding that when a man is ending 5 his days upon tho farm ho has probably cut out of tho wilderness, he will have tho mortification of knowing that tho bulk of ills earnings instead of going to his own children, will be confiscated by tho State. -• This is what wc propose to offer intending emigrants to New Zealand, while other less favoured parts of thcEmpirc arc offering the Freehold. They, however, are getting the increase of population, and must continue to c{o so; we certainly cannot hope to attain this desirable end. . Tho next portion of tho Band Bill deals with the limitation <rf Private “Estates in Land," but a clause in tho Bill excludes from this limitation any land within “cities and boroughs." Wo do not propose to deal with tho mpoet of tho question as to why rural lands and town lands should bo separated; but it is passing /strange that towns where enormous sums arc in ado by speculating in lands should bo left, whilst tho occupiers or users of rural lands should have this limit placed upon them. • The first limitation is that anyone holding more than £50,000 worth of unimproved land shall reduoa jpa holding to that amount within ten years; and tho secoilcß that no man can purchase or v Jea3e moro than i? 15,000 unimproved worth of land, The clause in relation to the latter limitation prohibiting tho purchase of moro than £15,000 worth of land reads as follows:—“In every case whore rural lands held in fed simple or by a lessee is disposed of by way of sale, gift or leaso, the instrument of conveyance, gift or’ lease shall have subscribed thereto; or indorsed thereon, a statutory declaration by the purchaser, donee Of lessee, that including the land ■comprised in the instrument he is not the..owner or lessee, cither by himself dr with any other person oy persons, of .any rural lands anywhere in New Zealand, tho unimproved f), value ascertained as aforesaid of thd unincumbered fee-simple of tho whole of which exceeds fifteen thousand pounds." Although tho meaning of this js involved, wo take it that whether an owner has a mortgage or not, he may not-purchase any land if ho holds £15,000 worth;

nr if less, what ho holds together ■with what ho purchases must not in tho aggregate bo more than £15,000 unimproved value, according to the value placed on it by the Valuation Department; and not—as at first sight might » be supposed—that after deducting the amount of the mortgage, he may hold £15,000 in land. In cither case the difference is one of degree. \Vc do not propose to deal with the principle of limitation of land td J>e held by owner or owners, whether by lease or freehold. This proposal iff connection with pri- * vatc lands has r never been dis cussed in our Union. - Wo will, therefore, confine ourselves to the examination of the limitation as proposed in the Bill. To force a man to sell any area over a fixed; amount is a distinctly new departure, unsanctioned by the people. But common justice demands; that, if this Procrustean method is adopted, the forced seller should be able to place his land on the market under ordinary conditions. This the Bill does not allow. Ho cannot soli the land for 1 other than cash, because he could not foreclose if interest were not yuud- -SMI AvAiy. Jif.tar J.fJva nariiiJß

process had been completed lie might- have more than the prescribed limit. It is true that the Lauds Committee inserted a clause whereby Ji,' mortgagee could purchase accompanied by a proviso that if the Tand- is dot sold withm two SA f«a- J.to f «*f*» tion of the transfer _ the rcgistiation shall become void for aH purposes, and shall be cance led by the Registrar.” (WhQ the land would belong to when the t4'.|®» 6r waa cancelled, whether the Crown or the oi’iginal defaulter, no one has yet been able to say.) To say nothing of the" harshness of sucli (i provision it would really be of no avail in moat cases, for if the land wore bought in by the mortgagee it would, no doubt, be at a time when prices were low and money scarce, so that he would not be able to recoup himself in the time. And rather than have the transfer cancelled, he would require to take whatever I I price' were offered or he would lose the whole. This Bill, however, specially provides (Clause 11b) that anyone on the £50,000 list cannot take advantage of the above provision, for ho can neither become lire purchaser” ■ i ■ • ‘‘or lessee under a sale by direction of the Registrar of the Supreme Court”; the £51,000 man, therefore, for his cm safety, must sell for cash. , Buyers, from’ him, would thus require to have one-third _of the value of the land at tneir command; before they could bor- .■ row the balance from some 8 lender. As no one can hole, | —together with what he I may pnrcliase — 1 more than £15,000 worth cf land, the number of buyers is limited, and, as will be seen when wo come to discuss the question of the £15,000 limit, the price of money is raised, and the buyers arc further limited, which all means the lowering of ths, value of land. The Union is not in fayour of large estates-, nor, as far as we are aware, is any member of it. Wc have recognised that what New I Zealand wants is that ploughmen, | shepherds, sons of farmers and others should have favourable opportunity of settling on the land for these meu have jaa4 a training —aro experts, not amateurs and therefore likely to become of service to the State and successful for th<ii?vjcivcs. But this proposal would not giro them any opportunity of takhp.g land; they would not have the necessary | capital. If, therefore, wo are going to givo these owners who hold more than £50,000 worth of land the opportunity of selling their lands, the £lo,ooo limit should be excised from the Bill, or we will most certainly depreciate the value of the land they are forced to sell, and nob do thesq whom wo wish to benefit any good, j THE £15,000 LIMIT.

The Minister, in speaking on his Bill, said that this limit was necessary to slop the £50,000 men cutting up their estates amongst their own families. When the list of holders of land

over £50,000 unimproved value comes to be revised, it will probably be found Lhoro are not more than 20 (Crown lands aro exI eluded, so that tenants of pastoral country arc not cu the list). Wc w ill sy,yr examine the resultof tho limit ui £15,000 more closely. It must never be forgotten that-, practically speaking, tho \ land of any country is the ultimate security for all tho debt (pul) lie itjjd private) and tho I credit allowed to tho, inhabitants. To seriously iimcrforo with that security means that tiie whole credit 'of the inhabitants has to be rc-adjustcd, and wo will proceed to'show what those best qualified la judge think will be the effect of tints £15,000 limit. It is obvious that wo cannot give names., but the information is bona-fide and not suppositious. A bank inspector said, as far as ids bank was concerned, that-, when they had fo realise an estate in tho past they nursed it in the m- ! teres!: of the owner, and only on ! rare occasions was there a total loss to him. Put now, with such

a. provision was A'proposed, limiting the holding of land to £15,000, by- which they could not look upon any security in the way of country lands as,* first class, they would require to realise as best they could in their own interests, and they could not protect the owner. The whole of their advances would require to bo reconsidered. A commercial man, .whyi-o name is a household word in New -Zealand, says; —“Tho effect of tho Government Land Bill must bring on a most grave upheaval,

destroying confidence aud causing

serious loss. Tho evil effects of the Bill will soon make themselves felt, and the colony will be taught a

lesson which will havo a very

steadying effect, aud whi/di will bring people to their senses?.” Here is a business! man, having no land

himself, forccopjng the gravest consequences to the people, not from a landowner’s point of view, but that tho town must suffer. City people who do not come into contact with the farming community seem to forget that the prosperity of the country is almost entirely clue to tho export of the produce of the land, and that anything that unsettles the producer diminishes tho output. The manager of one of the largest agencies in New Zealand, which deals with the produce of formers, and therefore has frequently to find large amounts in the way of accommodation for them, on being asked if the passing of the Land Bill would affect the rate of interest to his clients, replied: “Most certainly, but how much I cannot say.” “One per cent. 1" “More than that certja.jyj.ly, but how much more no one can say. If you prejudice our security we must charge a higher rate; the rate cl interest in entirely dependent on the security offered. The Land Bill will affect the security of some farmers most seriously, and wo shall have to charge thorn a rate according to the risk, which will be mirth increased.”

Another paid: “Besides our firm having many plienta in the farming community, lam a director of a company which lends money on land. We entirely ceased lending money when we saw the position wo would bp placed in if the Land Bill passed, for we could net hold land if we were forced to sell. Our own business would be very seriously affected, and our clients would have in the end to hear the brunt of it ?nd pay much higher rates and have" tljgir advances curtailed.”

It is well kno.wn that the in■auranco companies, which are such large investors in mortgages, refused loans pending the fate of the Land Bill. The directors dare not lend money on country lands with the prospect of not having untrammelled power to enter upon land in tiro case of default. “It ceases to bo a security we can touch,” said one. And the anoraa_hrton. -Jd have ex-. isted that t«w ould have »iki

been - gilt-edge security, whilst, “broad acres” would have been looked at askance.

A farmer of a couple of hundred acres, who is fairly well-to-do, but who started about ton years ago- with a heavy debt (to pay off which he has had to exercise the greatest frugality, economy, and self-denial), said: “If such a clause had been passed eight or ten years ago, it would have simply wiped me out-” Another, who is nearer the commencement of hia career, and therefore has the debt still unpalX caid; ‘■‘This Bill will undoubtedly falsa interest, and ff it does I shall lose everything.” Another small farmer says: l‘¥h« Vfhole credit system of the colony rests qft insecurity of the land, not alone affecting thejifjr mera, but also storekeepers, merchants, and even foreign as well as colonial manufacturers. By limiting the purchasing value of land to £15,000, it means no bank doing business in the colony can accept land as other than collateral security; this means the | galling up of overdrafts, which in turn means the stoppage of improvements. . When the farmer stops, the business mgn and the manufacturer must do likewise, and thousands of workers ■would be thrown out of employment.”

Of course wc are quite aware that there- are gome people in the community who would not he averse to the rate of interest rising and the risk increased.. Such people cu‘p accustomed to fatten upon the misfortunes of others. ■s&Ve think we have said .enough to show that in the event of the Bill passing money must bo more difficult to borrow, and that, in order to secure thcrascivcs, lend-

ers would reduce the amount they would .lend on “broad acres aim increase the rate, and we would exclude from the _ market all largo lending companies who have hitherto been such a large factor in our prosperity. These companies, against whom we have never heard a word of complaint, would he gone, and the usurers would remain. Tho price of money and the safety of security lias so much to

do with the price of land that myC rise in interest at once 'owers the value of land. It is an axiom that if the rate of inter eat rises, the value of land falls. If you add to this that (besides this rjyo in interest) money is more difficult to pro-

cure, and that the margin required by lenders is greater, it is easy to bo seen that the laud values rnyyi; V? considerably depreciated. Not that the well-to-do farmer will be much affected; ho will, at any rate, bo the last to feel the effect. But thousands of farmers in New Zealand, who have bought it at high prices-, ai;d who have burdened themselves with a large debt in the hone that by sell-denial and hard work they will be able to reduce the dpbt bof ore pi/Rcplt times come—• these will bo the uom who will suffer. , Our concern is with tho small farmer, who will bo so seriously affected by the Bill. There arc thousands ,cf farmers in portions of New Zealand who have been assisted into farms by those who had confidence in their integrity and dc-termincuyu to work to pay off their debt. There is first a mortgage for what they can get lent on the land, then some firm finances the rest. The man himself may have a hundred, or two of savings, aud this he puts i;j, b"t he practic-

ally mortgages tho whole of the properly. Somotimoa he receives assistance to buy cows, etc., or an auctioneer will buy them for him and take a bill-of-salo over them. The storekeeper trusts him for his requirements in the way of food, clothing, etc. Then he starts to work to

attic I;is debt off. The dairying

industry is a wonderful debt-rc-ineer, and if the faun or lias luck with his cows he ran make a very ,'oc.l start the first year. But naturally the rows are not so goo-:! ns an old esiahlished herd, and some liirm elapses before the tvee-.t■> r.r t jVa;id cut and clis-•ard-ed. and oi!i.;r f - boughi i.O take '.heir p'.-i w-d.-h arc better .•ivhlcrs. Given a fair run of luck uid good Units, he begins to feel his feet the third year mid make

money aft'.r. To sari; is on anv check is serioiu, but ihmgiiA what it

would mean to them it interest were suddenly to rise. The firm, auctioneer, cr storekeeper in whose debt lie was would begin to feel anxious. Tho bank

in tho rc-adiustmcnfc of their ad-

.vau.- Ci, would require to .call In a portion, arid tho firms by y/lipm the money ivas advanced to tho fanners would rcqvh'u tfl realise. The storekeeper who had given credit would 3)0 fc b e likely to be paid at all, and he ggfjij> would not bo able to meet' bin engagements, raid tho effect would bo felt in towns sooner than anywhere, Thus it will be seen that the ’commercial man who said there would T>o a “grave upheaval” was right in h'is conclusions.

TJiero are thousands of struggling men who “will win through” if left alone, who would lose all they had, and have ty begin tiro world again were the Bill as wo have it before us to pass. Tho Premier has said that not a line of tho Bill is against the Freehold. Surely it is safe to say tho Freehold is being attacked if it is made unsafe for these men to hold. Our Premier said that a graduated tax put on ihp land would throw “large areas upon the markets and would also cause a very considerable dislocation of the lanid market from end to end of the colony.” That is certainly what would happen if the Land Bill passes with the provision relating to mortgagees as it stands. To some, all this “upheaval” might bo a matter of congratulation, and we are truly glad to see the Ministry does not desire “to dislocate the land market from end to end .of the colony;” but we claim to have shown that outside the £60,000 men altogether tho land market will ho “dislocated.” Values will fall, to what no one can sav. Here are the thoughts of a man writing to a paper which is in favour of the Bill: —“lt seems to me this is worthy the careful attention of farmers. If the land to be cut up is sold at current rates it will benefit nobody ; if‘it is sold at, say, 25 per cent, les?, it means that all the land ip the colony will depreciate simultaneously. Farms are continually changing hands in the colony, and if every fanner whose land is today worth .£l2 an acre realised that if the Bill passes it will fall to £9 and not recover its value for some years, will not the Bit damage more than it assists! Could not the prompters of the Bill make some" reasonable forecast as to this matter!" On the London Stock Exchange, or on Wall Street, when financier# and capitalists want to make money out of stock they the market and resort to all sorts of devices to depreciate the yg,!n§ of the shares. When shares have touched bottom, they buy in and Oi- 1 . J* ■- . 1 - «-I v. r d--

make a fortune. That .would be the effect of the Land Bill. The House Would bo "bearing” the land values if it passed the Bill. But no one would gain b\ it: the poor man would have in credit, therefore ha could no; take advantage of the- market. The capitalist, if ho cared to pm down his cash, would he able to buy at his own figure. And why all this turmoil ? Not becaustthere was no land for sale in the colony. There is not 25 per cent, of the freehold properties in Now Zealand which cannot be bought to-day. There are, according to the Premier, 1,600,000 acres of Crown land remaining for settle ment. But the Year Book just published gives the Commissioner of Lands’ reports, and from these wo find the following : Crown IjaNds Available for • Settlement. Auckland Province ... 834,161 Taranaki Province ... 84,774 Wellington Province ... 39,33 a Marlborough Province 40,000 Nelson Province .... 19,575 Westland Province ...’ 101,352 Otago Province ... 33,665 Southland Province ... 52,311 Hawke’s Bay Province 25,117 1,230,896 Areas which are not yet open for selection: —-

Auckland (note tho Commissioner speaks of the land as suitable for settlement except in the case of Thames and Ohinomuri, and these we have not taken into account), 736,485; Taranaki, 131,550; Hawke’s Bay, }99 880; Wellington, 67,000. Tlie lands in the other provinces are given together in r.pund numbers, but leaving the South island out, there is, according to the reports of the Commissioner in the Year Book, gn area of 2,2bb,81J acres still' fit iyi’ tAtlemspt, together with all the available unfiuvoyoc? land in tho South Island. , . The Premier announcer Uiai there were besides this 6,000,000 acres of native Hud fit for settlement, so that there is still an enormous area of .unproductive land waiting for the settler and the axe. . , It is well known Lias the lanstill held by tho natiyca is not ordinary land, but for the most part is of tho beat quauty. FOl years past the natives have been selling , the roughest of the ianc. to the Government raid Keeping tho best, which has been enhanced in value by the roads formed by the settlers (becoming responsible for loans) aud Government. It is, in fact, more

capable pf being cut. up into, irhaljor areas than tho bulk of tlig land put upop the market by the G-ovevfjijicnt in recent years. Mr McNab’s figure* sUtf'y that under the optional system daring' the last three years 743,540 acres of land were taken up, and under the Lcaso-in-Porpetuity (Land for Settlement) 415,321 hcres, linking g. pf>tjil pf 1,158,861 acres. At this rate, taking the average quality of the unoccupied native land into account, and worked,in conjunction with the Land for Settlement Act, we have more land than we can settle during the next ten years. r iSvi> officials on a holiday trip,

whose opinion cannot be gainsaid, rode through a block of 80,OU0 gctes of native land, the grass jjeiug up to their stirrups along tho track, and they told the present writer that" it would be worth in the settled districts £l2 or £l3 an acre. Tho Year Book gives the total area of Freehold land in the colony at 16,473,025 acres. The )iie'A ’hold by the Crown and the natives is, therefore, equal Lo half the already disposed of Freehold land. Wo are told the Crown lands are nearly all gone. Surely it will bo a matter for congratulation when they are all gone —if they are only settled on a proper tenure. And yet, when th'iit is the case, there will yet remain this 6,000,000 acres of native land to find settlers for. Whilst that reraains unproductive, the colony is to have its financial arrangements completely upset by a Bill, tho principles of which have not been before the country except in regard to the right of leaseholders to acquire the Freehold, and on this question the country answered in the affirmative. The country said this i shquld be granted. The Bill dei niya that right. A Commission ; to enquire into this 1 question, costing £16,000. took evidence all oyer the polony, and it was overwhelmingly in faycur of leaseholders being given the right to purchase their laud. The Bill gives them the right to pay oif 00 per cent, of the original value, but refuses to ab low them to make tho land their own. By retaining the 10 per . cent, it would seem that any conditions imposed by the Land Act under which tho land b held, Stilj remain, though in the words of the Bill c (A) “When payments equal to fifty per eC'fitprq of suclj value have been made, tlm lessee iibftU for the residue of the

ivun oi the lease have pG.e»2:3ion of the land freed from all covenants and conditions contained or implied in (Uo 'ease other than the cfiV'U'.aut jo pay rent, 1 ' Anything specially nV-ffftouod iji the lease is freed, but not otherwise. It is doubtful, therefore,' whether

-ach I vur.sfcr must not have the lanctioa of the Land Board—even if tho land is devised bv

Mr iiamsay McDonald, who was lately cut hero louring the colony, and naturally associating with those who had similar views fo himself, and who had discussed the effects of the Land Bill amongst his friends in the colony, gave iu Melbourne the following opinion : —“lf New Zealand ware going; to carry cu progressive legislation, tlie Freehold system must bo knocked on the head. ... In this conncc-

tion Mr McNairs land policy comes in, with the elimination of the Freeholders.” Here, at any rate, is one who looks upon the Bill as an -attack upon the Freehold ; as a beginning towards the desired end cf “'knocking the Freehold on the head”; as an instalment of_what is hoped for. We would appeal to those who may do us the favour of reading this to look at the matter dispassionately, not as a party question, but as one of fairness and justice, and to remember that this Bill specially exempts the town lands from its operations, and therefore it deals with country lands only, from which are eliminated all Grown grazing lands. It therefore deals only with—/ Freehold land ... 16,000,000 Maori land, unoc-' enpied, say ... 6,000,000 Crown land, unoccupied, say ... 2,000,000 24,000,000 and the leasehold land which is not separated from the grazing runs in the return quoted. As town lands are not included, 'it goes without saying” that the country settlers should have a strong voice ‘on the matter, having already settled the land and being likely to assist in the settlement of the balance, as well as being mora comn stent fas.isiit