“ARE WE TO STAY HERE?”

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2569, 15 June 1881, Page 2

“ARE WE TO STAY HERE?”

The above is the title of an exceedingly well-written, interesting, and useful publication. The writer is Mr H. J. Sealy, a gentleman of lengthened experience as a surveyor in New Zealand, The pamphlet may be concisely stated to be a voluminous criticism of the Land Laws and Immigration and Public Works policy, and the bearing which the burden of the debt incurred by the latter may have upon the prosperity of the colony. Mr Scaly has not skimmed the matter. He has gone to the very root of the affair. He has sought his information in the most reliable quarters, and this, combined with the peculiar advantages of observation be enjoyed in the exercise of his profession, has resulted in his giving forth to the public a work abounding in information and well-reasoned suggestions. Mr Sealy believes, and a great many believe with him, that

the iniquitous land,laws of this colony have fundamentally been the cause of all the evils with which- the colony has been afflicted, and that .a' radical change will be required if the country is to meet its obligation* Otand the balk of colonists to' live 1 in a fair degree of comfort. Tbb English people, owing to laud' monopoly, have been termed homeless. There is no home for a man where he has no footing on the soil. It was to better their condition and establish homesteads of their own that induced people to leave the overcrowded Old Country, and locate themselves in Now Zealand. The hope'"was" delusive. It is a sad fact that the bulk of colonists are virtually homeless. The reason why is explained in Mr Sealy’s pamphlet. The land monopolists were too strong for the Liberals. It is so to the present day. The big landed interest lias ruled in New Zealand. Here in South Canterbury, where the country should smile like a garden, there are hundreds of thousands of acres devoted entirely to sheep. The following is a list of the largest holdings in South Canterbury ; Acres New Zealand and Australian Land Co., Levels .. »£• .. 80,000 „ „ Parcora 20,000 „ ~ Hakateramea 30,000 (Late) Rhodes, Scadowh .. .. 10,000 Mr Hoare, Rainclilf .. .. 15,000 Messrs Studholme, Opuha .. 15,000 „ Waimato .. 45,000 Messrs Trschemaker, Otaio .. 17,000

Mr Elworthy, i’arcora .. .. 40,000 Mr Rhodes, Bluecliffs .. .. 10,000 Messrs Parker, Waihou .. 10,000

Mr Douglas ~ -.. .. 10,000 Messrs Ho wdou & Co. Pudding Hill 20,000 “ Hakateramei 20,000 Hon. R. Campbell „ 3r>,ooU Mr M'Lean, Waihou .. .. 00,000

Since the inauguration of the public works and immigration policy one hundred thousand immigrants have been brought to New Zealand at the expense of the Government. The original object was that they should become settlers on the land. It was, of all districts in the colony, most suitable for the settlement of a yeomanry on the soil. The above list shows how the squatters and their friends managed to monopolise the largest portion of the best lands.

It is well for the North Island that it had a Native difficulty. Fortunately there are still millions of acres of good land in the hands of the natives. It may truly be said that the “ eyes ” have been picked out of the land of South Island. It is true that there is still a considerable extent of inferior country available for settlement, but if the present laissez fa ire system still prevails that will also soon be grabbed by the land monopolists. Are not their friends now in office ? It will take a strong and united effort on the part of the Liberals to counteract the influence of the land sharks and the money-lending corporations at their back.

However, it is not only proper dealing with the umdienated lands of the colony which must be secured. If the country is to progress, the mischief wrought in the past must be undone. No man has a right to monopolise the public estate. This very question is one which will soon find solution even in England. That there is such a question in New Zealand is a disgrace to the past Parliaments of the colony. A crime has been committed on the irtato, and many of the despoilers had a full knowledge that it was a crime. It is no use mincing matters on a subject which is of paramount importance to every soul in the colony. Public opinion may continue to slumber,but there will be an awakening to the true interests of the colony before long. Mr Scaly advocates a land tax on a sliding scale in order to meet the interest on the colonial debt. He would exempt freehold estates under 200 acres from the operation of the land tax. Above that amount he recommends the following scale ;

" Two or more estates" remarks Mr Sealy,'." belonging to same owners or company to count as one, for the purpose of computing the rate per acre. Of course there woull have to be modifications of the above scale according to the quality of the hind, for instance, an estate like the Longbeach Estate, all first-class land, cculd bear a higher rate, whilst estates on the shingly plains, or in the Mackenzie Country, would be very much less than the rate given. At any rate the principle is perfectly just and fair, as*the theory is, that people should contribute towards the expense of the State in exact pro portion to the beneiit the} 1 derive from *.he protection of the State ; in 1 if it suits a capitalist to hold a large tract of Innd to the exclusion of other people, it is quite fair that he should pay for his privilege." At a future date we will take another opportunity of referring to Mr Sealy's highly valuable contribution on the present condition of the colony, and the causes which have led up to the landless position of the people. Meanwhile we desire to recommend all those who have regard for the future cf New Zealand to read the pamphlet.

200 and under 500 acres s. 0 a. 1 500 1,000 „ 0 2 1,000 „ 5,000 „ 0 <1 5,000 10,000 „ 0 6 10,000 „ 20,000 „ 0 9 20,000 50,000 „ 1 0 50,000 „ 00,000 100,000 „ 1 2 G 0