PARLIAMENT.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 35, 11 October 1913, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 10. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wellington, October 10. The Legislative Council met at 2.30. In reply to the Hon. J. E. Jenkin;on, the Hon. F. H. D. Bell said that ,ie would lay on the table any despatches that may have been tabled in* the House of Commons relative to She dual control of the New Hebrides luring the years 1906-7. Confidential lespaiches could not be tabled. ( ‘j. T,jie; lUdftnicjl went into committee 'in the Land! Transfer Amendment Bill, which was! reported with formal [read a third time, and

lasted. I ,: li;<'■i i» H ; *' : 1! 1 • *' 4 The Local ! Injections and Polks Amendment Bill Was further cousidorand reported mittih imondments. lltUvill he read a third ime on Tuesda|y| j*\ ji; 11 t |; 11 j j »i The Counicl adjourned at 3|o’cloiclk. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. fPflJi PRBflr AsaOOIATION.] v : The House met at 2.30 p.m. NATIVE LANDS. The Native by Governor’s Most 'sage, a fifht’ time.‘ !U ' '* Jl Hon. W. H. Herries' eiplaiiied - that ;he main alteration was in iution of Maori Land, Boards. vision was made for the abolition of and boards and the appointment of i judge and a registrar 4 to,, as . a 'ooaid 1 . " The judge was ihadfr responsible for the partitioning of blocks il he thought they should be partitioned. Another alteration wps in regard to the purchase of native land by the Crown, reverting back to the old system of the Crown being able to purchase individual interests and doing away with a meeting of assembled owners.

Mr A. T. Ngata pointed out that first-class native land was rapidly being alienated from the. natives. He desired to see ample restrictive provision made, so that Maoris would lot bo loft landlass. Mr T. Buxton contended that the Maori required protection against the European trader. If titles were individualised under the Bill, the Maori would be tempted to sell his land reckthen become a burden on the community.

Mr Ngata demanded legislation to rectify injustices to Taranaki natives under the West Coast settlement reserves leases. The keynote of the dill was not compulsion, but an insidious temptation, which was worse than compulsion. Temptation to the Maoris to sell their lands was greater now than it was 20 years ago. Knowng the weakness of their nature, he dewed the effect of the Bill with considerable anxiety. The weakness of all mr legislation was tnat no provision was ever made to induce the Maori to farm his own lands.’ The Bill was in some respects worse than the worst ‘introduced by Liberal Governments. Mr W. D. S. McDonald said the Bill was a clear declaration of the Minister’s insidious intention to open the door more widely to thg European to acquire Maori lands. Mr D. Buddo advocated a system of financing the natives and so enabling them to farm their own lands. Them Was an imminent risk of natives becoming landless and a burden upon the State.

Mr T. Pa rata quoted a series of early purchases from the natives to show that they never had a square 'leal. Ten years ago the natives of both Islands held si* million acres. Within that time they had sold tv o million acres, and the whole <>f the money received therefrom had heen dissipated in hospitality. It was not the Maori nature to conserve money. What he wanted was protection. So far as he could gather, the natives now owned four million acres, an averagomf 80 acres per head; hut ol first-class land they had only fio acies ou an average. Compare these uith the pakeha holdings, and see how much

“-y land the Maori Jiad that could be taken for settlement. The Bill was road a second lime pro forma, and was referred the Native Affairs Commute*. TME LAND BILL. The House resumed at 7.0f.,' p.m. Consideration of the Land Bill in committee was continued. On clause iB, providing fl at a lai d board may dispense with personal residence on land, Mr G. W. Bussell contended that the clause would promote a system of “dummyism.” There were- hundreds of farm laborers who had one or two hundred pounds, and who desired to get on the laud and farm it. Otherwise men in foitms earning from two to three hundred a year would be able to secure a section, and after putting a manager on it, could sell out without ever having put a foot on the section. Dr. A. K. Newman argued that Mr Russell assumed that men who would avail themselves of the clause were single men, whereas it would be found that thrifty tradespeople and artisans would be the people who would benefit by putting their sons on the land. His only abjection to the clause was that he considered the provision specifying double improvements was too severe.

The Prime Minister accepted an amendment proposed by Mr R. McCallunij providing that where the income of a man and wife exceeded £3OO a year, the clause of the Bill exempting residence shall not alpjily. Mr MacDonald held that the inclusion of clause 18 in the Bill would be of Jangerous course to adopt. Mr Poland also objected to the clause, contending that the Minister; after hearing the adverse criticism.hi members, should withdraw it. If it were allowed to pass, it would mean m increase of dummyism.

Mr Massey explained that in most case* the substitute would be the lessees’s son. He implored the House to vote on the question and be done with it.

Mr J. G. Anderson moved an amendment giving preference to a man who intended to reside on the land. “'Mr Massey said that the effect would 'be to kill the clause. He could not accept it. The House divided on the ameiidnent, which was defeated by 33 'to 17. : ‘ ! u At 11.30 a division wan taken oh da use IS,; bind resulted: For 33,

igainsi 28- ’ ' i, ! A‘long discussion ensued on -the : cl : affse that licensees df ! tfrea*a-| in the Haurajki mining district might ■ icqiiii'e the fhe simple of their lands, j uS thti i House was left sittirig lat! 2 a.m. \\ >' > ' 1 11 J’

if 'AlijiALLl NICHT (SITTING, hi

Wellington, October 11. j After Ihe .Telegraph ( Office closed, | the clause providing for'tlie conversion of the Hauraki leases to freehold -,vas further debated. Th<j Opposition took strong exOepJ-'" tinnier*uio suggested provision, and alleged'that a member of the Hdrtsc’ owned -2000-acres ! bf Hauraki land.' 1 ' 1 Mr Herries stated that the.GmWn-b ment had nd?%nowledge of the 'Etilbstance of the allegation. i Mr Poland stated that he owned , 150 acres in the Hauraki lease, but if , the clause passed, he would not avail j himself of the freehold, so the state- : ments did not apply to him. He j would vote against the clause, and moved an additional proviso thaf-the compensation on resumption should not exceed the price paid by the owner to the Crown, The Minister said that he could not •accept the sugegstion. Mr T. W. Rhodes said he owned about 1000 acres, which he had got at a ballot some years ago. He had been notified that he was not to do anything until it was reported on by the Crown Lands Ranger and warden. Ho would be pleased to assist any prospector on the land, but thought there was no gold there. All he had done was to propose a subclause making it easier for a minor to get on the land. He had nothing to hide in the matter. Mr McCallum declared that the : purport of the clause was now hared ) in adl its effrontery. He bad it on best authority that the member concerned had 2000 acres. Mr Massey said ho accepted the clause* after receiving a deputation from the Thames district. Mr Rhodes j had given him the clause; M I At 4.40 Sir Joseph Ward accepted j Mr Massey’s offer to postpone the I clause conditional upon Mr Massey re- j porting progress. This the Prime Minister refused, I and the Opposition thereupon refused 1 to pass the clause and protested , against the driving tactics being io I verted to.

At 8 a.m. the House adjourned ioi ireakfast.

When the House met after bieakfast the Opposition endeavoured to induce the Premier to adjourn, but Mr Massey insisted on proceeding. At 10.30 Sir Joseph Ward suggested putting through clause W 31 inclusive, excepting 26, which the Opposition would not pass. Mr Massey did not agree, and a nebulous discussion continued.