THE NEW LAND BILL.

Samoa Times and South Sea Gazette, Volume 2, Issue 76, 15 March 1879, Page 2

THE NEW LAND BILL.

Mr. David Buchanan M.LA. has written to tho Sydney Morning Herald on tho above subjeot as follows: The main principle of the present bill is indiscriminate free selection as it is the main principle of tho bill of 1861. And those who aro in favour nf this principle are consistently bound to vote for the second reading of tho present* details, which may bo easily altered in committee. Such details as relieving future free selectors from the payment of interest on their balances U a piece of sheer folly a* unprincipled a-< it is idiotic, and would undoubtedly be wiped out with-

out even debate, Hid ao with othl r 1 details which req/ in. rdtrriajf. 1 k*ve :«; fc 1 re-id a single "p«*\.u «M«e during ihe j debate y;!:«»e tiw argximtnts of the j speakm- ia auy way jiisx-ify his announced intotition to vote against tbosecend reading of the biil. The main ,»asiple oi the-bill is favoured by ev<.tj"*pe*Scr; am this being so, it is consequently a bill to be at least read a second tinw if members were only animate by n U-.---.ii - to act in accordance wife extract parliamentary aetio:i. I. however, write this letter principal! .-■ to ejiiWMS my regret that the Government, in introducing a L&ud Bill, have shut their eyes to all the wrongs and evils and mighty mischief of the Art of 1861, leaving the war between squatter and free selector to be waged with increased virulence to the injury.if not ruin, of one or both. Theauthor of the Act of 1861 claims the Premier as a convert to his system; but if the Premier speaks his mind he is no convert, he is only timid and irresolute. I will venture to say there is not a member no* sitting iu Parliament who does not believe that it would have been of infinite advantage to the country had the two interests—pastoral and agricultural—been kept separate, and not have been throwu into violent and ruinous collision; and I further say ! hat a woll-cousidercd proposition to effect that purpose now would be supported by all that is honest and intelligent iu the country. The Land Acts of 1861, if they have done any good, have really loft us little else than that evil to consider ; and I appeal to every man who knows the subject to say whether or not the evil of those acts has not pressed with more crushing and ruinous results on the free selector than on the squatter, large as has been the squatter's injury. The land legislation of 1801, while it has enabled the free selector to invade the in every direction, has at the same time placed in the squatter's bauds a tword, not only with two edges, but with a dozen edges, and with this formidable weapon, and many others taken from tho same armoury, he has hemmed the free selector in, surrounded him on every side, and harassed him to a degree that made his life and occupation unbearable, and compelled him, iu hundreds of eases, to yield and sell out on any terms he , could get. Has not this war been going ; on for years, as the proceedings of our law courts can amply testify '! and is it not raging now, and will continue as i long as we adopt and maintain the pernicious law of bringiug two great ■ classes iu direct collision, creating for i thorn antagonistic interests, and forcing them by law into an attitude of such mutual nostility that war to tho knife is ' as inevitable as that the sun will shine i to-morrow ! Is this a law that the* ; country need boast of, which seriously , damages one great industry and well- . nigh ruins the other? This land lcisI latiou of 1861, it is said, is a copy from > the American system—as like as the i December weather here in Sydney is like ' the December weather of London. The i American statesmen are far too astute f than to bring ruin upen the great indusi tries of their country by setting them • at loggerheads with each other, and . creating a war ending only in mutual > destruction. Suppose the cotton-growing interest of ! America was the same as our wool-grow- ' ing interest here, and that the Govem- > ment of .America had let on leases almost the entire Publio lauds for the purpose jof growing cotton—that this cotton growing all over the United States (I am sup--1 posing that cotton could grow all over ■ the United States for the sake of arguI ment) was the main source of the wealth and prosperity of the country—what would we think of that legislation that • allowed the general public to rush those • already leased cotton-lands, and apply a > certain portion of them to olhor and | their own purposes, in spite of the leases I and previous occupation ? Surely the 1 American statesmen would keep cancelling the leases, and sotting tho land apart ! for agricultural or other purposes, before •' they allowed the agriculturists to inter*. ! fere; and by this means allow both the - agricultural and the cotton industry to I Uourish without interfering with each . other in tho slightest way. Although 1 this is hardly in any exact analogy with I. our case, still it shows what has been 1 drummed into Sir John Robertson's ears 1 by the Herald without eliding the slight--1 est answer—namely, that in America 1 they dealt with unocoupied lauds, whereas hore wo were dealing with lands 1 already leased and occupied by au into--1 rest which was notoriously tho main 1 sourco of all our wealth and prosperity, 1 and which auy interference witlj, in the way uroposod by tho legislation of 1861, would inevitably injure vitally, besides opening flic floodgates to a full tide of evils to roll in, little at tho time dreamt of, but which are now. realized to the extent of threatening the vory existence of both interests by placing two great classes of the community in perpetual hostility to each other, waging an incessant war, and poisoning the very sources of the country s well-being.

This is what the Land Act of 1861 has done. I have said before, while speaking on this subject in Parliament, taat this most pernioious and ill-con-sidered Act of 1861 was passed under a gust of passion, without thought or reflection, very few, if any being aware of tho multitude of evils that would follow iu its trail. Those evils are now patent to everyone, and will continue and grow and increase, becoming more and more dangerous and aggrivntcd in the character, so long as tho law brings two great classes of the people in violent collision, forcing both sides into a hostile attitude,

and omn&eliing them to resort to every ■iovice, which the law curiously enough most amply admits .>f, calculated to bring about each other's dtstruciton and rum.