VILLAGE SETTLEMENTS. THE GOVERNMENT WILL NOT CONTINUE THE SYSTEM. INTERESTING DEBATE IN THE HOUSE. (BY TELEGRAPH.—OWN REPORTER.)

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 285, 28 July 1888, Page 4

VILLAGE SETTLEMENTS. THE GOVERNMENT WILL NOT CONTINUE THE SYSTEM. INTERESTING DEBATE IN THE HOUSE. (BY TELEGRAPH .— OWN RE PORTER.)

Wellinoton. July 26. An impoitant and very interesting debate arose yesterday afternoon on the question pub to the Government by Mr Peacock respecting villagcaettlements,andas the subject isone which has been engaging a great deal of attention, and i^ at present a burning question in Auckland, I send a fair abstract teporb of ths discussion, which occupied nearly three hours. Mr Peacock asked the Minister of Lands -. (1) Whether lie is satisfied with its ultimate buccess ? (2) Does he intend to take any special stops with a view to facilitate further settlement on land either on similar lines or any modification of them ? (3) Has any communication been leceivcd recently from the corps of comnnbbionerfe in England with regard to land lor pensioner settlements in INewZea* land ; [n putting his questions, Mr Peacock baid the exodus of people from the colony must be viewed with regret, and the welfai o of the country demanded that special inducements should be given to those who weie inclined to go on the land. 'I he Hon. G. F. Richardson, in replying to the questions, said the report of the Village Steward at Auckland was misleading, as it gave only one side of the case. The position of these octtlements might be -ihovtly stated thus : There had been 1,269 \ lllage homestead .spocial selectors, taking up altogethci over 39,000 acres. Of these 904 remained in occupation on an area of 27,710 acres. There had been 233 sections of an aiea ot 7,421 acres forfeited; 71 sections of 2,328 acres had been forfeited and 61 sections of 1,878 acres abandoned. These figures were up to the 31st March of the present year. The ad\ ances to settlers amounted to £11,673, of which £10,148 was represented bv works in aid. Taking the aveiage, each <■ election had cost the colony £24 2s, <uul the approximate liability of the colony pei ootolcL Wd3 €42, making a total of £66 2b pei head. The receipt« in rent and in-teie-.b pei selection was 17s 3d, and there \\ ,us owing pei selection 6s Id. The Village Sfcewaid said in his report that the total ad\ances were £5,800, but this was only d Mn all pait of the expenditure. For instance, the expenditure on the Herekino ; lone was £3,247, the advances on account of this settlement being £1,082 15s. He would take another instance. On the Omaha settlement, the advances were £720 13s, while the cost of the settlement was £2,524. Mi Seddon objected chat the Minister was giving the House a return, and not a lcpl}" to the questions, bat wa=i i uled out of order. The Minister of Lands, continuing his lemaiks, said that of the 19 settlements ni Auckland six weie self -supporting ; live iiaidly so, and eight were relying considerably on the (Joveinment. To continue the ystem of advances to small settlement,* by giving full facilities to those who u oulcl otLei wise nob be enabled to obtain small holdings, he thought they were assisting to settle land by the most desirable means. Wiuh regaid to the third question, the Government had no further intoimation than that already laid before the House. tie might say that if this matter were further developed the present land laws Avould enable the Government to piovidc land for this purpose. Sir Geoige Grey wished to make some observations on this question, and moved the adjournment ol the House. He pointed out that the Government had a good opportunity of affording employment to those out of work in connection with the construction oi the North Auckland and Otago Central Railways. If the Government, instead of handing over the construction of these railway* to syndicates, were to set apart lands, and on security of these lands themselves issue debentures, which would also have the secuiity of public credit, they could dispose of Bhese on favourable terms, and thus raise funds to enable them to carry on the railways themselves and open up the country and establish special settlements. Where the very men were making the railways they could form homesteads for themselves and families. Mr Blake asked if there was any possibility of the settlements being self-sup-porting. If Uiere were any money due on these, it mattered nothing. Mr Moss declared that the answer of tho Minister of Lands was misleading, and there was too much of the old talk about liabilities. If the men did not perform certain work, the land would go back to the Government. The question was — Would thc«e settlements be a success? He and others in Auckland thought that the scheme Mas a most beneficent one, and having been put in operation at a time of great distress, it took men who were unemployed ofr the streets, and placed themseh es and families in homes where they could help themselves. All that these men now asked was a little help in making roads. He ventured to say that with his own produce of £10, or at the most £15 per annum, it would be sufficient to enable these people to live comfortably. They only asked for this work at first. If there were some failures, as was said, that was no reason why all should be condemned. In Auckland all the information they could obtain was that thesetblemenbswereasuccess and the people of that city would hold in detestation any attempt to decry them. If the gentleman who devised this scheme never did anything else, this system of settlement entitled him to rank amongst the benefactors of the country. Mr Peacock could not say that he was satisfied with the answer given by the Minister of Lands, and thought bhab a mora definite answer might be given. The ! settlement of the land was of great importance, and it did not so much matter what form was adopted so long as settlement was proceeded with. | MrTurnbull also regretted the answer given, as he thought this village settlement scheme was the true solution of the unemployed difficulty, and was one of the wisest and best investments the Government could make. It would be a great mistake to lefc the system drop, and he was sorry if it were not to be continued. Mr Thompson regretted very much to hear that it was not the intention to continuo this form of settling the land. There was a very strong feeling in Auckland in favour of village settlements and the gentleman who devisod the scheme. If the late Government did nothing else, that one act of their policy had been very beneficial. Seoing that the Minister of Lands had quoted figures showing that the scheme was a success, he hoped it would not be allowed to drop. Land settlement would sustain a check if this system were nofc con j turned.

Major Steward regretted that the Minisier of Lands was nob prepared to press on with the good work which had Laen begun by Mr Balance. It was gratiiying to he^r from the Auckland members who had spoken that the scheme had been such a success intheNorrh.andhehopedthe Minister would reconsider his answer. He had spoken about labilities, but we found crowds of able-bodied men leaving the colony, and this kind of thing' would go on unless Government devised come means of getting them on the land. Land settlement and increased population would do more to alleviats our difficulties than re trenchment to the last shilling could poboibly do. Mr Cowan said this (system of settlement was known outside vhe House as " the spoon-fed system/ and he reminded members that it- was shown in Committee on this sy&tem that liabilities had been incurred to the evtent of £60,000 oxer the 1*5,000 voted by the House. Mr Goldie was surprised at the statement thafc these settleis were spoon-fed after \\ hat the Minister had told them about the j difficulties in the way of the settles. In the North the settlers required very little assistance, and that only in making roads for opening the country. The system had done a very great deal of good in the oolony, and if borne failures had occurred it was only natural that this should be the case, for the reason that mauj' of the settlers weie cit'-'Cns who never had had a spade in theiv hands, but weie only too willing to do what they could to present themselves and families fiom starving. Ifc was very gratifying to find that to many of the settlements were &elfsuppoiting. He sincerely hoped the Government would see their way to continue the settlementi. If the whole of the £60,000 liabilities weie claimed, the State would have the benefit in improvement of the land and election of cottages. This land did not go from the ouintry, and tho money was better spent in this way than in charity. Mr Smith, as the representative of village settlements, said he knew that the member for Bay of Islands and others had brought pressure on the Government to induce them to kill the village settlements, but he was glad that the Government had stood firm and determined to give the system a fair trial. There were failures in all systems of settlement, and ihe small percentage of those who had given up their noldings showed that the village settlement system was a good one. The ' iaigest proportion of the \illage settieis had done well in the past, and would probably do better in the future. Mr O'Gallaghan was sorry from the tone of the Minister of Lands that he *vas not a friend to the system, although the very facts he had furnished showed that the results of the system had been rno^t gratifying, and the secret of settlement of the country by the poorer classes. There was no other wwarj r of settling people without capital. As a friend of the system, he was glad that such success had been achieved, and he asked where were the dismal foiebodings of failure, poverty, and wretchedness about which so much was heard Some had singled out those men who weie suitable, and they had stuck to the land. He had letters from former friends in Canterbury who had gone to settle in Bokianga, and they said they were doing well, but were very much in want of road?. Mr Fish gave gratifying accounts of interviews he had with village settleis at Pahiatua, which confirmed his opinion that the scheme was a success. If Mr Ballance never did anything but inaugurated these settlements, this work alone would send hio name down to posterity as a benefactor to the colony. He had recehed \ei y depieasing accounts ot people 1 aving Dunedin in hundreds dm ing the last eight or ten days, and unless something was done quickly, we would lose the flower of our population and our best artisans, and the bone and sinew of the country. He looked on this question as most important. He trusted tnat the Minister would not be content to leave the system, but would also extend iv.i u . Mi* O'Conor was sorry the Government wore inclined to neglect one of the great means by which prosperity might again be brought to the colony. These settlements, which had, so far, been a gieat success, could be easily and cheaply establiehed, owing to profitable employment available from our mineral resources. How could we expect the country to prosper when oui two greatest producing powers — land and people — were lying idle ? Mr Tanner expressed his appreciation of the zealous endeavours of the late Minister of Lands to settle the country, but he was convinced that it was useless to attempt to place people on less than 100 acres, and if they did that it would not be neces&aiy to spend large sums of money for their support. He compared the system of the piesent administration with the village settlement system, and thought the advantage was with the former. Mr Taiwhanga spoke with the object of showing that there were 60,000 acres of land not yet paid for by the Government. Dr. Hodgkinson said village settlements were not the best system of settlement, because the essential conditions of success were not present. The settlers under such circumstances were paupers on the State. Mr Duncan replied to Dr. Hodgkinson, and spoke in strong terms of the village settlement scheme. Mr Hobbs gave the Minister of Lands and Government credit for endeavouring to carry out the engagements of the last Government creditably, and he had letters from settlers expressing satisfaction with what had been done. He admitted that he had endeavoured to get the freehold of the sections for settlers, but the Minister would not grant the concession, as he wished to carry out the intention of the system in its entirety. He was glad to hear the expressions of satisfaction from the House with the system, and he hoped members would be willing to assist the Government bo keep their engagements with the settlers. Unless people were put on good land with favourable surroundings, they could not succeed. Ifc was a mistake to suppose that the Minister of Lands was opposed to the scheme, and even now people could take up sections in village settlements if they chose. Mr Ballance was glad to hear of the noble efforts being made towards success by the village settlers, and this went a long way to remove the stigma of " pauper settlers " applied by one member. Mr Cowan had spoken of " spoon-fed settlers," but he had for years persistently sought for concessions for deferred payment settlers, to whom fche term "_spoon fed " might be better applied. Mr Cowan said he did not endorse the opinion, which was one used outside the House. Mr Ballance proceeded to say that settlements in the North were on good land and in proximity to goldfields, and settlements in Canterbury were on poor land, because no good land was available. The Minister of Lands, speaking at Christchurch, attributed the .success of the Southern settlements to the fact that they were on good land and those in tije North on bad, but the positions were .actually reversed. He was surprised that the Minister of Lands had nob taken •fche to make himself acquainted

with the working of tho system, and visited the settlements himself. He had not even gone to the Wairarapa settlement. He feared many of the engagements had not) been kept, but not Irom want of a disposition so much as from want of information. It was the duty ot the Government to have the settlers visited to ascertain how they were getting on and whatengaeements had been made that were to be kept. All that was necessary was a little work here and there. No one irom tbatsideof thoHouso asked that the village settlement scheme should be the only system of settling land. They only askod lhat it should be one of the various systems He was prepared to say that the village settlements were selfsupporting, and held that it was unfair to make chaises for road-constmction against the village seotlement system when the money Avas taken out of a special vote. Why amis not expenditure for road« also charged against delened payment, homostead, and other selectois ? Village settles were a great and unqualified success, oncl had observed their conditions and kept their engagements more faithfully than settlers under any other system. " He defended the peasant proprietary system of France from attacks by the Minister, who should remember that money spent on these ssttlements was money spent simply in improving lands belonging to the Sbate, wtu'e at the same time TomWtable homes- and emplo) men t were- pi o\ Hed for people who had no other means of supporting thom.selxc- and families.. He feaied the MiuMor of Lands had not had sutlicieist expeiience of this s»yotem, and asked him to \hit the \illuge settlements, and learn tor himself the piog less mud e. At the same time ho thought the Hou.se had misundoistjod the answer given by the .Minister of Land*-, and was convinced that that gentleman had no intention of letiectingon the village settlement system. The Minister of Lands, in rejr'y, said there appeared to be a misconceptionc eption in tho minds of members respecting his reply t) the questions. He simply seated the lesults of the svsfcem, and many of these were favourable. So far as Canteibuiy was concerned theie was, a brisk demand for small settlements, and so long as settlement was developing rapidly in a" natural way he did not think it was light to take State funds for the purpose. Mr Peacock : Does that hold good foi the North ? The Minister then proceeded to say he had reconed complaint's from the North of the difficulty of getting suitable sections to settle on, but he intended to lemove any obstacles in that direction. He asked the House to believe that he was anxious to facilitate land settlement. The ditticrLy at present was to get land into the market with sufficient rapidity. The Government had some difficulty with certain setolers because of promise- which appealed to have been made with the agent who pat them there. The whole of the village settlements in Wellington and the South were satisfactory and self-support-ing, and also a fair proportion of thos.e in the Nor tli. It u-as not fair to suppose that he was opposed to the village settlement system. He acknowledged there were many cases in which it had been successful, but he held that as long as land was being readily taken up as fast as it could be put in the market, they were relie\injr the unemployed. The difficultly he found was to get sufficient in the market to meet the demand. Mr "W. P. Pveeves said that the policy of the Ministei in Canterbury was simply peipetuating a system that had been a cuise in the past — that ot feeding a brisk speculative demand. What was wanted was to settle people on small sections and ielie\e the congested labour market. The Ministei of Lands said that, unfortunately for the lion, gentleman's argument, these sections were all subject to settlement and residence conditions. Mr W. P. Reeves pioceecled to express regret that there were to be no moio village settlements in Canterbury, where the system had been a complete success. Sir George Grey, in reply, said that no man was more in favour of small settlements than himself, but the system was not new, a^ some members appeared to think. He, however, attacked Mrßallance tor a disposition which he declared the bon. member showed in his speech to have these settlers made serls or slaves by appro\ ing of the system oi binding settlers to their sections by pei petual lease. Why were 1 hese people to be tied down to their small sections when large tracts of millions of acres weie given away to foreign landlords ? The question then dtopped.