MR. OKEY AND THE LAND QUESTION.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 59, 10 May 1907, Page 4

MR. OKEY AND THE LAND QUESTION.

To the Editor

Sir,—One of the funniest things t have read for some time is Mr Okey's speech as reported ill your issue of the 7th in-t. tunny, did I say! Well, it would be if it were not so lamentable. It is funny because of it.- jumble of ideas on the land question. It may not be quite fair to single om Mr Okev —he is but the type Of a class, and if I had read the speeches of his opponents it luav be that 1 should have found them no better. He says: "But I tell you straight I am an out-and-out freeholder," and that he has preached the same gospel for years, and having delivered himself of his gospel, lie probably folt easier in his inind. But though he istrong on the freehold ho evidenUv down in his inner conscience he j lieves there i s a use for the leasehold to use as a ladder for the purpose of attaining the freehold. \\ hence eomes this fascination for th: freehold in the minds of Mr Okev and many others who ought to know better* Mr Okey tells us what is in his mind when ] he says it is "dread of the everlasting rent." 1 can only suppose lie thinks (and lie is not singular in this) inat when a man buys and pays for a freehold he is quit of rent. Perhaps he is, as regards the name, but it has a troublesome knack of appearing under another name, viz., interest. If I buv 200 acres of farm land for say

■C25' per acre, lively the money I pay if I did not buy land with it I should expect to earn me live cent? Hut if 1 put it into land aud use it as a farmer, as a business man, every ywr 1 must charge myself with 5 pyr cent on it; that is, if like a business man I should balante my accounts every year. Of , ourse I shall be told that if 1 (lo it against the business it comes back into my pocket instead of going into ttie Treasury. Granted, but in that case I must start as a capitalist. I must have some thousands in the bank. Ifow many of us-wanting to go on the land are in that position? But this can be the only fascinating side to the freehold, viz., being able to pay for it. There is 110 "everlasting rent'' in this picture; everything is "colour de rose." So arc most other things when there is plenty of money about. But there is another side to the picture, Supposing I have little more thau enough money to pay for my land, that is to say, 1 am a small capitalist aud I am laml-hungry, as most covetous persons are; then to carry on I must give a mortgage over two-thirds, for which I must pay seven or eight per cent interest, and then 1 am a slave to someone else. Am I bet - ter off paying eight per cent on twothirds to a money-lender than I would be paying the Stale four per cent on the lot? And you eau back a niort-

gage every time. Even Mr Okey sees that when he puts the words in to the

mouth of the money-lender (and a generous one at that), "Well, if the worst conies to the worst I can take the land." I have seen it more th;;n once in this country when both the mortgagor and mortgagee come to grief over the same transaction. We must give Mr Okey credit for straight speaking; it is not often a candidate is so candid, lie ad- ; mits that one reason tlure is a cry tor the freehold is that the wants it. But surely if there is to be a money-lender the State is the best one? Judging from past experience the only trouble is that it is a. bit too good. However, we have one reason for Mr Okey's gospel, and 1 think if he takes another dig into that inner consciousness of his he will find another. Like the first, it is a fallacy, but nevertheless it is there. He thinks by getting the land on a freehold tenure he get« it out of the grip of the State altogether, and by some mysterious mean" he will , defy the State to tax it. Again he is j not singular in this idea. His talented j chief, the Leader of the Opposition, is of j the same opinion. He thinks when a j ! man buys land on the freehold tenure j he buys it absolutely as he does a sack i of potatoes. It is not so. When a ! man buvs freehold he is still a tenant of I

the Crown. He does not buy land absolutely. According to-English law he buys an "estate" in land; that estate is always subject to the will of the people. Practically what th'j Government can sell him is occupation and use only. He is a unit among 000,000 people, who each ami all have an interest

in that land. Everv elector in this co

lony is to an equal extent his landlord. The sovereign will of the people will have sufficient knowledge to understand the phi'its'', "New Zealand for New Zealanders." They will have no time then for men of the Okey stamp or for many of the men to day who call themselves politician!?. It is against that day—the awakening of the people—th.tl all who think with Mr MasSey and his friends are anxious to put themselves under what they fancy i* the safe shelter of the freehold. Vain imaginings! When the people of New Zealand arrive at the knowledge of what is their birthright they will also learn how to come into possession. At present they arc hybemating under a dose of too much so-called prosperity, largely engendered by the spending of the mortgage money advanced on the public estate by the British mouey-lender. When the next depression comes along they will wake up from iheir pleasant dreams and begin to think. It is wonderful how an empty stomach sharpens the wits of even the dullanls. Then we shall probably be able to take another stride forward 011 the path of progress. Until then we must possess our souls in patience.—l am, etc., INDEX.