SETTLE THE LAND!

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 169, 10 August 1909, Page 4

SETTLE THE LAND!

ADVANTAGES OF RURAL PURSUITS.

WHAT THE DEMOCRACY MUST AIM AT. LESSONS FROM DENMARK. In a speech at Feilding last week the Hon. Dr. Findlay devoted some time to the discussion of land settlement. He said:

Now let me say a few word about die closer settlement of our lands, it

is curious how the political heresies of one decade become the accepted creed uf the next. The policy of rcsumhg private land for closer settlement has become an article of faith even with the Opposition, and yet the ■•Hansards" of not so many years ago would not lead you to expect this. But let thai pass. However much we may dislike it or have denied it, wc are all compelled to admit the absolutely obvious. It •is not the past but the future we arc most concerned with. More must yet be done to put people on the laud. That should be the great cardinal aim of every Government in this country. For nniny years, perhaps for many generations, yet we must be essentially a farming people. We must rely upon the product of our soil—not of our manufactures—for our national progress and prosperity. In New Zealand in' the pas't, and still, the chief obstacle to closer settlement is—the large estates. We have spent six millions in buying some of these and wc have imposed a graduated tax to induce, if not force, subdivision. This latter step has been .bitterly resented bv Mom*. JJut our best interests as a young nation, our future as a people must be paramount over sectional desires and interests. lou are all aware of the magnificent results of the closer settlement policy. 1 need not recount them here. Jiut wc did not originate that policy. It was enforced much more drastically in a country to which 1 will now refer. 1 mean Denmark. LESSONS FROM DENMARK.

I have referred before to this littU: i nation and Mr. Mnssey tells ine that the Danish people arc individualists—not "Socialists." That there are no "Socialists" there. I agree with Mr. Mnsscy's applause of the progress of Denmark —f never know what he means by Socialism. But I' feel sure he cannot approve of the methods by which the Danes have achieved their present prosperity. Denmark, we read, was not long ago—some fifty years or so—in the hands of a few great owners. Now there arc bctwec .1 100,000 aTld 200,000 small holdings; and remember the size of the country itself. Its area Is 10,000,000 acres. New Zealand is six o r seven times as big as Denmark. How did Denmark effect this subdivision' We are told 110 revolution was necessary to produce this change. No purchase of the land by the Government —no (..iivciuuient ownership. It was all quietly done one step after another. The Government of Denmark divided all the great estates in private hands into farms of, a certain «izc varying in area according to quality. I', then imposed a progressive land tax. u horribly socialistic graduated tax. If a man contented himself with one but kept two, the tax was .much greater on the second. If he kept-three it was much greater still, and so on until the additional tax became prohibitive. It grew near the dimensions of confiscation. Surely the Government of that day must have got into power by "sharking up a Jiet of laudless resolutes," to quote Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. The object of Denmark was to settle the people on the land—to favor the owning of farms by those who actually cultivated fliem. What is the result of this V We are told that the produce of the land is' now three times as great as under the former system of large proprietors—the system still prevailing in England and still prevailing far too widely in New Zealand.' Let me add that" Denmark has a strict law against aggregation which prevents these small farms being merged an as to form larger farms or estates. I might give you many proofs of what this close settlement of the land has done for Denmark. Let me give you one very significant one. One half of (lie entire population—men, women and children—have an averam! "f £32 in the Danish Saving- Banks.' f am quoting from a return dated lilOtj. Compare (his with Great Rritain for the same year. About „ quarter (not half a* in Denmark) of the population there ''."l £l7 (not Ml, as in Denmark Lin (lie Sayings Hanks. Does' Mr. Mnssey. who rejoices in Denmark's success alid' who sees no socialism in Danish methods of government, approve of the means by which the Danish lands were subdivided! Would he, if in office, adopt the same, means, as a system of similarly subdividing the great estates 111 -Vi;w Zealand? This sounds like a question in an electioneering campaign It will probably he answered in flic same electioueering way. TUKGUADi/AT'KD TAX. V\e cannot have a-better object lesson than Denmark. Are we prepared tn copy her methods'; Our method of purchasing great estates adds' to our national debt, has already added mum millions, and its growth'is thrown at the Government by the verv class whom these purchases 'hem-fit.' The Danes added nothin.r tn n...i.- national ilcbt to secure the splcmlid (subdivision "' Y ' g rl "»t estates. Our graduated land tax is promoting the same purpose. Already it is doing much-it must yet do more. [.' m - to voluntary (rival,- suMivisi,,,, „,her (hall t'o State purchase must We uiainlv look for widespread closer settlement'of our privately held estates. If fho new graduated land tax scheme is really as efloclivc an engine of subdivision lis it proim„.s to be; if it forces the larger owners to sell for subdivisional purposes, then the Special Settlement Fin- '.""•<: l-ill.of last year has an additional justification, ft makes cvervNandless "mil desiring a small farm an active '"'"I agent. It also helps the lame owners y, dispose of their estates, it does I his |,y really financing the 'mmd |'> wouiitbc settlers in purchasing from '" large proprietor. Shortly slated. "- aw (,| the Bill passes') will ~av to Hie landless; "I,ook around you, if'you 'an get a large owner to sell all- estate suitable lor closer settlement at a reasonable price-ami for ~ s „|„|i visioll of «luch the Stale ap.o'ov,. !| 1( . stale «|ll guarantee to (he vendor'or the lender of the purchase money. Each of you will the fee simple of you,- sec- '■"'■'■ '"'"<«;. l] tlMKbe a help to both sides-.-!,, the landless lo procure, to the land .'owner to sell land.