WEST COAST LEASES.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 137, 5 December 1911, Page 6

WEST COAST LEASES.

To tlic. Editor. J . Sir, —Your leader of yesterday <loi>s not .state the case fairly. There are. sonio points you have cither kept back or you lire not fully acquainted with the matter. You go on to say negotiations proceeded some time ago between the leaseholders and the Public Trustee, it ltd as a result a Bill acceptable to both parties was drafted and submitted to Cabinet (this is where the rub comes), who have not yet sent it on to Parliament. Well, why not? Simply because one man, Sir James Carroll, has blocked it every time. You must know, Mr. Editor, that the Native Minister is the only man that could bring this I?ill before the House, and this, it seems, he has refused to Jo for two years. In 1!X)9 we went to Wellington, got an interview with the Premier, and stated our case to him. As a result he advised us to take our case before the Lands Committee, which we did, the Public Trustee (Mr. Poynton) being there. We thrashed the matter out with him. Piefore we had done we came to ail agreement with him that was satisfactory to both parties. As a result, the Lands Committee brought down a recommendation to the House that a Bill should be passed giving the Public Trustee power to deal with these lands on the lines which we had mutually agreed upon. What was the result? To block its coming before the House, knowing that if it were thrashed out in the flare of the House, we would get justice done us, the Native Minister moved that it should be referred back to the Native Committee, which was done. As a result, the Native Committee had nothing against it. Thi; was in November, 1909. It was shelved then until the next session. What was the result then? Mr. Okey and Mr. Hine asked the question in the House several times when this Bill was going to be brought down, and what was going to be done. They were put off with the answer, "The Government had it under consideration." What was the result? Twelve months since the Native Minister, finding we would not be put off, inserted a clause in the Native Land Act giving us compensation for improvements up to £5 per acre. That would not satisfy us, as some of the lessees' improvements were up to £lO or £ls per acre and others only £5, so the 1 man that had only £5 worth of imi provements would get paid in full. The ■ one with £lO wortli would only get half, ■ and the one with £ls only one-third, i This, I think you will admit, is not fair. ' Well, the session just over, what was > done? Simply nothing. We interviewed the Premier again on the Wednesday i before the session closed. He certainly '■ led us to believe were wee going to get ■ something done to relieve us; but what was done? A Royal Commission was re-

commended to be set up to enquire into it. Now, what good are we going to get from this Commission? What good can they do after the Lands Committee and the Native Committee and the Public Trustee are satisfied the natives are getting justice done them. Surely Parliament and tlie present Public Trustee are capable of backing up the Maoris' interests. I think it is an insult to these gentlemen after they have gone thoroughly into the whole circumstances and are perfectly satisfied with the arrangements for a commission to be set up, most likely composed of men that know nothing abont either leaseholders or native interests.

But this i 3 the "taihoa" policy of the Xative Minister. If the Government meant to give us justice, why didn't they do it two years ago? I honestly believe the Premier and most of the Ministers, excepting the Xative Minister, are in sympathy with us, but Cabinet is domineered by Sir James Carroll. They eau simply do nothing with regard to Maori lands. You say in your leader that had the demands' been conceded last session it would have provided substantial grounds for the election cry of "Tammanyism, bribery and corruption." "vote-catching," etc. Why wasn't this done two years ago? Then the Government could not be accused of "bribery, corruption or Tammanism," or "votecatching." What is going on now? There is the Government exploiting the white man for the Maori. If these lands go j back into the hands of the Maori, and we get the .€5 in full, the natives will pocket something likf 1 £7 an acre on an average all round on 18,000 acres. I > That is -something like £128,000 of substantial improvements; also the unim-

proved value, which is, I Should say, fn'ly £3 per acre, making a total of £IBO,OOO. And what have they done for it ? Simply nothing. It is all hardearned money of the settlers. This is all in the land. What has been done in the way of borrowing money to make roads and money spent in factories and establishing the dairying business, it is hard to say. Then we have men of the Rev. Isitt's kidney in the House shouting. ''lt is a shame and disgrace that these settlers should have the cheek to want a right of renewal at a fair valuation! No; turn them out; confiscate their improvements; give it all to the Maoris." Yes; turn these 140 families out, make them start afresh in life, many of them the pioneer settlers on the coast. This from a minister of the Gospel and a member of Parliament! Well, I say. God help and protect us from men like this, but I think next Thursday if tile people in Christchurch are wise they will put this rev. gentleman in his right place, which is spouting Prohibition. What is being done now with native lands around Parihaka? At the present time, it is simply disgraceful for the Government to allow it to go on. The Public Trustee is letting lands on the Newall run and the Parihaka, block, some bush land, covered with noxious weeds, -blackberries, furze, ragwort—pretty well every noxious weedletting these lands on a twenty-one years' lease, no right of renewal.'compensation £-2 per acre at theg end of the term. lam sorry to say it is pretty well all taken up. Now. what is going to happen? Young fellows take it up thinking of getting married and making a home? What will be the result? They will spend the best part of their life, rear a family, and they will slave for whom—the native. ITe will put, perhaps, £l.) per acre improvement on this land, say 100 acres, at the end of 21 years. He and his family will be kicked out and they will get 'the magnificent smn of £200; the. rest belongs to the native. Well, Mr. "Editor, perhaps T am tiikinj* too much of your valuable space so will stop.—T am. etc.. C. ANDREWS. Okato. Bee. 1, 1011. [Y\ e refer to the above elsewhere.— Ed.]