The Daily News. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1912. CLOSER SETTLEMENT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 142, 2 November 1912, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1912. CLOSER SETTLEMENT.

The Hon. J. D. Ormond, a member of Mr. Massey's party, and recognised generally as a hide-bound Conservative of the old school, is not enamored of the Government's new land proposals. In the Legislative Council on Wednesday evening he contended that the Bill would be an absolute failure in its general aim, at satisfactorily settling the land. He . agreed that nothing should stand in the way of genuine settlement, and said that the promise made to Sir Joseph Ward by the owners of large estates in Hawke's Bay to subdivide and dispose of their land had been carried out. The only districts where large acreages were available, he continued, were between Napier and Tauranga, between the railhead beyond Stratford and the King Country, in the North of Auckland, and in the Waikato district. The honorable gentleman did not furnish details of the promise he refers to as having been made to the late Premier, or, if he did, the reporter did not telegraph particulars, and consequently it is impossible for the outsider to tell if the terms of the particular compact he refers to have been kept by Mr. Ormond and his friends. We do know, however, that there exists in the Hawke's Bay district at the present time a monopoly in fertile land for which hundreds and thousands of people in the Dominion are hungering. Subdivision there has been; closer settlement has followed, but not in a manner commensurate with the demands and with the interests of the country. One cannot blame the owners of the large estates for holding on to them and demanding big prices when the Government approaches them with a view to purchasing for settlement purposes, but we maintain, as we have always maintained, that both the Seddon and Ward Governments made a great mistake in not bringing about a division of these estates under pressure of the operation of a stiff and compelling graduated tax. Both Governments seemed to consider more the interests of the big land-owning class than the interests of the mass of the people clamoring for land. The Massey Government is behaving very little better in this respect. It has admittedly stiffened the tax. but the object of its imposition will certainly not be attained until the tax is further increased. Purchase by the Government of these estates is but an expedient. The object could be achieved much better and without increasing the country's indebtedness by the operation of a prohibitive tax. By all means treat the owners fairly. Give them fair warning, though surely they all must know that the time has arrived in the progress of this country when large landed proprietors must give way to the army of men who desire small areas of land to farm. We want population, but until the land, is available it is idle k> promote immigration, for as things stand we have not nearly enough land tn satisfy the appetite of New Zealand-

ers. But to return to Mr. Ormond's statement. Just what a monopoly there is in Hawke's Bay is shown by the fact that no less than 7G1,77fl acres of freehold land, of an unimproved value of £4,381,477, is owned by 230 persons. This gives an average freehold of 3312 acres, and the value of this area as bare land, according to the Government figures, is £19,049. Taking 400 acres as an average living area, there would be room for 1904 settlers and their families, or about 8000 souls. Practically all the land is suitable for close settlement. Then there are big areas of leased land, a large proportion being Maori land. Mr. Massev is confident that the proposals in the Land Bill will settle the Maori land difficulty, but Mr. Ormond is not so optimistic. Tn the course of his speech in the Council he showed that the Maori has a great idea of sticking to his land, and the temptations held out by the Bill to induce him to hand it over to the Government are not sufficient. We agree. Like his pakeha -brother, the Maori should be compelled to disgorge all land beyond that which is required for his own reasonable needs. To leave the disposal or future use of his unproductive acres to the choice of the native is but calculated to perpetuate the present very unsatisfactory und stagnatory condition of things.