NEWS FROM THE CAPITAL

Taranaki Daily News, 4 December 1926, Page 2

NEWS FROM THE CAPITAL

WELLINGTON TOPICS THE FORCEFUL MINISTER. STANDS FOR SMALL SETTLERS. (Front Our Own Correspondent.) Wellington, Dee. 1. The controversy going on just now between the Hon. A. D. McLeod, the Minister of Lands, and the New Zealand Herald, Auckland’s morning paper, concerning land settlement in the northern province, naturally is being watched with interest in Wellington, where popular opinion, for the most part, is with the Minister. Mr. McLeod is generally acclaimed as the forceful member of the Cabinet, and when he gets into print his words are no less vigorous than they are when he speaks from the hustings or from his place in the House. The lieraid, which allows itself to be restrained by no mere personal or party considerations, opened the exchange of opinions by roundly stating that the Minister lacked most of the qualities necessary for the effective administration of his department—experience, enterprise, vision, understanding and the rest—and demanded that his colleagues and the public should call him to account while there yet was time to save the country from destruction. That, in effect, was the substance of the paper’s indictment, The Minister's real offence appears to have been a certain inability to see that Auckland’s needs for land settlement were more pressing than those of the other provinces.

THE TWO POLICIES. Mr. McLeod's last contribution to the | controversy is marred by a suggestion that his critic is impelled by some perI sonal motive—a slip that can be pari doned only on the ground of the writer’s political youth—but in other respects it presents a very sound summary of the position. "The policy of the Herald,” the Minister says, “is to throw open the large areas of unoccupied land in the Auckland province, while the policy of the Government is to consolidate, as far as possible, the position of the many hundreds of settlers who are battling against tremendous odds on similar [lands and on swamp areas throughout the province. In this policy the Government has the support of every practical farmer prepared to sign his name, while the policy of the Herald is backed up by land agents and by those who wish to unload on to the general taxpayer of the country thousands upon thousands of acres of second and third class lands, whose owners apparently are not prepared to spend a shilling in their development.” From the outsider’s point of view it certainly looks as if the policy of saving the settlers already on the land was sounder economically than the policy of inviting other settlers to risk the same experience.

THE BETTER WAY. The Dominion took upon itself yesterday to rebuke Mr. McLeod for having implied that its contemporary was not altogether disinterested in its zeal for closer settlement in the Auckland district. "Mr. McLeod’s resentment against being flattened out or bludgeoned into submission,” it says, “was natural enough; but he allowed his feelings to I carry him too far when he suggested j the possibility that the attitude of the | Herald was prompted by motives of I personal gain on the part of someone | connected with the paper. The Minister j did not go quite as far as that, per- : haps, but his words might bear that inI terpretation; and we have no hesitation iu saying that the Herald is not the sort iof journal that such a charge could or i should be levelled against. Its record jis one that does credit to New Zealand : journalism.” It is doubtful if the i Auckland daily will be greatly thrilled by this tribute to its immaculacy, but it will bo reassured in the possession of a powerful friend at court when next it conies to grips with the Minister of Lands. The Dominion, it should be added, though extolling the virtues of the Herald, refuses definitely to associate itself with its land policy. “While we think the Minister of Lands allowed his feelings to run away with his judgment. there can be little doubt that he is on sound ground as to the lines of policy he has laid down in regard to land settlement and development.” This is the point that matters, and the hard words of the controversialists are of little consequence.

! OLD SORES. j The incident, however, is reminiscent ! of the old jealousies between Auckland I and Wellington, which prevailed half a I century ago, and still persist in a conj sidcrably modified form to-day. Perhaps I the trouble began with the removal of • the seat of government from Auckland ; to Wellington in 1865, when feeling ran bo high that threats of separation were | thundered from the north. Then came 1 mail services and railway construction. ' Whether the early Panama boats should ‘ touch at Auckland or at Wellington was ■ u question of burning consequence in the estimation of both ports, and they I never agreed. Railway construction | was a still more grievous bone of con- ; tention, and the differences between ' Auckland and Wellington were largely responsible for wasteful expenditure so far afield as Central Otago. The SouthIsland, holding a majority of the seats in Parliament at that time, was able to Impose its own terms upon the two contending parties, and the use it made of its opportunity is now emblazoned, so to speak, on the railway returns. But ! all t his in ancient history. A new genI oration has grown up since the lay out of the trunk railways was embittering the relations between the two cities, and by this time the old jealousies and recriminations should be decently buried and frankly forgotten.