The Temuka Leader TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 1889. THE CANTERBURY RUNS.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1870, 26 March 1889, Page 2

The Temuka Leader TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 1889. THE CANTERBURY RUNS.

Otjb excellent contemporary, the Ashburton Q-uardian, has evidently been favored with maps showing the classification of the Canterbury runs, the leases of which expire shortly, and it has expressed satisfaction with the way In which the work has been carried out. The land has, according to proi mise, been divided into three classes, viz.: first, the rough country ; second, a better class of sheep country, which will be let in areas of from 900 to 5000 acres; and the third class, which will be dealt with under the Laud Act as ordinary land, and disposed of by sale or on perpetual lease. The Guardian is highly satisfied with this arrangement, and adds that it has reason to believe that only the first class—that is, the rough country —will be offered for sale in Christchurch on the 29th, that is, three days from to-day. The better class of land will be withdrawn. We have the greatest respect for the opinions of our contemporary, and the fact that it has expressed satisfaction with the arrangements certainly well calculated to reconcile us to it. We have not seen the maps yet, and have no information on the subject, but it appears to us that if in three days’ time the runs, or any portion of them, are to be offered for sale it is time the

public had some information on the subject. Our contemporary surely cannot be satisfied with the thing being kept dark like this. Is it not disgraceful that the sale has not yet been advertised, and that nothing has been done to invite competition and make the best of the transaction ? When the Otago runs were disposed of seven years ago several people came over from the other colonies and were amongst the competitors. Such as these have had no chance given them to compete for the Canterbury runs, the disposition being evidently to dispose of them surreptitiously. We hear a great deal about driving capital out of the country, but this looks very much like preventing capital from coming into the country. The maps and all information connected" with such a large land transaction ought to have been prepared six months previous to sale, and it ought to have been freely advertised. If, as our contemporary states, only some of the maps have yet come to hand, and the sale will take place on the 29 bh instant, the affair presents the appearance of a most determined attempt to let the present lessees have them without co mpetition. [Since t he above article was iu type we have learned that the sale of runs has been postponed to May 30th.] OUR B'.OYS. In another column will be found a letter by Mr Duncan. It is in his usual vigorous style, but no doubt with the view of making his arguments more forcible he has based them on altogether wrong foundations, His conclusions may be right, but the process of reason by which he arrives at them is wrong. We have not originated the question in re the boys certainly, but we published the most recent commentary on it. A few issues before receiving Mr Duncan's letter we commented on the subject, and also on machinery, and naturally thought he was replying to our remarks. He says he was not, i and we accept his denial, After reading Mr Duncan's letters we have i come to the conclusion that it is not to natural affection for offspring he i objects, but to the hoarding up of wealth. If that is the case his basis of argument was wrong. Instead of : making the natural affection of parents for children the basis of his argument, he ought to have attacked the avariciousness and the greediness of the present age. The feeling which prompts men to hoard wealth is entirely different from that which parental affection suggests. The misers of history have almost all been childless, and amongst the most grasping and covetous are those' who have few, if any, dependent on them. Men accumulate wealth because it gives them worldly respect, power, and influence. The age worships the Golden Calf, and he who wants to win the obeisance of his khid must hare control of the fetich —wealth. The thinking parent who sees this, and sees, too, that the opportunities of the people are vanishing daily, cannot help reflecting on the prospects in store for his children. Land held in immense blocks ; syndicates forming in all quarters to produce the greatest quantity possible with the least amount of labor; "corners" ingrain; trickery, chicanery, and corruption in politics; machinery doing everything, and almost nothing left for honest workmen to do; and, above all, stupid, unthinking I electors still ready to vote for a continuance of the muddle. Educate them, and let them shift for themselves, says Mr Ducan. Educate them for what? Educate them for Lawyers, doctors, parsons, schooll masters, surveyors, engineers, clerks, &c. ? they are " as thick as leaves in Yallambrosa " at present. Educate 'them for carpenters, for tailors, for shoemakers, &c. ? the world ia full of \ them, a great many of all trades are idle, the greater part of their work being done by machinery. Educate them for agricultural or general laborers to carry their swags and swell | the ranks of the unemployed, while f daily improving machinery is doing the greater part of their work ? Looking at these facts, can a parent avoid anxiety for the future of kis children? He cannot. It is a very serious matter, and we would advise Mr Duncan to attack the inequalities of wealth from some point of view other than that based on the boy question. We have shown how the unthinking may be made to think by means of it, and that alone ought to be sufficient to recommend its discussion. The field of labor is narrowing; the cry of the unemployed is loud and long ; the schools are thronged with children. What will they do ? Politically we are going backwards; the government of the country will fall completely into the hands of the wealthy classes as soon as the members are reduced to 71. The price of grain is now, there is great demand for land, yet the owners of large estates such as the Levels show no disposition to sell. We had a Q-overnment that proposed to buy them out and settle the people on the land. The people kicked that Government out, and when shall we see another Government ready to undertake the task? We have no right to rail at owners of large estates; they mind their interests well; they make use of their opportunities. We have only ourselves to blame for not looking after our own interests a swell. We elect the men who make the laws, and we do our share of the work like fools. We cannot complain if we have to suffer for our folly. ,

THE TYRANNY- OF CAPITAL. Several papers have alleged that the woman who made the lining for the superb carm#3 in which Her Majesty rode on Jubilee day is on the verge of starvation. The poor creaturo is a cripple, bent almost double, and has worked and lived in the same room for thirty years. The lining was exquisite work, but the woman was paid only per yard, and by working from dawn to midnight she was able to make just six yards. From the way in which this is spoken of and marvelled at, people would be almost inclined to imagine that this was a most unusual case of destitution, whereas it is ; typical of millions of similarly sad cases in the daily life of the great | cities at Home. This is the normal condition of women in the humbler ranks of life ; it is either that or a life of sin and shame. The alternatives are very limited; and, in any case, misery in some form has to be endured. And yet thoughtful men of sympathetic natures, who manifest repugnance at this unnatural condition of things, are denounced by ' society' as socialists and visionaries. Human foresight and wisdom can never, under any circumstances, wholly obliterate misery in this world ; but the misery of the masses at Home has reached a depth and assumed forms so appalling that even their natures, brutalised and sodden as they are from long acquaintance with poverty, are beginning to revolt. This is the fruit of competition, the result of the doctrine > of the survival of the fittest, the condition to which human beings are reduced under a system idolised by political economists.