The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1890. THE LAND QUESTION.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2016, 6 March 1890, Page 2

The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1890. THE LAND QUESTION.

We have received a copy uf the Land Acquisition Bill which was prepared by Mr Ballance in 1887. When this measure was announced as a part of the policy of the Stout-Vogel Government someuf the land-owning members intimated privately to Ministers that if they would oppress it no opposition would be offered to their Customs duties proposals or other measures; but Ministers refused to comply with ti. a request, and they were consequently thrown out of office. The cry of Retrenchment and Freetrade was raised, and the people, with the madness so characteristic of democracy, voted for the return of the Conservatives to power. The Land Acquisition Bill sank into oblivion; we have had a pretended retrenchment, and between 10,000 and 15,000 of the flower of our people have been driven out of the colony. This is all due to the unthinking actions of the electors. They voted against the best Ministry we have ever had, and their place was taken by the most corrupt and incapable Government New Zealand has ever seen. Now, what is the principal feature of the Land Acquisition Bill? We have so frequently explained its provisions before that we do not think it necessary to deal with its details. Put i u the simplest manner possible, it means that the Government shall buy up large estates, cut them up into suitably-sized farms, and settle the people on them. This would not all be done in one day; it would be done gradually—as people ware found ready and willing to settle on the land. Now it was this very Bill that ruined the Stout-Vogel Government last election yet it was the wisest and the best measure that has ever been suggested in a New Zealand Parliament. Some people think that a «burating-up ” land tax would be better, but we thiuk

Terentiy, If a “ bursting-up ” laud tax were put on, it would throw ail the large estates into the market at once; land would become unsaleable, the owners would be ruined, and the colony as a whole would suffer through it. If the land were bought by the Government at a fair price, and the people settled upon it, the desired end would be attained without hurt to anyone. There is a great difference between the two proposals, and reasonable beings, after due consideration, ought to have no difficulty in making a choice between them. The strongest objection raised to interfering with large estates is that so long as Crown lands remain unsold we should not trench on private property. This is a very plausible argument until the other side of the question is discussed. The land now remaining in the hands of the Government is either very inferior in quality, very far distant from railway station or seaport, ©r so thickly covered with bush that it would take a large amount of money to clear it. On the other hand, many of the large estates are situated near towns and cities, and are retarding industrial development. Now it is obvious that it is the good land within reach of the most approved accessories of cultivation that is the most suitable for small farm settlements. We have spent immense sums of borrowed money on railways, roads, and bridges, and the land through which they pass ought to be utilised to the fullest extent, and made to yield results to the revenue proportionate to the benefits conferred on it by the expenditure of public money. The Land Acquisition Bill aimed at settling these large estates, but those who object to it say : “ Settle the Crown lands where there are no means of communication with the outer world first, and let us enjoy undisturbed possession of our homes!” Yery plausible this, but it is compliance with it that has ruined the colony. The land in the immediate vicinity of railways, etc., should be made the most of at once, and inaccessible land ought to be allowed to wait until a more prosperous people can afford to give facilities for developing it. There are in this colony nearly 18,000,000 of acres in the hands of 1615 people, while 16,679 families have only 300,000 acres of land between them. Let anyone think of this. Sixteen thousand families have only a little over a quarter of a million acres, while one thousand six hundred people have eighteen million acres. One thousand six hundred and fifteen persons have over 5000 acres each ; 7507 persons have from 10 to 50 acres each; 9172 persons have from Ito 10 acres each. That is the way in which the laud is so far divided, and it does not appear to us to be very satisfactory. It is, in our opinion, desirable that there should be a more even distribution of our greatest source of wealth, and the best means of attaining that end is by the Land Acquisition Bill. It is absolute nonsense to talk about inaccessible Crown lands; these ought to be treated as almost non-existent until all the land which has been enriched by public expenditure has been made to produce as much as possible. This is the way to make our railways pay, to increase population, to lighten the burden of taxation, and to make the colony prosperous. But can it be done ? We are afraid it cannot. Mr Ballance will, we believe, introduce his Land Acquisition Bill again, and there will shortly be a general election ; but will the people support him ? It is very doubtful. The people as a general rule make a lot of noise about bursting up large estates until the time comes; then they will give their votes to the man who favors large estates, and wonder why things do not go on right. Let them remember that so long as they do this they cannot go on right, and that they themselves are entirely responsible for the sorry state of affairs in this colony.