MORE POPULATION.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2058, 12 June 1890, Page 3

MORE POPULATION.

The following letter appeared in the Lyt*e!trfn Times on May 20th';— Sir.—ln my previous letlerl pointed out that several features of the policy of the Stout-Yogel Ministry were splendidly devised for- increasing population. They were introducing capitalist immigrants, settling the unemployed on the land, encouragingthedevelopmentof oar industrial resources (including gold-mining)—lifting the heavy end of the' harden of taxation from the shoulders of the class whose happiness It, ia our interest... to promote.,; and they had intended to break .up largo estates in a,very statesmanlike way. We had not the common sense to see this at the time, and mark how we have been punished. Instead of capitalist immigrants bringing with them money at the rate of about £24,000 a year, 12,000 of our population left us, and their less to the Colony has been set down at a million sterling, f have not the slightest,hesitation in saying that the loss has been half a. million at least. Moat of those who left had some money. Some of them took away thousands, some hundreds, and some probably, had very little mere than their passagemoney. But if you add their individual value to a State languishing for want of population to the amoout they took away in cash, half a million of money would be below the mark. This is no fanciful sketch, but a solid fact. In more ways than one we have been fortunate. We have had: the Dunedin Exhibition, for which we have to be. grateful to the Dunedin people ; we have bad fair prices for our products ; and the flax industry provided a tremendous amount of employment. Only for the flax industry we should have thousands upon thousands of men unemployed, and the consequences would have been extremely serious. Seeing that there is danger of the flax industry proving unprofitable, and seeing that without it thousands will be unemployed, it behoves us to consider carefully what we are doing. To this end I write. I have suggestions to make, but 1 wish it to be understood that,- in my opinion, the principal features of the Stout-Yogel policy, to which I have previously referred, must run concurrently with any other effort put forth to increase population. With regard to the three first points I need not say one word; and, as I wish to conciliate the wealthy classes, I shall let progressive taxation drop. This brings me to the question ,of large estates, and it ia to this 1 wish to direct attention.

The most practioal proposal respecting the settlement of large estates which has hitherto been put before the public is that which the Land Acquisition Bill contains. The machinery in that Bill is excellent. I would have been prouder of being the author of that measure than of cartloads of the tinkering, patching-up Acta of Parliament which yearly pass through our Legislature, Under it corruption would be impossible ; the State could not sustain a loss, and the landowners would receive fair value for their property. I cannot find language capable of expressing the admiration I feel for that measure, but still I cannot help coming to the conclusion that it is not practicable at the present time. In order to operate under the Land Acquisition Bill it becomes necessary to haye a large amount of money, and this we have not. The Lyttelton Times has said that we must not borrow another penny for any

purpose whatsover. Your paper, Sir, ia the most powerful organ of the Liberal part}', and, recognising it as such, I conclude that you are only re-echoing the determination true Liberals have arrived at. To this I say, Bravo ! Three years aao Sir Robert Stout said, in his election speeches, that he was not prepared to borrow more than £2,000,000 in ten years. Sir Harry Atkinson borrowed that sum in two months, A great change has, therefore, taken place during the last three years, and the Land Acquisition Bill, which was practicable three years ago, is not so now, because we have no money. Sir Harry has borrowed and spent the money with which large estates might have been settled, consequently the Land Acquisition Bill could not be worked, and large estates must remain intact if we cannot find a way out of the difficulty.

Now I think I have found it. Let Parliament enact that large estates shall be divided into reasonably-sized farms and leased for a term of twenty-one years at a rental of 5 per cent, on the Property-tax value of the land. Let provisions be made for preventing landlord tyranny, and for giving tenants compensation for improvements. Now, much as I admire the Land Acquisition Bill, [ think that for simplicity and effectiveness this proposal is far better than it. Tbe landowner gets very fair interest on his capital and can’t complain, the tenant gels the land on reasonable terms, and the State gets all the advantages of increased population and extended settlement without having to incur the slightest risk. Everyone is treated fairly and honestly, and it appears to me that it is a suggestion which ought to be adopted forthwith.

To the man who says this is not in accordance with the most advanced ideas on the land question, I say it is the best we can do at present. Mr Hayhuret has in Temuka about five thousand acres, on which close on forty families live as tenants ; and I believe that through all the depression not a single case of insolvency occurred on the estate. Not fur off are larger estates, on which live only a manager and a few shepherds, 1 ask which is the best? On Mr Hayhurst’e estate families are brought up accustomed to rural pursuits,oh the other estates there are no families,- for who has not seen tbe stereotyped advertisement, “ Wanted, a married couple, without encumbrance.” No babies need apply on such estates ; and in the face of that fact, how can we expect population to increase ?—I am, &g., J. M. T’vomey,