THE Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 1892. PERPETUAL LEASING.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2327, 10 March 1892, Page 2

THE Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 1892. PERPETUAL LEASING.

The Mount Ida Chronicle has the following : “ The balloting for the sections of land recently opened in this district has conclusively proved the superior popularity of the so-called perpetual-lease over the cash and deferred-payment systems of tenure. Out of over 40 sections balloted for on the optional system, according to particulars given in our last issue, only three were taken up on other forms of tenure.”

That of course means that 37 sections were taken up under the perpetual lease system, while only three sections were taken as freeholds. Now could anything give a more substantial proof of the popularity of the perpetual-lease system than this. Yet, with that evidence before it, the Chronicle roundly abused the present Minister of Lands for having favored the system which evidently the people want. The Minister of Lands has strong, broad shoulders, and no doubt will be able to bear the abuse of the Chronicle, but at the same time it must be admitted that to abuse him for giving the land to the people on the most popular terms shows lack of common sense. The late Minister of Lands did his best to kill the perpetual-lease system; he took office avowedly with that intention, but he completely failed. The perpetual-lease tenure has become more popular year after year, until now, according to the above extract, men will hardly take up land under any other tenure. It is not, of course, astonishing that this is the case. It must be plain to any one that it is by far the best. A man having but a very little capital runs the chance of losing it by taking up a freehold. Let us say, for example, that a purchaser has sufficient capital to purchase the land, he must borrow to improve and stock it. He at once gets into the hands of the money lender; and unless he is very careful he will never get out of them. He must first go to a lawyer to whom he must pay a procuration fee for procuring the money, next he must pay the lawyer for the mortgage deeds, and then he must pay interest on the money. All this means tremendous expense, which he must bear thefirst year, and unless very careful he will never recover it. He will have this burden hanging over his head, and does not know the moment the mortgagee may foreclose. There are hundreds in the colony who have been ruined in this way. But the freehold system suits the money lenders and lawyers. Uuder a perpetual lease there would be no money lending, there would be no procuration fees, and no large bills for preparing mortgage deeds: the Government does all this for the tenant. It is no wonder, therefore, that lawyers and money lenders do not like the perpetual lease tenure, and it is also not surprising that the people are glad to be able to get out of their clutches. But from a national point of view, the question is still more important. The freeholder pays the interest to the mortgagee, and he alone derives the benefit; the perpetual lease holder pays rent to the Government and the whole country gets the benefit of it. It must, therefore, be patent to all, that from every point of view the perpetual leasing is the best, and it is, therefore, fortun nt,e iat P eo P^ e are recognising it to the .‘ ,xtent £ l uote<l above -

THE NATIVE of7_' C;B '

Foil many years longer than we can remember Government after Government have taken office fully pledged to abolish the Department of the Native Minister. It has been regarded as a sink of corruption, which squandered money without giving any value for it, and consequently it has been looked upon for years as a Department that ought to be completely abolished. The late Mr Donald McLean’s sugar-and-blanket policy was succeeded by the late Mr J. Sheehan’s still more extravagant vagaries, and unless we make a mistake it was then—that is, about 12 years ago—admitted that the Department was a useless expense. The Hon. John Bryce, when Native Minister, publicly declared it desirable to wipe it away; but he did not do it. Mr Mitchelsou took office fully pledged to abolish it, in fact, it was one of the planks of the Government, but the Native Office was strengthened by the addition of seven new judges and a large number of other officers. The present Government said not one word about it till one morning about a week ago the news was flashed throughout the colony that the Native Office had been abolished: part of the work having been transferred to the Minister of Justice; part to the Minister of Lands, and so on. The Native Land Courts went to the Minister of Justice ; the Native Land Department to the Minister of Lands, and thus the affair was at last settled, and a great saving effected. No sooner was this done than a howl of indignation went forth through the land. The Ministry ‘

were represented as everything bad, and it was said that it was all done to snub the Hon. Mr Cadman. Later accounts, however, show that the arrangements were carried out at the request and suggestion of Mr Cadman himself, and all the abuse heaped ,on Ministers proved to have been groundless and non sensical. However, what we desire to point out is that the Native Department has at length been abolished, with the astonishing result that the party which have for years been crying out for it shows the greatest dissatisfaction with the change. This proves that in the eyes of this party the Government can do nothing right; they must be wrong whatever they do. Still we think the country as a whole will regard the action taken by the Government in this matter with approval, as it shows that they are making an effort to economise, and reduce the administrative machinery to a Workable condition.