AGRICULTURAL LEASING.

Tuapeka Times, Volume V, Issue 235, 1 August 1872, Page 8

AGRICULTURAL LEASING.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, — Some time ago a number of applications were made for agricultural leases of land in the Tuapeka district. The miners objected to the granting of these applications on the following grounds : — Ist. That the land applied for is auriferous, and wanted for mining purposes ; 2nd. That all the hill from Lawrence to Gilbert Clark's has been declared a mining reserve and a commonage for the use of the public generally, and we consider that leasing for agricultural purposes any of the first reserve would be a great injustice to the miners of the district. With your permission, I will offer a few observations on the subject. Regarding the first of these objections, I may observe that the land in question has been open for mining since the discovery of gold in Gabriels Gully down to the present time — during the whole of which period numbers of miners have been working and mining in the vicinity, and every piece of land presenting auriferous indications has been thoroughly tested both by Europeans and Ohinese. The whole of it is commanded by a supply of water, available by means of races already constructed. Of the objectors the greater number are miners; of those a considerable ■ number are making a bare living, and some of them are unable to earn even that. It is scarcely probable that, if the objectors believed the ground applied for to be auriferous, they would fail to test it ; and, if payable, embrace the opportunity of improving their condition by working it. None of the objectors were willing to swear that the ground is. to their own knowledge, auriferous — but only that they had been told so. Referring to the second ground of objection, I find that 6 of the objectors are themselves holders of agricultural leases over land in the immediate vicinity of that applied for — their land presenting even greater auriferous indications. Were the objections urged of any validity, they apply at least with equal force to the case of the objectors themselves. Sixteen of the objectors are the holders of residence areas — most, if not all, of them being on the same hill which the objectors desire to retain as a commonage. As all are aware the regulations provide that one person shall not hold more than 1 acre of land as a residence area ; yet the several objectors have, in defiance of the law, occupied several areas. Surely it would be better, in the interests *>f the district, that the land should be occupied by people who have a title to it, and thereby afford a guarantee that they intend to become settlers, Jffan by holders of residence areas, who, while objecting to the legal occupation of the ground— yet holding it themselves — exhaust jthe soil, fail to renew its strength,, aii4

when it becomes irapoverhised and choaked with weeds abandon it ; and who, moreover, contribute nothing to the revenue in respect of the land occupied, and but little to the general resources of the country. The tabooing of land on the ground of its being auriferous has now become so general that it is scarcely possible to obtain an agricultural lease within the Tuapeka district. The area of the agricultural leases may be estimated in round numbers at 90,000 acres — probably about one-third of this area is unfit for agricultural purposes, and will always remain available for commonage. Nearly one-third is now occupied either by miners or cultivators — the remaining area would be available for agriculture, and would be rapidly occupied, were it not for the action of objectors in various parts of the district. As nearly as can be ascertained, the area of land tabooed is as under :—: —

acres. Area in the neighbourhood of Lawrence - 8000 „ down the Tuapeka river ... 6000 „ blocks 5 and 6, Waifcahuna East - 7000 „ „ 4, 5, and 7, Table Hill - -15000

Total - - . 35,000 Surely if this large area of land were occupied and cultivated, the direct and indirect advantages to the country from its increased productiveness could scarcely be less than what might be derived from the gold pi'oduce. The former advantages are immediate and certain ) the latter problematical and prospective. When it is considered that the miners may roam at will over all the runs included within goldfields, and that the agriculturist is confined to the limited area over which the pastoral leases have been cancelled, it cannot be consistant with the principles either of public policy or justice to preclude the latier from availing himself of his restricted and carefully guarded rights on either of the grounds urged by the objectors, or that the interest of this district and of the province generally should be sacrificed to the clamor of men whose desires, if yielded to, would result in leaving the country a desert, as they found it. Some of the objector's are owners of cattle, and may possibly be influenced by their desire to preserve their grazing rights iniact; but I submit that, if the land were enclosed and cultivated, its grazing capacity [ would be increased, and the object of this olass of objectors better attained than by allowing it to remain in its natural state. — Yours, &c. Cockatoo.