THE LAND BILL, AND HOW IT AFFECTS THE FARMERS.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXIX, Issue 8351, 7 February 1907, Page 3

THE LAND BILL, AND HOW IT AFFECTS THE FARMERS.

THE UNION'S OBJECTIONS

No. 6 ; Tfhe'Premier announced that there were besides this. 6,000,000 ■acres of native land fit for settlement, so that there ia still an ; enormous area of 'unproductive land waiting for the settler and '■the axe. It is well known that the-lpml •still held by the natives is not•ordinary land, but for thf part is of the best quality. For years past the natives have been selling the roughest of l:>r.o. to the Government and keeping •the best, which has been enhanced in value by the roads formed by the settlers (becoming responsible for loans) and •capable of being cut up into smaller areas than the bulk of the land put upon the market by the Government in recent years. Mr McNab's figures show that under the optional system during the last three yearsi 743,540 acres of land were taken up, and under the Lease-in-Perpetuity (Land for Settlement) 415,321 acres, making a total of 1,158,861 acres. At this rate, taking the average quality of the unoccupied native land into account, and worked in conjunction with the Land for Settlement Act, we have more land N than we can settle during the { mexb ten years. Two officials on a holiday trip, opinion cannot be gainsaid, rode through a block of 80,000 ;acres of native land, the grass toeing up to their stirrups along .the track, and they told the present writer that it would be worth in the settled districts £l2 or £ls an acre. The Year Book gives the total area of Freehold land in the •colony at 16,473,025 acres. The .area held by the Crown and the natives is, therefore, equal to half the already disposed of Freehold land We are told the Crown lands are nearly all' gone. Surely it will be a matter for congratulation when they are all gone —if they are only settled on a proper tenure. And yet, when 'that is the \ case, there will yet remain this 6,000,000 acres of native land to find settlers for. Whilst that remains unproductive, the •colony is to have its financial arrangements completely upset by a Bill, the principles of which have not been before the country except in regard to the right of leaseholders to acquire the Freehold, and on this question the •country answered in the affirmative. The country said this •should be granted. The Bill denies that right. A Commission to enquire into this question, costing iIIG,QOO, took evidence, all

• over the colony, and it was overwhelmingly in favour of leaseholders being given the right to purchase their land. The Bill gives them the right to pay off 90 per cent, of the • original value, but refuses to allow them to make the land their •own. By retaining the 10 per -cent, it would seem that any conditions imposed by the Land Act "under which the land is held, still remain, though in the words of

the Bill: (4) "When payments equal to fifty per centum of such value have been made, the lessee, shall for the residue of th« •term of the'lease have possession <of the land freed from all.covenants and conditions contained or implied in the lease other than the covenant to pay rent."© Anything specially mentioned in the lease is freed, but not otherwise. It is doubtful, therefore, whether each transfer must not have the sanction of the Land Boardeven if the land is devised bv will

Mr Ramsay McDonald, who ■ was lately out here touring the • colony, and naturally associating with those who had similar views to himself, and-who had discussed the effects of the Land Bill amongst his friends in the >• colony, gave in . Melbourne the ; following opinion:—"lf New Zealand were going to carry on progressive legislation, the Freehold ; system must be knocked on the head. . . . In ohjs connection Mr McNab'a land policy comes in, with the elimination of the Here, at any irate, is one who looks upon the Bill aa an attack upon the Freer hold; aa a beginning towards the desired end of "knocking the Freehold' on the head"; as an instalment of what is hoped for. We would appeal to those who may do us the favour of reading this to look at the matter dispassionately, not as & party question, but as one of fairness and justice, and to remember that this Bill specially exempts the town lands from its operations, md therefore it deals with country lands only, from which are eliminated all Crown grassing lands. It therefore deals only with— Freehold land ... 16,000,000 Maori land; unoccupied, say ... 6,000,000 Crown land, unoccupied, say ... 2,000,000 24,000,000 and the leasehold land which is xot separated from the grazing runs in the return quoted; As town lands ara not "it goes without saving" that ihs country settlers should have a strong voice on the matter, having already settled the land an<F being likely' to assist, in tlm settlement of-the as weft! as being more competent (as cuß-' tivators and users' 6f the land) to • deal with a qtiestion which is essentially their own.