Parliament.

Waimate Daily Advertiser, Volume III, Issue 180, 25 July 1901, Page 3

Parliament.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Tuesday, July 23* Mr Buddo resumed the adjourned debate on the Land for Settlements Act Amendment Bill. He strongly opposed the clause which proposed to give married men a preference in taking up land. He deprecated the gambling which went on under the Land for Settlement Act, and eng-

gested the abolition of land transfers under the Act, Which he believed would almost Completely put a stop to this objectionable practice. Mr Homes was sorry there was no provision in the Bill to grant settlers the freehold. Sooner or later that boon must be granted. : He said the Assets Board, by making prohibitive prices, was discouraging attempts mads by genuine settlers to bay laud in the Waikato district.

The Premier regarded the Bill as an attempt to suppress the evils of dummyism especially bj preventing a fictitious system of balloting, which frequently was Worked under the present conditions. He was in favour of elective Land Boards, and believed they would be conducive to the better settlement of the country. Mr Barclay strongly condemned the lease in perpetuity system, and said that as the value of land would persistently rise the people of the colony would regret the day they allowed the system to become law. He also condemned the fee simple, which ho said must be deleted from the Statute Book.

Mr Hornsby expressed his preference for the freehold system, provided there was every necessary security agdust the aggregation of large estates. He thought that before the back blocks were opened up they should be roaded. He objected to re-valuation of Crown lands, and said the working of the Valuation Department at the present time was a perfect scandal.

The Bill was read a second time on the voices, and the House then went into committee on the Bill. Mr Seddon moved a new subclause to provide that restrictions on sub divisions should cease twelve months after the Government gave notice to acquire; if the Governor did nut proceed with the purchase.

After considerable discussion, in which several numbers urged that the intention of the amendment should bo made clearer, Mr osddon explained that it was not proposed to hang up a man’s property for twelve months if the Government did not intend to buy it. The delay in the negotiations which he had complained of did not coma from the Government. His proposal would only be carried out in the case of the compulsory taking of land. The law was nnv being evaded, aud the Government were not safe in any negotiations they might enter upon.

Eventually, Mr Seddon’s amendment was agreed to on the voices, and the clause as amended was ulded to the Bill on a division by 1L votes to 21.

At clause 8, “married men with families to have preference,” Mr Beddon said that this provision was insjrted in the Bill as a means of checking dummyism, which was so rampant in c -nnaction with the ba lot system-. He proposed, however. to delete the clause from the Bill, and in its pla’e to introduce a new clause, wnmu he hoped would attain the object the object the Government had in view.

Mr Fe met opposed the clause giving preference to married' men, on the ground that it would oe the means of driving young men and young woman {torn the colony. There wa§ a demand for land for settlement in bis district, but it had not been met.

Mr G. W. Rus el'thought that the evil of dummyism could be met without any legislative action, simply by placing enough land on the market to meet all existing demands.

4 free a lengthy discussion', Mr Seddon’s motion to strike out clause 8 was agreed to on the voices. Captain Russell moved the following new clause: Where an owner of laud has children born in lawful wedlock the areas limited by sab-sections 2 and 3 of section 12, of the Lands for Settlements Consolidation Act, 1900, shall be increased as follows : that is to say an additional area of first-class land of 500 acres for each such child, of second-class land, an additional area of 1000 areas for each such child, and of pastoral laud an additional area of 2000 acres for each such child. He said that no one could be injured by such a provision, and it would in many cases prevent children being turned oft an estate in favour of outsiders. Mr Seddon said that the House might as well repeal the LaM for Settlements Act as pass this new clause.

The hour of 10.80 having.arrived, progress was reported on the Bill, and its further consideration in comrhittee was made the first order for 7.30 to-morrow night. The House then rosei