MASTERTON DEBATING SOCIETY.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 4, Issue 1073, 13 May 1882, Page 2

MASTERTON DEBATING SOCIETY.

This meeting of the above Spcietv last evening was' well attended, Mi' Grundy (the President) occupying the chair. Mr Barnard, in opening the debute in favor of the nationalisation of land, asserted, ns his position, that the whole of the land should belong to the people, that the rents should be paid to the State, mid take tho pkico of luxation In dealing with the question he found it necessary' to go outaidfs New Zealand, and described the monopoly of land which existed in England, Ireland, and Scotland, which resultd in jlarge areas ',pj njioqltivated land and rnahy thpiisands of unemployed laborers. The condition of the English laborer was worse than that of a Blave. Tho landowners had tho laws in their hands, and the laborers were their victims. There was a danger of tho laborers wresting the land from its owners, and the only preventive was the extinction of private title, He quoted Mill to show that private proprietorship of land was unjust, That it should be used for the good of the nation. All tliat tho individual was entitled to was tho improvements he maclo upon it, Hitherto labor had paid the taxes that land ought to have borne If Parliament took land for public purposes, such as railways, the State might also take it to secure the public weal. The natural increase of value of land should go to the State and not to the individual. Ho quoted from tho Westminster Ijnvipw, tp shpw that landowners nunjslieij'tfinants i?ho did not give them th'eir political support. He read extracts from a publication by Mr Stout to show that renting under the State was preferable to purchasing land under the deferred payment system where buyers wore charged BO per cent, more than if they paid cash, He next recited passages from ft pamphlet called "Land ho!' : supposed to havo been published in 1891, when all land in tho colony had become nationalised, and sat down ainid applause. Mr_ Redman said he only took the negative side of the question pro forma, and (13 tho mouth pjece of Mr Park, who had plficecl his uptep at t]]e speaker's disposal. 'He would'like toWaii experiment tried, by nationalising land in some small part of tho colony, but thought it could not be introduced as a general means without a revolution. Ho pointed out that nationalisation was the cry ol those persons who had nothing to loose. He failed to see hgw all the- distress in the world could be chargeable to monopoly. He ratl}'er' thought some of it was due to the want of perseverance and tact on the pjirf of thp English laborer. He was under, the impression lhat idleness and debauchery caused morp distress than land monopoly, H_p also pointed out that if liind were nationalised, rich people would rent large areas and the present inequality would be perpetual, and that the rent derived by the State would be insufficient as.a substitute for taxation, Ho anggestod that in the Old Country distress arose through the exhaustion of tho soil, In New Zealand, a land tax on a sliding acalo would bo quite sufficient Ito chock fhe evil of land monopoly, (Anplam) "','■'. Mr ford said that a roliablo calculation had been made that the amount of money required to purchase land in Eugland could not be found by any Government,, and that it was impossible to nationalise laud already populated. Even "iii New Zealand it could not bo dqno, He also pointed out that in farming leasehold land tenants, during the latter portion of their loases, allowed thoir land to deteriorate, iu order to get renewals on easy terms. Under a nationalised system,'in the course of a century, land would become absolutely .worthless, Rationalisation and pauperism were distinct [questions, and were not due to tho same- causes. (Applause,) ■ ~; -. . The Rev Mr Isitt being called upon said that Mr Ford had covered tho ground by showing (hat- nationalisation of land if desirable was not possible, and if possible was not desirable.

Mr C, Morrison showed that if the State leased lands in fixed quantities an inequality arising from the varied character of the soil and situation would ut once arise, ' \-

Mr Galloway considered the" nationalisation of land would do away ; with a good deal of poverty, The natural energy of the English laborers had been ground down till they were almost imbecile. Mr Collins pointed out that to counteract the decrease in value of leasehold property leases would havp to be granted at terras of 100 or 200 years which would leave a state of things exactly as before. In the long run he thought the Stato would lose by tho speculation, Mr R. Brown objected to alltTie crime under the sun being charged against the land system. To eliminate poverty they must alter human nature, He contended nationalisation of land was Communistic in principle and revolutionary in character.

Mr Hogg claimed support for the proposal on the ground that eminent political economists advocated it. He questioned the right of the State to sell land to the people, as the latter never gave the former authority to dispose of it, He advocated compensation to be given for improvements in leasing land, a«d -riiet the objection that the State could not find means to purchase, by the example of the United Sfates in emancipating the alaves without compensating the owners, Thiß was not done without a sacrifice of life and the nationalisation of land might not

lie attained without bloodshed, but he held'it was worth England's, while to follow the example of America.-(Ap-plause.) Mr Barnftrd having briefly .replied, the question was carried by seven votes to five, Mr Rodman not voting, and some of the opponents of the proposal having left the room. T|ie meeting then adjourned, '