PROFESSOR HONTER ON THE LAND QUESTION.

Waikato Times, Volume XX, Issue 1669, 17 March 1883, Page 4

PROFESSOR HONTER ON THE LAND QUESTION.

Processor W. A. Huntkr, University College, London, doliveicd a lcctuicon Thursday night in the Music Hall Buildings, Aberdeen, on the land question, under the auspices of the Junior Liberal Association —Professor Minto, Aberdeen, presided. Professor Hunter, after speaking on the land laws, said in regard to agricultural land, he ventured to think thatif the landlords once realized their true position, they would find little difticulty in accommodating their claims to tho requirements of modern agriculture. If once they dismissed irom their minds the vain dreams of social and political importance to be derived from the ownership of land— what Lord Derby mentioned as the chief motives for the purchase of land— a solution would not be difficult. They imu»t bear in mind that the principle of compulsory compensation for improvements was now accepted by both political parties, and that legislation to carry the piiuciple into effect was due at an early date. What would, then, be the position of a landlord stripped of the social and political consequence hitherto associated with the possession of land ? He would be entitled to the hightest lent he could get, bub for some considerable time that was likely to be limited by foreign competition, and on each change of tenant ho. would have to meet vaiying and uncertain claims for impiovements. The mere expense and worry of dealing with such claims would make no small addition to the burden of existence, while the payment of large sums would not always be convenient, and the landlord might not be able in every case to recoup himself by a rise in rent. The only advantage of the present system, from the landlord 'a point of view, waa that he was free from such embarrassing claims, and could boast with reasonable certainly the amount of his annual income. In these circumstances, he believed landlords wonld be glud to feu their lands to their farmers ior a fixed perpetual rent, which might be mcasuicd in produce, so as to guaul against loss from the depreciation of money. They Would thus yet a cet tain, instead of an uncertain income ; they would get lid of the English tioublcs of compensation, and they .save the not incon&idciablc expense of estate management. They would get higher rcnt>, because the land would be woith more to a tenant who was at libeity to ninke tl.o most of it. They would piobably foibid sub-letting, and thereby cnsuie lli.it the actual cultivator should cairy on his business in circumstances most favouiable to success. The tenant, having the absolute contiol of the land, and getting the whole benciit of every impioveinent, would be stimulated to do Jib best, and would have no fear of being driven from bis home in his old age. There could be m> doubt that fclic result would he an enormous increase in the production of the soil, thus securing an abundant supply of cheap food, and diminishing our dependence on foreign supplies. He indicated two minor reforms as necessary. In the first place, every municipality ought to have po'ver, without in each ivBtancc incurring the great expense of a private Act, of compulsory pui chase of land within the municipal boundaries. No wrong wonld be done, as the parties whose land it wos would get full compensation. But lie thought the powers ought to go farther. Tho municipality should ha\c the naht to buy any lanil within a fixed lading of the bomrlary, to long as it was not built upon, at its agricultural \alue.