LAND FOR SOLDIERS.

Auckland Star, Issue 123, 24 May 1919, Page 6

LAND FOR SOLDIERS.

Dissatisfaction at the choice made by the Government in purchasing land for soldiers does not decrease- It ii comjmon talk that mistakes have been made, and specific instances are given. A significant feature of these criticisms is that some of them come from farmers in the districts in which purchases aro made. When one hears of a farmer strongly ! condemning a purchase for soldiers of land in the district in which he has lived for years one is naturally impressed. iThis man must know something about j the value of land in the district, and his opinion cannot be ignored. Assuming that he i 3 a fair judge of land and its producing power, his opinion is certainly 'more valuable than that of a Board sitting in Wellington. The Board may send a valuer with deeper general knowledge and wider experience than the local farmer's, but it does not necessarily foli low that the valuer's judgment in this 'particular case is weightier than the [other's. The visitor may see the projperty under exceptionally favourable jor unfavourable conditions. One would think that the Land Purchase Board would be only too willing to avail themselves of this local knowledge and experience, but apparently it make 3 little or no use of it- This defect in its administration seems to have impressed a deputation of business men and farmers that ■•waited on the Minister of Lands in Palmerston North the other day to protest against the dilatory methods and faulty judgment of the Land Purchase Board in dealing with properties offered for soldiers' settlement. The deputation de--1 clared that the Board, through no lack of deliberation, had rejected a number of desirable properties and acquired others that were unsuitable. It suggested that the Board should be abolished, that its j functions should be taken over by the. .Land Board in each district, and that this Board should be assisted in the ■ selection of land for soldiers by an advivsory committee consisting of local busi- ; ness men and farmers.

This is a large order, to carry on which ■would require legislation. It is not likely that when Parliament meets for a short session before the general election it will be inclined to revise the land system; but it would probably be prepared to agree to proposals facilitating soldier settlement along safe lines. It is stated that as the law stands, the chairman of the Land Board is supreme in his own sphere, having power to override the recommendations of valuers, boards, and Ministers alike. If this is so, then, pending an alteration of the law, all that can be done is to endeavour to make that officer see how reasonable is the demand that the Board shall make more use of the knowledge and experience of local farmers when a purchase is being considered. The Minister seems to have been impressed by what he heard at Palmerston. We can assure him that there is a good deal of dissatisfaction with certain purchases of the Government, and with the way in which local farmers have been ignored and offers of advice refused. Patriotic farmers were willing to give their services for nothing, but the Government apparently did not want them. It is probably a direct result of this foolish policy that one hears from time to time of purchases being strongly condemned by men who know the district well, and who would have been only too #lad to give the Government the benefit of their advice. We hope Mr. Guthrie will realise the feeling on this matter, and act as vigorously as he can.