IRRIGATION FOR CANTERBURY.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 9941, 21 January 1898, Page 5

IRRIGATION FOR CANTERBURY.

TO THE SDITOR OF THE PRESS. SIR,--I have been much interested in the articles recently appearing in your journal and the Times regarding irrigation. Having during the last five years had some experience regarding plains land in the DunsandelRakaia distriot, I can speak as to the imperative necessity of irrigation, whilst ita value was freely shown in cases where waterraces by accident became choked, and overflowing submerged adjoining land. The whole stretch of country from Riooarton southwards to Timaru, and even to Oamaru, would be immensely benefited were the water now flowiug down tho rivers to the sea used for irrigation. Can this be secured ! I am perfectly sure it cannot, under present conditions. There may be a few isolated efforts at irrigation in a small way —local efforts. What is wanted is a comprehensive and general scheme. With our local government in its present" state I despair of a comprehensive scheme being undertaken. 1 submit that the irrigation of the Canterbury plains is, and should be taken up' as a colonial work. What is a colonial work» Railways are re* gardedascolonial works because theyinorease the wealth-producing power of the country and add to its capacity for carrying population, and therefore to its revenue. The same remarks apply to roads and bridges, the importance of which to the country no one can deny. But the idea underlying all the expenditure on these works is that they are of colonial importance, because they add to the wealth and cheapen the transit of the country. . Is it not fair to argue that exactly th* same principles obtain regarding irrigation ? No one will deny that an efficient system of irrigation would treble the carrying capacity of the land affected. Would not that be a benefit to New Zealand, as much as making roads and bridges in various localities in the North Island? It would be much more a colonial benefit, because the railways in Canterbury would at ones receive a largelyincreased revenue as the result of the irrigation. Not only so, but the increased productiveness of the land would be immediately followed by an increase in the land tax valuation and the rates of the local bodies. The land would be cut up into smaller areas, and the stamp duties would receive the benefit, while increased productiveness would mean increased Customs revenue. ■ In 1896, when the million loan was being raised, I proposed in the House that » sum —I forget the amount, but think it was £50,000 —should be set aside for irrigation and £10,000 for forest planting in Canterbury. This would have been.an act o* bare justice to Canterbury, seeing this province has to bear one-fifth of the interest. But, unfortunately, no private member can propose the expenditure of. money—that is the prerogative of " the Crown," i.e., the Government of the day. However, I see no reason why the people of Canterbury should not take up the question in real earnest, altogether independent of party, and try and force from the colonial exchequer sufficient assistance to be able to undertake a comprehensive irrigation scheme. Ot course, the money would need to be borrowed, and as much as is necessary, up to a million or more, can be obtained at 3 per cent, or under. There are three methods by which the work can be done:—(1) By the General Government; (2) by union of the local authorities (county, councils); and (3) by the General Government and local authorities combining. (1) If the work were undertaken solely by the Government there would be a howl by the parish politicians ot other parts of the colony. I, therefore, dismiiw that as impracticable. (2) If the work were dona by the local authorities only it would unfair, seeing the colony would receive increased revenues from railways, stamps, land tax, &c. Besides, the burden of so great a work; should not be tbaro.wa.ugen the It is colotuWl > iffl ; :«»• .':'■ racter. (3) The third plan, namely, lot the General Government aud local authorities, to be equally responsible for the interest on the money, seems to mo to be the only fair and equitable wayof dealing with this proposal. That would mean the colony being responsible for li per cent., and the districts benefited for the other I£. The colony would raise its share by increased railway revenue, stamps, land tax, and Customs revenue; the local authorities by the inorease in the rates, license fees, &c. The advantages of such a scheme are selfevident. (1) It would provide an enormous amount of employment for the labouring classes; (2) this employment would be directly reproductive in enhancing the value of the land and increasing its prodaoti?e« ness ; (3) the revenues of the colony would undoubtedly be largely increased; (4) increased prosperity would permeate the whole province, including the city apd ■$ towns; (6) sheep-fanning and cereal-growing would be made independent of tho vagaries of climate; (6) land now almost valueless would become capable of subdivision, and would be regarded as of great value. I think the Government should import _ first-class irrigation engineer to devise the scheme, which Should hot be local, tfttt adapted to the whole province, as far as necessary, but that the actual carrying but of the works should be entrusted to the local bodies. I submit these proposals to the. Canterbury people, and contend that if true to-onr-selveß we shall lay aside party feeling and unite—both farmers and townspeople-»in urging this matter on the Legislature. "I would suggest that some reoognised association or public body—say the A. and JP. Association—should call a meeting in conjunction with the Chamber of Commerce and Industrial Association, and set up a strong committee to consider the question. Then, having devised a scheme, go to the public with it, and agitate, agitate co that the lessons of the deplorable droturht May not, like the water in our rives*!, be abWlutely wasted. If any apology is necessary for the length of this letter, I trust the importance of the subject may be sufficient.—Yours, •Sec, G. W. RpssjbUm .