The Press. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER, 15, 1905. "McKENZIE'S MISTAKE."

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 12351, 15 November 1905, Page 6

The Press. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER, 15, 1905. "McKENZIE'S MISTAKE."

Whflo there is a great divergence of views on the land question between tho Seddonites on tho one hand, and the Oppositionists on the other, there is an extraordinary unanimity of opinion on all sides that the special feature of Sir John McKenzio's Land Act, namely, tho 999 years' lease, has been a huge mistake. Both parties agree, moreover, that some form of leasehold is necessary for .he purpose of enabling men to get on the land in the first instance, and there ia a very general agreement that Mr Rolleston- system of leasing, which was displaced by the present Govern- ; ment when they carried Sir John | McKenzi. _ Bill, is probably tho best | system that could bo adopted. Mr G. W. Russell, who was the means of hastening Mr Rolleston's retirement from public life, now goes so far as to prophesy that the next Parliament will revert to that great statesman's policy of dealing Vith the land. ■ ' When wo come' to discuss the ques-

tioo of what should be done with the leasos-in-perpetuity, then it is that tho most marked" differences of opinion arise. Mr W. W. Collins, in the one flash of originality which illuminated his speech on Monday night, olaims to have hit on a eolution which will settle the difficulty "in on© • act." He would allow the lessee to occupy his holding on the present terms as long as he cares to. do 60, but if he desires to sell his interest, Mr Collins would "compel him " to make his first offer to tho State." It is a pity the candidate was not a little more explicit. Does he mean that if the lessee will not .take the price which the State is willing to give, he will nob be allowed to sell to anyone else? If so, wha6 becomes of the sanctity of contract about which even tho Seddonites profess solicitude? If, on tho other hand, the lessee is allowed to make the best terms ho can, either with the State or with a private buyer, wo may take it for granted that ho will willingly give tho State an opportunity of buying his property, and that no form of compulsion will be at all necessary. But, what an abeurd proposition it ie in any case I The State has, in the first instance, purchased the freehold: of a property, and bae let it out in smaller allotments on a 999. years' lease. Now,— always supposing that Mr Collins means fair treatment and not confiscation it ie to buy back these leaseholds at the enhanced value, for the purpose of re-letting them once more on a 33 years' or 50 years' lease. Does any man in his senses suppose that this couFd be done on terms which would pay the new tenants, and at tho same time make it a sound financial transaction for the State? Could there be more convincing evidence that Mr Collins doee not possese en otom of constructive ability in his composition ? It ought .to be a solemn warning to him not to attempt to be original, least of all upon the land question. But it is always the townsman who has never worked on the land, and never owned any land, who propounds tho most cocksure theories as to the best methods of dealing with the land. The fact that his theories are unsound and impracticable does not trouble him in the least. Turning to the two other men of " Liberal light and leading " who spoke on Monday night—Messrs Tanner and Laurenson, wo find that they agree in one thing, namely, in hating the freehold, and they appear to look upon a man who prospers as ' the owner of a freehold farm or section, very much 03 if he was the enemy of his country. Mr Tanner, speaking to the electors at Phillipstown, solemnly warned has hearers to "beware "of any political oamdidato who advo- " oated the freehold." We wonder if he will repeat the warning at Belfast and Marshlands, and if co how many of sturdy freeholders in those districts will bo converted to his views. Compared with tho muddling and conflictiaig views of the Socialists and Seddonitea in regard to the land question, the policy of the Opposition is ac satisfactory as it is simple understand. In. tho first) place they insist on the absolute Sanctity of a contract. Whatever bad bargains the State has made it must keep to them unless it is voluntarily released (by the other parties to the contract. Tho leaee-Ln-perpetuity iis both unsatisfactory to the tenant and a bad 'bargain for *he State. Tho policy of the Opposition is to give the tenant tho option of acquiring tho freehold on equitable terms. No more leases of the same kind will be granted, bat in future land will, for tho most part, be sold oa occupation leases with the right of purchase. Some lands Trill be sold for cash outright as at present, we eeo no objections to making a certain number of Crown reserves which should bo open

for lease only, as in tho case of the prc___* education reserves. Re-aggre-gation will bo provided against bjr restricting tho area of Crown lands to be held by one person, and the Land Tax (which tho lease-in-perpetuity tenante co far havo ©scaped) will always secure to tho State a certain share in the unearned increment. In tho meantime the bulk of tho land will te cultivated on the tenure which has given the very best results all the world over, and the freeholder will enjoy a security of pes___sion and a freedom from interference such as no Crown leaseholder can ever hope to onjoy.