The Dominion. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1909. THE LAND NATIONALISERS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 671, 23 November 1909, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1909. THE LAND NATIONALISERS.

The advocates of tho inalienable leasehold did not advance their cause in the slightest dogreo by the meeting which thoy held last night, Tho question is one which can be settled only on a basis of practical logic, and our " leasehold" frionds hardly make even a pretence of giving ua any reason why their policy should be adopted. Messrs. _ M'Lahen, Hooo and Taylou certainly said all that can bo said for that policy j if they have not helped their cause, it is becauso their cause has so littlo basis in and not becauso they are poor advocates of it. Mr. Taylor has some ideas about the future' valuo of Crown land rents as an aid to ihe..reduction, of. taxation_ and

even the extinction (if the national debt, but it is really asking too much to expect anyone to believe that tho school of politics 'which favours land nationalisation will ever be' likely to reduco taxation or get tho country out of financial difficulties./ The " leasehold " argument consists in the main of declamations against the wickedness of " getting rid of the people's.property ".and equallyiappeals for ".the conservation of; the national estate.". Surely it is time that tho land nationalises realised tho absurdity of. their idea that when a Crown tenant purchases his holding the land, passes out of the ken of man. One, would imagine from the wild talk about "the conservation of the national estate " that land is a, thing which can be cut down like timber or carried out of the country' like • the ; '.' 600,000,000 . golden sovereigns "•' that Mr.. Seddon firmly'. believed were shipped away from Britain every year. The national estate is best'con- : served by creating conditions which will make it most highly productive; and I these conditions ;can best be created' by the policy of small freeholds. : It was made quite apparent in last nights speeches, and especially in Mr. Taylor's speechj that; the '■ object of the out-and-out, leaseholders is twofold: to shift the whole biiijden of taxation on. to the 'shoulders of the. farmer as soon as may be, and to. prevent the creation of the. yeomanry that 'is the ' chief, obstacle to the. progress of Socialism. - It is. much more important that this should' be re-, alised, than that the absurdities in the nationalisation , party's phrases should be. exposed in detail. Tho, fallacies of ;the leasehold doctrine are obvious; the real, motive of the extreme leaseholders is riot obvious. It must therefore be kept .constantly, before the public. We'; are bound to say that we have more respect ;for the. land nationalises,who demands rigour in principle than for those who offer.the freehold with one hand.and withhold it with the other. The question involved is .a simple matter of principle: either (the freehold principle is the right .one-, for the State; to [adopt in respect of its lands, or it is not. . If it is right, there ; is no logic, no principle and no honesty ■in -the half-and-half .proposals of the Government. If it is. wrong, tnere is 'still' no: logic, no principle,and ho honesty in those proposals. Of course the Goyernment will endeavour to; persuade usV that its proposals are a.reasonable ".compromise," and ,'vwill say that no pro-; gress. is possible "without somo. give-and-take.:' It will not say, but everybody ;will know,. that compromise , does not meani: and never. has meant, the simultaneous embracing of two opposite principles.;.. There ';■ is no ■ need for iis to Say hero [what all'fair-niirided men on both sides think of the Government's cheerful repudiation of the vows that it took. only l two years ago..The Ward Adminis-tration-.has not gained the support of the esteem of'|he freehold party, and,it has lost the", respect, arid will shortly lose the support, of tho honest believers in the "leasehold .tenure.; 'As' Mr. Taylorj said.last night, "fighting-to-the death-'■'. is not in',Sir Joseph Ward's: line. The demand for a referendum calls for little notice. We belieye it would bring forth; a freehold Mandate,than ever,; but,it willbe time to grant;-the. demand: for'■> it; : when''those: nowv'clamouring for! the :yoice of- the people,*-which was taken!: last November,'.to 'be' taken'again, : arc 'ready -to- tre'at-oyory.,-question of;, policy in tho same' way,.'. ■'*' '' ■:..'..-■.'-'•