The Daily Telegraph. FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 1896. ONE REASON WHY EMPLOYMENT IS SCARCE.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 7737, 17 April 1896, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph. FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 189 6. ONE REASON WHY EMPLOYMENT IS SCARCE.

The Government own many millions of acres of bush land. Instead of trying to solve the unemployed difficulty by utilising that land, they are spending hundreds of thousands of pounds in buying out the occupiers of properties already profitably cultivated. By so doing they spend unprofitably moneys that could be profitably used to clear some of the millions of acres of bush land the State owns, so rendering it ! fit for occupation by men of small j means. They also reduce the total of

our produce for export by stopping cultivation, for a time at all events. They also reduce the revenue from the land tax, by cutting up the resumed properties into small pieces not liable for taxation. Thus the pockets of the people are being lightened in several ways. If the money now being spent in purchasing improved properties were utilised to bring bush land into a state fit for occupation, the improved properties would go on producing, the general production would be added to by the cultivation of bush lands now lying waste, and all the unemployed could be set to work without the loss of a farthing by the State. Many working men are of this opinion, which cannot be gainsaid, and to show how the class most interested look at this question, we reproduce from a contemporary a letter by a working man on this subject. It is worthy of careful reading, and has the merit of being practical. He writes :—" Now, being an old colonist of some fifty years' standing, mostly on bush lands, I think I can show you that a tremendous amount of labor could be absorbed in the following manner, and I am sure if it was it would be profitable to the Government and a great benefit to the country generally. It is well known ! that amongst those out of employment a great many are acquainted with bush work, and others would be only too glad to tackle bush work iE a subsistence could bo earned at it. It is also well known that the Government have some millions of acres of bush lands wanting occupation, and that there are hundreds of people in ]\ r cw Zealand i who would take improved holdings \ from the Crown if they were to bo got. And if the Government were now! using up tho surplus labor i< convert \ bush lands into smiling pastures, instead of buying up improved estates at large cost to the colony, they would bo doing a much wiser thing. It appears to me that it would be quite an easy matter for tho Government to place one, two, or throe hundred men in the j bush—as convenient to townships as possible, so that supplies would bo somewhat handy—at contract work, under the supervision of competent bushincn, and at a price per acre, say 255, that they could earn n fair wage at. Men to bo hi gangs large enough to hike 50 or 100 acre blocks. When tht) Jelled bush is dry enough to burn, of course in season, to have it burnt, howii in grasH, and foncod, fill with this ciiißii of labor, and at contract prices ; and, s.-ty iivo or six months after grass is shown, and when showing at us beat, to place the land in the niju'ket in .sections of, say, from 50 to 'JUO-acrc allotments ; and I am as certain as one can be that every aero i

would be grabbed up at a price that would leave the Government a handsome profit. I would guarantee, if I had the management, that they would net from 15s to 30s per acre. As I thoroughly understand what the cost would likely be, I hereunder give estimate of probable cost :—Say, land at prairie value per acre, £1 5s ; felling bush, £1 5s ; grass seed, cocksfoot, rye, clovers, all that is necessary, 10s 6d ; labor of sowing, 2s ; fencing (four wires) 10s ; supervision, 5s ; total, £3 17s 6d ; profit, say, £1 ; grand total, £4 17s Gd. Hundreds would be only too glad to either buy or lease at the above price."