HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Evening Post, Volume LIV, Issue 141, 11 December 1897, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

The House continued its sittings after we went to press yesterday. , LAND FOB SETTLEMENTS ACT AMENDMENT. The Minister of Lands, in moving that the House go into Committee on this Bill, said there was no necessity to refer to the success of the original measure. It bad been found necessary, however, to make curtain amendments. The first was to extend for one year the time for which the Act .stall remain in operation. The next was to increase the amount that could be expended under the Act. During the past year they had had to refuse one large estate which in their opinion should have been purchased in the interests of settlement, and there were now several estates that it was desirable to purchase. Among the other proposals in the Bill was one to enable the Government to work a lime kiln in the Shag Valley, which would supply a very large art* with lime. The lime was inexhaustible, and was considered to be the purest lime in New Zealand. Sir Robert Stout said clause 5 wai an entire reversal of the original Act, which provided for the breaking up of large estates. Power was now given to take any small farm of 100 acres anywhere, and allow the owner to keep only 25 acres. Surely this was a blunder. It could not really be meant. The Home would never .consent to it. Captain Russell complimented the Minis, ter of Lands upon his courage in introducing ' the Bill. His courage no doubt was very . i good — the Bill execrable. The Bill if passed meant the death of the freehold. Every farmer in the colony would be liable to have his land confiscated by the Minister. This might not be intended, but such was the case. The Minister wished them to Relieve that the power of purchase should fle extended from £250,000 to £500,000 annually, but he bad shown no reason for this. He thought the expenditure of £250,000 annually by the Minister and bk advisers without reference to Parliament quite sufficient, especially in view of the fact that the unexpended balance of any year could be carried forward to the next year. There was not, he thought, any necessity for expending £500,000 a year in purchasing land for settlement. It was said— and ha was inclined to believe it— that the Act was largely used as a political tnachine. (The Minister of Lands— No.) Mr. Mills considered that the Bill should , receive the support of every member of the House. At present the prices asked for estates under offer to the Government were exorbitant. Mr. Wason argued in favour of allowing tenants under the Act to convert their leases into freeholds, and mentioned an amendment he intended to move to that effect. Mr. Montgomery said the original Act bad done much to relieve the unemployed. He contended that sooner or later Crown tenants would have to be given the right to obtain freeholds. Mr. Gilfedder testified to the success of the land for settlements policy. Mr. Lang urged that the effect of the principal Act had been to drive capital out j, of the colony. Mr. o' Regan said he would vote against the Bill, because he did not believe in the State paying landowners for land the value of which wai> due to public expenditure. Mr. Rolleston believed in encouraging land settlement, and he would support this Hill. He would criticise some of its details, but would generally support it. He recognised the necessity for the acquisition of Urge estates, but considered the lease in perpetuity an impoiwible form of tenure. ' -Mr. Duncan supported the Bill. Mr. Tanner said he had always supported the principle of acquiring land for settlement by the purchase of the large estates. He urged the acquisition of land near the citie* for workmen's homes. xVlr. Kelly mentioned one estate purchased in the Wallace district, the Otahu estate,

only one section of which had been taken up. He had warned the Minister that this would be the case. If proper care had been taken this particular piece of land would never have been taken. He would support a clause to provide that no estate should be purchased until sanctioned by the House. Mr. G. P. Richardson could not conceive a man like Mr. M'Kerrow recommending the purchase of estates like Pomahaka and Otahu. There was something behind it that had not come to light. Mr. M'Kerrow's judgment and advice mutt have been overruled by men who did not know. Mr. Ward referred at length to the Pomahaka and Otahu Estate purchases, quoting copiously the opinions of others in support of the acquirement of the properties. Mr. Pi rani pointed out that the late owner of the OtahU Estate had purchased the property three years ago for 15s an acre, and by the sale of it to the Government had made a'profit of £30Q0. It jeemed to him that under the present system of purchase under the Land for Settlements Act the man who knew least about land and about the district in which it was situated should be tbe one to advise the Government as to its purchase. Mr. Buchanan oritioised the provisions of the Bill, stating that he could not approve of it. He questioned whether the estates purchased would return 5 per cent, on the purchase money. Mr. Carncross said the Opposition argu ments were threadbare, and Mr. Flatman wanted the Bill to go further in obtaining laud for settlements, Mr. Massey was afraid that the Bill, proposing as it did to increase the expenditure of the colony by £250,000 per annum, would not receive the consideration it deserved. What the Opposition had forecast when the original Bill was introduced had now cams to pass, namely, that the limitation presenting the Government from taking estates of less area than 1000 acres had been removed, and small areas were now taken. He would vote against the Bill. Mr. R. Thompson protested against the small amount expended in the Auckland district. After further debate the motion to go into Committee was carried at 1.40 by S2 to 12. Captain Ruisell then moTed to report progress. This was negatived by 26 to 18. Captain Russell moved to alter the title of the Bill to read " Small Farmers Expropriation and Land for Settlements Act Amendment Bill." This was lost by 31 toll. Ai> olause 3, extending the power of borrowing, Captain Russell moved to strike tbe clause out. Negatived by 28 to 15. Clause 5, providing that small areu may be taken for settlement, was amended to provide that no area under 100 acres could be compulsorily acquired. A new clause was added providing that not more than 100 acres should be acquired in any one year within five miles of eaoh of the four chief cities of the colony. Mr. Wagon's new clause, providing for the conversion of the leasehold into freehold, was». negatived by 20 to 9. The Bill was then pasted through Committee. On the motion for the third reading, Captain Russell said the Opposition had done a good thing that night. They had prevented the small farmer from being despoiled. He protested against the Premier keeping the House at such hours. The Premier denied that this construction could be put on the Bill. The third reading of the Bill was agreed to, and tht House rose at 4.50 a.m.