MR. JAMES ALLEN IN REPLY.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIII, Issue 30, 5 February 1907, Page 2

MR. JAMES ALLEN IN REPLY.

to Tan editok. Sir,— Mr. P. J. O'Regan was at one time a, member of the liouse of RepreIccntatiyes. He has done me the honour to criticise in your paper my speech e.t Milton on the proposed Land Bill. Ido not know that his criticism, if based on correct premises, would be very damaging; for, after all, it amounts to, this, that Mr. Allen has changed his mind, but has not explained why. It is Gomewhat a stretch of the imagination to call that "suppressio veri." But, suppose Mr. Allen has not "reversed his policy," nor " ( turncd a co&jplete 'somersault," nor entered into a "wholesale denunciation in 1907 of tho principles he himself supported in. 1896 ">--(I- quote Mr. O' Regan), then what truth has been suppressed and what explanatioiN was necessary ? The matter is perfectly simple and plain. I did not approve of the 999 years' leatc wben introduced, nor in 1896; nor do I believe in it now. ' •!■ was and am in favour of shorter leases, with periodical adjustment of. rents if men prefer leasehold, and I was and still am a believer in the right to obtain th* freehold. Let me quote my remarks in 1896 (Hansard, vol. 92, p. 360) : " I may point out that we had 'the freehold an,d ucrpetual lease (not lease- in perpetuity) years ago, and the two worked well together. Here were these two systems of freehold and perpetual lea.«e existing side by side, and the land of the colony was settled under them, and no doubtsatisfactoiily settled." I still believe the shorter leasa somewhat similar to the perpetual lease is fair for tho tenant and for the Qrown, *and at the came time I

still pin my faith to the hard-working settler having the right, if he thinks fit, to earn tho reward of his long hours, his hard work, his hardships, and many tiials by securing for himself and his children a freehold and secure home, and I cm certain euch an inducement is the best gpir possible t to men's energies, and results i-.i the greatest benefit to the State. '. s, It is delightful to have Mr. Olßegan in pgrccmeat with me, but he should bo quite sure we do agree before,, ho so writer, othtrvvi-e I may have .\to use those n;u:ghty words, " suppression veri." Ho civs he quite agrees with mo •" as to the breakdown "of tho land foe settlements' scheme." Some newspaper must have been playing havqa-with my iwords, or Mr. G'llcgnn has not,becn cafoful. I liaVo not raid the lafid-'-for settlements ccheme has broken down. It lifys been abused, aa I judged it would; but,; speak* ing generally, it has done good. v Whaw has made tho scheme more costtyMo th.6 State Ins been the action of £he late Ministry, no doubt for political -reasons, in interfering with the cutting-; up of estates by the owners, stopping the owner doing this and purchasing themselves. If 1 mistake not 4 this 4s what happened with one or more of the Assets Board properties. So Mr. Grßegan, much as I regret i(, we do not «^rco on the ."breakdown of the land foj;settlements' scheme."' — I am, etc.. «' l ' JAMES AI/LEN. Dunedin. 2nd Feb., 1907. fc.