THE LAND BILL.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIV, Issue 108, 2 November 1907, Page 2

THE LAND BILL.

f. DEBATE IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SEVERE CEITICISM. THE lIOX. J- D. OIIUONDS VIEWS "CONFISCATION." The debate on the Land Rill was rosullied in the Legislative Council yesterday. Perhaps most interest icntred in the speech of the llou. J- D.- Ormond, who bitterly condemned the Bill. ; The Hon. J. Ansley, continuing his speech, spoke of the fall in the rent values oftceilain grazing and pastoral runs, I and particularly quoted the case of Ihe I Morven Hills run, Central Otago. At one time this run carried 110,000 sheep; in 1905 the number was 42,000. The plain, fact was that the run was altogether too large. Holders of pastoral and grazing leases should have the right of renewal just the same as any other Crown tenant, and he could not understand why this right was not conceded in the Bill. In regard to the -66 years' lease for ordipary Crown lands, he did not think the renewal lease for the sscond period should be move than 33 years. In his opinion a lease of 21 years on improved Crown land settlement lands was quite long enough, A tenant who put equal to a third of the capital value of his holding in improving such land should be relieved from cropping restrictions, just the same as the tenant who paid off a third of the capital value of his holding. He contended that residence should be insisted on. At Opotiki some time back for 25 rural sections there were 1601 applicants. Did anyone suppose these were, all bona fide appli- j cants? Why, one highly respected land ! commissioner had informed him that j fully 80 per cent, of all applications were bogus. They had no intention of residing on the land. If residence were in- j sisted on, and applicants were obliged j to undergo an examination before a bal- ; lot took place, it would do away with dummyism and remove many existing difficulties. STRONG CRITICISM. The Hon. J. D. Qrmond said he did not propose to go into the details of the Bill. He desired to say something about j the speech delivered by Hie AttorneyGeneral. He (Mr. Ormond) objected to the stat?ment that the history of the land legislation of this country "was largely one of failure and intrigue." The man who established liberalism in this country, Sir George Grey, was condemned. (Dr. Findlay : I made no distinction as to Governments.) It was under Sir George Grey's regulations that most of the land had been disposed of. Dr. 'Findlay: Yes, sold tho Cheviot Estate at 10s per acie! The Hon. Mr. Ormond : The hon. gentleman has ' no conception of the conditions ruling there. He spoke of what had be-en done under provincialism, and declared that Dr. Findlay's reference to the '"devious history, intrigue, and manoeuvring of (be past" was unwairanted I and absolutely incorrect. He challenged any on« to produce an instance in the ! fifty years' political history preceding the advent of the Liberal Government in 1892 that would compare with the uttc-r-jy -ruinous consequences of the lease-in-r>;rpctuily. He also condemned tho ballot and the- -gross ijambling it had iostered.' So far as the Bill itself was concerned he entirely d-isogreerl with it in j many respects. Last year's Bill was j n land nationalising Bill. The Evening Post had gloried in the triumph of land nationalisation «md the downfall of tho freehold. Later on, however, Ministers were loudly declaring that they were not land nationalises, and great dismay was j expp?ssed in tho Kvening Post at tho ' back-down of the Government. He was a freeholder, and he wanted to see freeholders in this country. '•CONFISCATION.'' Last ye<n's confiscation pioposals werenot dtiite so had as this year's, lie was aware the Bill was a popular measuie — it affected only a limited number of people. Was it necessary to enaco these conliscatory clauses at this stags? The great majority of people who would be affected by the Bill weie tho pioneers who had given up their lives in making homes which tlv?y hoped to hand down to their children. Ihey had succeeded because* they piactised the utmost selfdenial, and in many case 3 had lived like dogs to achieve success. There were pninds of depression, ■and ono out of every thro* went uih'ov. . T)r. iPindl.iy : Tho bit; ian'lownris aio not ;'U fef tiers. Tbr-o \v-mo nioinors in other callings ; my father w;u a. pioneer. Mr. Ofmnnd: The r^tl nionceis mpic those who went nut into the back conntry. He c-onckmned tho graduated tax, and Mid that, the millions of acies of Maori lands at present lying idle tlsoiild hue been .settled Ix'foio oonftscatory clauses weie made to apply to tl>- eaily settleis Nov.- ,-t, Native Land Bill had boon introduced, and it appeared to hinv to bo an impracticable; measure. Much as he logrctted the "taikoa policy"' it would be infinitely better to leave the Bill ovpt till ne.\t session rather than to attempt to put a wniknhl© measures on the stutulo-book in the time at Parliament's disposal. The early s-ettlois mii^ht have been spared confiscation while such lareo ureas of hind wore lying waste. Ho regretted that the freehold had been attacked If the country settlers come together ns they should there would be a groat dift'eionee in the total of their representation >n the popular Chamber after the. next election. There would be a. demand iv the next Parliament for o.r p. for land for settlements, and if tho endowments were standing in the w.iy of settlement they would be sold. OTHER .SPEAKERS. The Hon. George Jones said no GoI vernment had done so ninth for tho Lniner as tin,- lib.-ral government. As for lh<> administration of ihi- paH ho spoke gonoraliv of tho grid-iromiii; m | Cam-rbuiy. In those days tho administrator:, hiu\ a kpon app<cci.itiou for th t > not-ds of th.'ir friend:.. The provincial governments \\i-;v poor, but Ihov were not hon.-hf. Ho d. m,xl th.it .ih those, who Jieiv. held Lugi- ;n overlies in JNVw Zealand had <onu; by ih.'in in an home.l way. Own<Mt> of large states wero not. going to have their l.mds .>\-. propruiti'd— th-vy would gft v fair prior, .u'ld a. handsonic price. Air. Ormond was simply I'lideavouimi; to inako out (Ik* best ca.v pot.^iblc for liimsolf and his rl.-is... Wliul did the colony loso by thf leisc-in-porpetiiily? Aa a imiltei 1 of tact th'^ tfcl.ik'S lal nndi-r this t >nur* would )ia\ • been paid for in 62 years. In any <.i.se tho l.i.p. tenure was not uijuiioiis to the.iolony. Land {igaiegution would have becu impossible iindM' it <tnd it should hv leiiicuib'ja'od thai it was not Sir John M.Kk^njiic's polu-y. It wa-s propounded by Mr. RolL-sl^n ten years previously. 'He spoko. "of the shady manner in which largo tract* of land had been acquired from the natives in tho early days. There had been more heroism displayed by thy ln:iss<?a in New Zealand than any of the groat lauded proprietors could lay claim ,to. lie hoped tho Government would do not only what was, just lo th- lyud proprietor, but lo tho people oi Npw I Zealand. The Government w.is t.iliil. d to the gratitude of the' puoplo oi Aew i Zealand for what it had dons,. I

Th-> Hon. J. Mm shall said the Bill would havo his hoaity support. Tho Hor.. H. Baldey described jh<> BUI ns a innsterpiecp.. j Thp. Hon. W. Btedhan said he would heartily support the Bill. The lion. C. M. Luke approved the Bill. laid emphasis on the fact that the Government had jievor paid anything below market valuo for lands acquired by it. So long as this was so the largo land owners had nothing ti> complain about (a member : They are totting mow). Tlu- Bill would "meet Hie present and future ncecU of the country. At 9.20 p.m. the debate was adjourned on the motion of the Hon. J. Bigg.