HON. J. CARROLL HECKLED.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVI, Issue 111, 6 November 1908, Page 3

HON. J. CARROLL HECKLED.

LAND ADMINISTRATION. THE NATIVE QUESTION. [BY TEL2GEAPK — PRESb* ASSOCIATION.] GISBORNE, This Day. The Hon. James Carroll, Minister of Native Affairs, as a candidate for the Gisborne electorate, delivered a political address in the theatre last evening. The building was crowded to the doors. The Minister icceived an attentive hearing, excepting when tke small grazing runs question was under consideration, when he was subjected to considerable heckling. The bases of the charges made in this connection were :—: — 1. That the Government had broken faith with grazing runs lessees by refusing to grant them a renewal of their leases. 2. That Mr. Carroll had used his personal influence to secure a renewal leasa for a prominent Government supporter and a personal friend, who had got his run back in spite of the recommendation of the Crown Lands Ranger, adopted by the Land Board, that the run was suitable for subdivision. Mr Carroll's reply to the first contention was that the alleged right of renewal was « matter of Jaw. In regard to the second, he stated that all he had done was to send on Mr. Hall's complaint against the proposal that his run should be cut up to the Minister of Lands, without any comment of his own. A clerical error, he states, was responsible for a schedule sent by the board to the Minister^ making it appear that the run was unsuitable for subdivision, whereas the board's report had been to an opposite effect. The Minister o f Lands had acted on this wrongful information, hence the trouble. Mr. Carroll's explanation was not re ceived with general satisfaction, and constant interruptions ensued, the subject occupying three-quarters of an hour. In his nJain speech Mr. Carroll said j that he stood as one definitely identified with the party in power, which had) held office at the wjll of the people during th 6 past seventeen years. He dealt with the record of that party in regard to the land laws, labour legislation, advances to settlers, humanitarian legislation, etc. He then proceeded to defend the administration of the Native Land Department, claiming that magnificent work had been done during the last six or seven years. He stated that in that period no less than 1,649,320 acres had been made available for settlement. That these had been properly settled would be recognised when it was mentioned that the different holdings ranged from 500 and bOO acres. These leases and sales were arranged under the supervision of boards, which ensured that justice was done to the natives. He justified the work ot the Native Land Commission which had already reported on 1,295,268 acres. Of this 643,574 acres were reserved for the Maori own-

ers and 651,694 acres were recommended for general, that is European, settlement. It had been stated that they were spoon-feoding the Maoris, but he would ask, would any European community allow half of its lands to be taken from it and handed to others ? He considered that in allowing their lands to be thiiß disposed of the Maoris had been distinctly magnanimous. He also controverted the statement that Maori children had any favouritism shown them in educational matters. Replying to an opponent's charges that of 37,000 acres leased by the local board 24,000 had gone to persons representing one family, the Minister said that 91,240 ar es had been passed by the board and distributed in 213 leases. It was true that 24,000 acres had gone apparently to one family, but all the individuals had been able to sign the necessary declaration as to being bona fide settlers. Mr. Carroll specially justified the endowment feature of the Government land policy, and detailed the now legislation of the Government in regard to Labour matters. He appealed to both workers and employers to give a fair trial to the new Act, which, ho felt sure, was an improvement upon the old one, and would make for industrial poacc. At the conclusion of his address Mr. W. L. Eees moved a vote of thanks and confidence. The mover failed to get a hearing for his complimentary reI marks, and the motion, when put to the meeting, received a mixed reception of hostility and approval. It was impossible to say whether opponents or supnoTtera of tht motion were in the majority, but the mayor, who was in the chair, declared it carried.