SOLDIER SETTLEMENT

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 7, 8 July 1922, Page 8

SOLDIER SETTLEMENT

HARSH TREATMENT ALLEGED

■ "I believe that a revaluation of soldiers' land should take place immediately," said Mr. Masters (member for Stratford) in the House of Representatives last evening, "because it is manifestly ur.fai. to those soldiers on the land at the present time if revaluation is delayed."

Mr. Masters draw attention to the purchase of the Balfour and Walker estates. Those estates were acquired in 1918 at a cost of £00,000, and yet not one section had been taken up up to the present time. That meant a loss of £3300 a year in interest for four years. There must, he remarked, be something wrong with the quality of the land or the price when not one returned soldier had taken up a section of that 4000 acres.

"The same thing applies to my own district," added Mr. Masters; "but I must say this: That so far as the prices were concerned, on the whole the prices were fairly right. I know that in some instances land that* was purchased for dairying purposes was never intended for such, and no practical soldier—no practical farmer—could ever make a success of some of the land selected for dairying purposes. - "

"I am, sorry the Minister of Lands is not here, because I want to level a certain amount of criticism—not at him, because I have found him sympathetic with soldiers generally—but against the administration of some of his officers. Then, too, the attitude of some, of. the land boards is unnecessarily harsh and severe. I have instances here where the land boards are taking the whole of the men's cheques—leaving them absolutely nothing to live on. Mr. Wilford: "100 per cent,?" ■' Mr. Masters: "Yes—loo per cent. 1 have here a. memorandum from the Commissioner of Crown Lands."

Mr. Massey: "Where is that?" Mr. Masters: "New Plymouth."

Mr. Massey: "Taranaki?" Mr. Masters: "Yes, Taranaki. I have an order here demanding from the soldier 100 per cent.—the whole of his earnings becoming due—and.it is added that the order cannot be revoked except by the Commissioner of Crown Lands himself. This is extremely hard, and ought to be looked into. The reply was: 'I will sign nothing like this—_» starve my wife, my family, and myself.' " Mr. Glenn: "You are a member. Why did not you report it?" Mr. Masters replied that if the hon. member was not so impulsive he might learn more about the matter and about what the speaker had done. "This soldier," continued Mr. Masters, "has been forced to go out on to the roads to ear,n daily bread for his family. That is a question that should be loked into." Mr. Masters then complained of the present system of the -purchase of stock from auctioneers. In some cases payments were not made for some five, six, or seven months.

The Hon;-Mr. Guthrie: "I do not know of a case like that."

Mr. Masters then gave particulars, of several cases, concluding by remarking that there was general complaint with' respect to the attitude of the Land Board in that connection.'