The Evening Star FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1909.

Evening Star, Issue 14225, 26 November 1909, Page 4

The Evening Star FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1909.

The Government, when they decided to capitulate to the deThe Land mauds of the EreeQueStiori. holders, can hardly have expected the Leasehold party in the House to acquiesce in their own discomfiture and betrayal, or even to refrain from energetic opposition in respect to the new reactionary proposals. If the Land Bill is to be pressed on the attention of Parliament without delay an autumn session is inevitable. While disapproving anything in the shape of actual obstruction, wo are of opinion that it is incumbent upon those members who cherish the Liberal principles of Mr Seddon and Sir John M'Keiizie to contest the Bill clause by

clause, and to enable the people (whose inheritance is at stake) to realise clearly the nature of what is essentially a treasonable design. The appearance of tlio Bill itself, with the details of the Ministerial renouncement of popular rights, has not in any degree .modified our objections to the new policy. The specific restrictions and the endeavor to secure a portion of the unearned increment for the State do not constitute an adequate set-off against the wholesale concession of freehold facilities; while the more we think about the interference with the exclusive leasehold provisions of the Land for Settlements Act the more amazing does the tergiversation ( of the Government appear. How the Minister of Justice (to take one instance) can try to justify such a somersault, with any show of reason or consistency, we arc utterly at a loss to conceive. We have regarded Dr Findlay’s great speech on the Land Bill of 1907 as a Liberal manifesto that could hardly be bettered in point of logical cogency and zealous determination— and this is the end thereof! “In tho name of the Prophet -—figs! ’ We cannot deny that a majority of the present representatives favor a reactionary Land Policy, but at the time of the last General Election nobody supposed that the Government would wantonly discard the compromise of 1907 and become converts to tho *’asseyite doctrine of alienation. One point that must not bo lost sight of in connection with the situation is that it will be increasingly difficult to urge tho Labor party to continue thiir alliance with Liberalism, if Liberal principles regarding land aro to be contemptuously thrown aside. We are glad to hear that determined resistance to the Bill in the House and an educative campaign in the country are to bo promptly organised. If tho Government are inconvenienced by these hostile measures, there is no help for it; they have only themselves to blame. We have no hesitation in saying that the National Endowments aro in jeopardy. Mr Massey, emboldened by success, asks that they should bo given up to tho freehold grabber; and, having regard to what the Government are proposing to do with the Land for Settlements areas, what guarantee is there that this additional sacrifice may not be perpetrated ? The educative campaign should be vigorously pursued •in both islands, and a visit of Northern supporters of the leasehold to the South might well be arranged. AVe should like to see Messrs Hogan, I'isher, M‘Laron, and Poole, with other genuine Liberals, on a Dunedin platform ; while Messrs T. E. Taylor, Bussell, Arnold, Forbes, Davey, Laurenson, and Hanan would bo assured of a good hearing in the northern electorates. It is quite a mistake to suppose that the North is overwhelmingly freehold. Mr M'Nah found that out when he took the platform on this very question three years ago. But his old colleagues have forgotten Mr M Nab, and the famous “guns” have been finally deserted.