A STONEWALL

Greymouth Evening Star, 11 October 1913, Page 5

A STONEWALL

GOVERNMENT LAND POLICY.

BILL UNDER DISCUSSION

UY TELEGRAPH —PEE PRESS ASSOCIATION-

WELLINGTON, October 10.

When the House resumed at 7.50 p.m. consideration on the Land Bill in coirlmiltec was continued. , *

On Clause 18 providing that a la ltd board may dispense with personal residence on land, Mr G. W. Russell (Avoh) contended that the clause would promote a system of dummyism. There were hundreds of farm labourers who had one or two hundred pounds and who desired to get on the land and farm it. Otherwise men in towns earning-two or three hundred a year would be able to secure a section ,and after putting a manager in, would sell out without having put foot on the section.

Mr E. Newman (Rangitikej) argued that Mr Russell assumed that men who would avail themselves of the clause were single men, whereas it would be found that thrifty tradespeople and artisans would be the people who would .benefit by putting their sons on the land. His only objection to the clause was that he considered the provision specifying double improvement was too severe. . The Prime Minister : accepted an amendment proposed by M r R. McGallunl (Wairau) providing that where the income of a man and his wife exceeded £3OO a year the clause of the Bill exempting residence shall not apply. Mr W. D. S. MacDonald (Bay .of Plenty) held that the inclusion of Clause 18 in the Bill would bo a dangerous course to adopt. ; v Mr H. Polland (Ohinemuri) also objected to the clause, contending that the Minister after hearing the adverse criticism of members should withdraw ,it. If it were allowed to pass it would mean an increase of dummyism. Hon. W. F. Masspy explained that in most cases the substitute would bo the lessee’s son. .He implored the House to vote on the question, and be done with it.

Mr G. J. Anderson (Mataura) moved an amendment giving preference to a man who intended to reside oil the landMr Massey said that the effect would be to kill the clause. He could nut accept it. i- ' i.. The House divided on the amendment which was defeated by 33 votes to 27.

At 11.30 a. division was 'taken ,on Clause 18, and resulted as follows: For 33, against 28. A long discussion ensued on the clause permitting licensees of areas in the-Hau-raki mining districts to acquire the fee, simple, as it was alleged that it might be injurious to the mining rights.

SENSATIONAL ALLEGATIONS. A STONEWALL SET UP. THE HAURAKI LANDS. WELLINGTON, This Day. After the telegraph closed, the clause providing for the conversion of the Hauraki leases to the freehold was further debated. The Opposition took strong exception; to the suggested provision, and alleged that a member of the House owned 20,000 acres of Hauraki land. . Mr Herries stated that the Government had no knowledge, of the substance of the allegation. Mr Poland stated that he owned 450 acres of the Hauraki lease, but if the clause passed lie would not avail himself of the freehold, so the statements did not apply to him. He would vote against the clause, and moved an additional provision that compensation on resumption should not exceed the price paid by the owner to the Crown. The Minister could not accept the suggestion. : ■ Mr T. W. Rhodes said he owned about 1000 acres, which he had got at a ballot some years ago. He had beer notified he was not to do anything until it was reported on by the Crown Lauds Ranger and Warden. He would be.pleased to assist any prospector on the land, but he thought there was no gold there. All he had done was to propose a sub-clause making it easier for a miner to get on the land. He had nothing to hide in the matter. Mr McCallum declared that tli© purport of the clause was now bared in all its effrontery. He had heard it on. the best authoiity that a member concerned had 20,000 acres. Mr Massey said that he had accepted the clause after receiving a deputation from the Thames district. Mr Rhodes had given him the. clause. At 4.50 a.m. Sir Joseph Ward accepted Mr Massev’s offer to postpone the clause conditionally upon Mr Massey reporting progress. . This the Prime Minister refused. The Opposition thereupon refused to pass the clause, and protested at driving tactics being reverted to. At 8 a.m. the House adjourned for breakfast. After breakfast, the Opposition endeavoured to induce the Premier to adjourn, but Mr Massey insisted on proceeding. At 10.30, Sir Joseph Ward suggested nutting through the clauses to 31 inclusive, executing 26, which the Opposition would not pass. Mr Massey would not agree to this. The nebulous discussion was therefore continued, and was proceeding at 1 p.m.

ENDOWMENT LANDS. EXCHANGE PROPOSAL DELETED. /Bv Telegraph— *n.*clal to the Star.) WELLINGTON, This Day. The clause in the Land Bill empowering an exchange of national endowment land for ordinary Crown land was withdrawn by the Prime Minister tins morning, when he recognised the reasonableness of the criticism from the Opposition following up Sir Joseph Ward’s suggestion that clause 23 be deleted. Mr Witty pointed out how unfairly ; it would operate. Any difference/ in the. price of exchanged lands was to be paid under the provisions of the clause cither to the laud fur settlements account nr,the national endowment account. Assuming that lands Wore unequal in value, to tip; extent of £25.000. the effect, of an ex ; change might be, if national endowment areas were .greater in value, to deplete, the fund available for.education and pen--sions by that amount, whilst the reverse position would .similarly prejudice, the land for settlements fund used for land purchases. ’• ‘ ’ , l !