LAND AGGREGATION.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 3997, 30 July 1913, Page 5

LAND AGGREGATION.

COMMISSIONERS’ REPORT. NO CLARINC CASES, MORE STRINGENT LAW. [BY TELEGSiPK—PiSLIAiIEXTAEY CORRESPONDENT! WELLINGTON. July 29. The report of Mr E. F. Hawthorneon the alleged cases of land aggregation was laid on the table of _ the House to-day by the Prime Minister. Mr Hawthorne, in dealing with the question "Has there been aggregation or not?"' says the term aggregation is, of course, both vague and elastic, but allowing for this. I think it mflv fairly be said that the case of th? Bindings in the Oolnuiga and Mt. Cerberus districts is a real case of Land aggregation. The Messrs W. A. and R JR. Burling have since the year ISS3 acquired 16.190 acres of freehold land and 1475 acres of leasehold. If "aggregation" means the_ acquisition of a greater area than is necessarv for the maintenance of the purchaser and his family, then the Burlings’ case is doubtless one of aggregation. although it must be pointed out that there is nothing in the information supplied by the Commissioner of Crown lands to indicate the class or quality of the laud in question. Out of this 16.190 acres _ the area purchased by the Bindings direct from the Crown amounts to only SOS acres, and no less than 12,562 acres were alienated from the Crown for cash prior to ISSS. It is therefore absurd to charge either the present Government or the Department with maladministration. The case of the Wilsons (Hautapu, etc.) cannot. I think, be placed in the same category as that of the Burling.?, There are eight separate owners, who hold altogether an area of 665 S acres, made up of 427 2 acres freehold aud23b6 acres leasehold. litis gives an average of 532 acres for each holder. T\ hether or not this should be regarded as a case of aggregation largely depends. it seems to me, on the relationship. ages, etc., of the various persons. and on these points I have no information. The Gorringes (Hautapu district) hold a total area of 3932 acres amongst four persons (average 953 acres). 3252 acres being freehold and 6SO leasehold. This cannot, I think, be considered a very glaring case of aggregation, although there is, of course, nothing to prevent it developing into such unless more stringent legislation is passed. The eases of the Stuckeys (Hautapu) and the Masons (Hautapu) donot call for any special remark, event the editor of‘the “Manga v tier" admitting that the ai gregating were only sufficiently to provide a comfortable living that the holders were residing on a. working the laud in a bona fide manner. In regard to the question “Is the aggregation Tithe result of the passing of the Land Laws Amendment Act, 1912?” Mr Hawthorne says: “The answer to this is, certainly not. AH the purchases of the Bindings were made between June ISS3 and May, 1912. The Wilsons’ acquisitions range from 1901 to 1911. and the Gorringes’ from 1907 to 1910. Stuckey’s and Mason’s acquisitions wore also all prior to the passing of the 1912 Act.” As to the area held by the Gorringe family, Mr Hawthorne says. “I understand from Mr Broderick that 3932 acres is the actual area held by the Gorringes as freehold, as revealed hy a careful search of the Land Registry Office.”