THE Grey River Argus. PUBLISHED DAILY. TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1899.

Grey River Argus, Volume LVII, Issue 10261, 18 April 1899, Page 2

THE Grey River Argus. PUBLISHED DAILY. TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1899.

The HpaJ McKenzie is generally admitted ho have heen hhe hesb and moat successful M|nister of Lands that: iSevr Zealand Ms 'eyerihaifc EVen his most Jjitter political opponents, and he has nxaiiy on fcheOppositipn side' of the House as well as in the country, -will do him the justice to adpiit'th^ lie/ has acted conscientiously throughout his career as Minister of Lands and has been actuated with a sincere desire to bring about a better state of affairs in the colony and to settle the people on the land. Though we do not believe in the principle of buying up large estates at fancy prices, to be subdivided into small holdings, when these estates have been made valuable mainly through the expenditure of public moneys on roads and railways in the vicinity, yet we are compelled to admit that the land policy of the present Government has been for the benefit of the masses, inasmuch as the colony would otherwise be as backward in this respect as when the late Mr Ballance acceded to power. Still there is room for much improvement iti the land laws. We have always contended that the- question of taxation, of land values, or the appropriation by the State of a portion or the whole of Jhe unearned moremaut; from

land, is the great sooial and political question of the day. It is surprising what strides this doctrine has made of late years. To a certain extent the Parliament of New Zealand has fallen in with the popular will as an outcome of' which we have the Rating on Unimproved Land Values Act, the provisions of which will nojdoubt be extended nextsession. There is very little fear that the taxation of: land values, which was the main plank in the Liberal platform when Mr Ballance took office, will be departed from. After realising for nine -years : the equity as j well as the expediency of such, a. measure the tax-payers are not likely to . allow a return to the old iniquitious system as . embodied in the Property Tax, . though the Opposition still favor it. The chances are that until such time as . Captain Russell's party changes its opinion on this as well as on their freehold platform they will have but little show of occupying the Treasury Benches. The question is now being, xaised wliether^ tha time is not ripe for a .further;.^extension of the principle "of taxing ;ian4>:^alues. ; The lgraduated,Wd <v t^x 'is 'not meeting the reguir^mfutsjof' tjjei Colonial^ Treasurer/ t) \Ym£^,ihe. cutting up of ■ jarge estates and^^ theiixemptioij-clauses under the Act the revenue has. '. materially decreased. The Act of 1890 exempted from taxation a.ll holdings.pf unimproved value of LSOO • or' less," and tne deduction for assessment purposes of LSOO from all holdiugs 1 of LISOO, or less in unimproved value' was provided for. This exemption was vided to prevent the -opposition of- smallfarm&ts arid lijnd owrie'ts" :i wh^ ( probably^ ndtclearly'distihguishinig -beWeetf a^tax; on land and a tax on land, values, /might Havfe beSil misled by'the toy raised that the farmingicomTnunity and the, small settlers were to be crushed by the -heterodox f^r{ip6BalsA " of ■ >faddisfe. ,? The exemptionsMshdwedrclearly at thai time that it was not the small landholder who mould "be taxed, but * r the large holders, ithe f monopolists, • andithe^speculator in ilandvvalues^ i: The {graduated -i»x has avorked admirably -up to-the:piesent, but its- efficiency ak a reveriue;producer seems latterly 'to have become somewhat impaired. Whereas in 1893 it produced -L285j00O r in 1898 it brought in only L 26.7,000. % ThisTisiaargely J flue • : to | the breaking up of_laige estates and|the closer settlement, but it is also alleged that bogus subdivisions of property varebeing made' with : the iobjeSfc « r 6f evading the tax. If this tar is still to be regarded as a pe^mahenb^ source!. of lirevianue and not merely /as: .a: means for preventing -the holding of land, -in large areas, the question of readjustment will have to be faced. In 1892 there were 91,501 landholders in the-colony -and: the total unimproved value , of their holdings was L54i427, 5 175;; Of the, total number of landholders- 45,192 owned land the aggregate unimproved; value -of which was L1, 716, 727* -the unimproved value of each holding ? being ; not, more thanHOO, and the average value L 38.; So we see that if there were no exemptions at all, the largest of s these 45* 192 holders would not pay more than 8s 4d per annum, and the average would be 3s 2d. But there is. more to follow. There were also £1,207 landholders,, -owning a total unimproved value of L6^904,633, an average of slightly over L 221 each. Adding these two classes of holders; together, we got 76,399, and the average unimproved value of their holdings was Lll3. So thaV the land- were i : , levied on without exemption,, they would each pay on the average ,9s i sd per, annum more. The intention as far. as we can gather from the publiQ. utterances of the different members of the House is to abolish the exemption?" uiider "the : Lahd Acts, which would^mesn- <an additional charge on the smaller settlers. Thi?; however, would be Immediately followed "by a reduction in the Customs, which would mean that the smaller .landowners would pay about the same*' Sis'' £hey< do at present;' and the bulk of lthe; general public ;woald have their, burdens- materially lightened.; Mr McKenzio lately stated that in his land legislation was only to be found a reflex of public opinion. With ;• an unusual degree of modesty he claimed no credit to himself. : At the same time it is just as well to bear in mind that but for the pertinacity of the hon. gentleman, backed up by /his convictions we would not be nearly so far -advanced in land reform as we are at present. While it is quite true that a minister can only effect reforms through the power;-- he .derives from the people, it is equally clear that a great deal depends .upon- the eflfrneshness,. the energy and the fighting ppwerojE the Minister. Supposing that it is. .granted that in all he has done, Mr McKenzie has been simply '>■ obeying the popular mandate there still remains to his ; credit the fact that h'e^de voted tp the work of land reHformali his knowledge, experience, and vigour, coupled with the zeal begotten of sincere conviction. Hence he succeeded where -a weak or only half-con-vinced man wo.uldhaye failed. Impress•'edi; even in his early r days, with a sense of the iniquity of absolute private ownership in land, and -especially of large in. dividual holdings* Mr McKenzie's labors as Minister have been directed to, securing the subdivision of large estates and the settlement. of the" people upon, the land, under conditions making for their success and independence and for the prosperity of tho colony as a whole. The Lantt Act, witly -its impyovad tanvrcesj the Land for Settlements Act, providing for the re-purchase by the State of large tracts of country ; and the Advances to Settlers Act, by which the small farmer was freed from monetary thraldom, are , monuments to Mr McKenzie's reforming j zeal ; but. still more gratifying monuments are seen in the growth (of settlement and of profitable agriculture, under the fostering care of the Departments of Lands and Agriculture.