The Star. SATURDAY, JANUARY 15, 1881. THE PARIHAKA LAND SALE.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume I, Issue 80, 15 January 1881, Page 2

The Star. SATURDAY, JANUARY 15, 1881. THE PARIHAKA LAND SALE.

The announcement of the sale of 5000 acres of land near Parihaka, following as it does close upon the heels of Mr. Bryce's retirement, may probably be regarded as a manifesto on the part of the Government that they are resolved to brave Te Whiti's resentment, and to proceed with the settlement of the land. They have determined upon the " suaviter in modo," but coupled with the " fortiter in re." The potato has been cooked, and shall be eaten. The reserved prices put upon the land appear to be somewhat high, but as there is clearly a risk of the sale being somewhat slack, on account of the close proximity of bad, if not dangerous, neighbors, the Government must either fix the prices high or else run the chance of a considerable loss of revenue. It would not matter much if a considerable proportion of the land now offered were not sold immediately, proyided that those would-be settlers, who are on the look-out for land, and who are also willing to run the risk attached to settlement near Parihaka, are allowed the opportunity of having what they require at a fair value. At most of the recent land sales a considerable proportion of the land has been bought by speculators, and the cash at their command enabled them to make a handsome profit on the investment. It is extremely doubtful whether speculators will care to risk much money near Parihaka, and consequently the bona fide settlers may hope to have the field pretty nearly to themselves.

It is an open secret that at the last sale of Waimate land the practice of making false declarations, in order to obtain a number of chances in the lottery, for small farm allotments near Manaia at the upset price, was largely indulged in. It is also well known that many of the buyers at auction of land on deferred payments held out strong inducements to other applicants not to bid against them. Now, the 61st section of the Land Act plainly declares, first, that a would-be selector is disqualified, " who, at the time of making his application, has made any arrangement or agreement with any other person to acquire, by purchase or otherwise, the allotment, in respect of which his application is made, or which he has bought at auction, or any part thereof, or the applicant's interest therein." The sworn declaration, made by every selector, is to the effect that none of the foregoing conditions have been violated, and the Act provides that, in the event of any of the sworn statements being false, all rights to the land, all money paid, and all improvements made by the selector shall be forfeited. Clauses 50, 51, and 52 provide against extortion, and set forth that any person offering to pay, or accept money to abstain from bidding, may be imprisoned for any term not exceeding 12 months, or fined any sum not exceeding £200 ; if money is actually received, either party may be imprisoned for two years, or fined £500. The colonial, or we might even say the national, conscience is so tough, that the average citizen thinks bimselt perfectly justified in " swindling the Government as much as ever he safely can." He regards the upset price as a limit which ought not to be exceeded, or if more has to be paid to secure the land, he greatly prefers to bargain with a rival bidder and to buy him off as cheaply as possible, to bidding against him at public auction. Very few of those who enter upon this broad and easy way of " swindling the Government " ever dream that they are taking the first step towards committing, or leading a friend to commit, a solemn act of wilful perjury. Still less do they perceive, when they enter a lot of dummy Mends in the lottery,' that practically they are showing the way to a number of speculators, who by taking up a large number of tickets in the same lottery, must reduce the chance of the honest selectors almost to zero. The abuses which have arisen are, however, so plain, that once public attention has been directed to them, the honesty and good sense of a majority of the offenders will induce them to refrain from such questionable practices.

The announcement of this sale at Parihaka induced us once more to refer to the Land Act of 1877, and although we are perfectly well aware that the interpretation of the clause is open to question, we are of opinion that a provision exists, under which all the successful speculative offenders may bs fitly punished. Clause

65 provides that when a selector shall desire to assign his interest in his laud, after tlmty days' public notice of ins intention to do so has been given, •• if the Board shall think fit to accept the person proposed as transferee," it shall allow the transfer. The first condition grants an absolute discretionary power to the Land Board (in this district the Board is represented by the West Coast Land Commissioner), who may surely decline to entertain or deal with any transfer, unless the original selector shall have given substantial evidence that he selected the land in accordance with the terms of his sworn declaration and of the clauses already quoted. The whole spirit and intention of the Act in relation to deferred payment land is intended to insure both the improvement and the actual occupation of the land. Until such time as a selector had given evidence of good faith, by six or twelve months' personal residence on his land, the Commissioner would be only fulfilling the duties of his trust by refusing all applications for transfers. It is known that many of the restricting clauses of the Act were evaded, and that a lot of swindling was carried on under the very nose of the Commissioner. If the residential clauses are strictly enforced, and no ti'ansfers allowed for a year, there will either be a number of speculative persons with elastic consciences, and of every conceivable calling, suddenly and unexpectedly converted into honest amateur farmers and "farmeresses," or the Government will become the fortunate possessor of a quantity of forfeited deposit money, in addition to the reversion of a number of sections of land, plus a substantial increment of value due to the surrounding settlement. In order to avoid future trouble, the Commissioner would do well to announce before the next sale of land at Parihaka, that he would not allow a single transfer until after the residential clauses had been substantially complied with.

Since the above was in type, we have received a copy of the Taranaki Herald of the 13th, containing a long letter on this subject, and taking up much the same line of argument ; the writer signs himself "E. C. R.," Hawera. Any one might easily suppose that we were largely indebted to him for much of the above article ; whereas, strange to say, neither writer could possibly have known the opinions of the other on this subject.