The Lyttelton Times. October 18, 1851.

Lyttelton Times, Volume I, Issue 41, 18 October 1851, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. October 18, 1851.

The Wellington Independent is desirous of raising a discussion upon the whole question of the price of land in the colony. The article is well worth perusal, we have therefore printed it on another page. suppose the Lyttelton Times is now the only newspaper in New Zealand which believes in the high price theory. But we do believe in it; and whether our opinions be right or wrong, we think we shall do good service to the cause of New Zealand colonization, by accepting- the challenge thus published, to enter upon, this discussion. The question indeed must and will be discussed. Before long the colonists will have to deal with it themselves, and it is better that they should have fully considered it in all its bearings. If, however, such a discussion is to be of any real service, it must be carried on in a calm and friendly spirit; we must drop the tone of political strife, and deal with the question simply as an economical one. " What ought to be the price of our waste lands ?" is a question which will be better answered by quiet arguments than by strong adjectives.

By advocating the high price theory, we do not mean 11. an acre, or 3/. an acre, or any other talismanic price, we mean what Mr. Wak'efield has emphatically called the " -sufficient price," a price which can only be ascertained by actual experiment, and which it is the business of rthe-colonistsr ineach colony, to determine for themselves. Now the argument of the Wellington In-

dependent may be condensed and classed as follows : — The high price ought to be given up,— ; First, because the colonists are almost universally opposed to it, and the colonists jought to have the disposal of their own waste lands. Secondly, because it has proved a failure both in Australia, and in New Zealand. Thirdly, because it is wrong in theory. As to the first of these positions, we agree that tfne management of the waste lands of the colonies ought to be entrusted entirely to the colonists themselves. These lands are originally the property of the British nation, held in trust by the Crown for the benefit of the people. The mother country is therefore justified, when a new colony is founded, in taking care that the inheritance of her population shall not be heedlessly squandered amongst a few. It is her duty to take care that a whole tract of country shall not become locked up in hands which can make no use of it. Therefore it is essential, at the founding of a settlement, that gome law or rule for the partition of land amongst the colonists shall be determined on. But as soon as the colony is once firmly founded; it becomes the interest of the new community to have the waste lands profitably occupied. The colonists, as soon as they are fairly settled, and have time to look around them, become the best judges of how the land can be best disposed of to the advantage of the colony, and therefore of the mother country also. They are most competent to decide upon what will be really the " sufficient price." Therefore we think that the disposal of the waste lands is one of those matters which ought to be left to the Colonial Legislatures, and to them alone. So far we agree with the Wellington Independent. We admit, too, that many, if not most of the colonists, are opposed to the high price theory. They are opposed to it for the reason which we have put down as the second of our antagonist's arguments, that they think it has been tried, and has failed. Let it be clearly understood, we are jnot arguing that the high price ought to be "kept up by Government, Company, or Association at home in the face of the wishes of the colonists. We would simply persuade our fellow-colonists that it is for their own interests that the high price should be maintained by themselves, and abide the result. Now is it the case that the high price theory has been tried and failed? Is it true that the Wakefield system has ever been fairly tried at all ? Because if it has not been fairly tried, no argument can be drawn from the facts which have resulted from its partial trial. Now the Wellington Settlers will not one of them say that they reaped the •benefit of the price of land at Wellington. They know that the difficulties which they have so manfully overcome were wholly irrespective of the price of the land. The system of a high price of land will never be fairly tried, until the whole of the proceeds of the sale shall, every farthing of it, be placed at the disposal of the colonists, to be expended on works of public importance. Bntil that is done, we object to any argument being drawn from the effects of the price of land having been raised in the Colonies. The argument which has been quoted from the Times, deduced from the Land sales in Ijl'ew South Wales, is conspicuously unfair. Ijess money, it is said, was raised under trie 1/. an acre system, than under the 5/. an acre system, therefore the 1/. an acre system is the worst. The fact, however, is, that the change took place in 1843; but the sum raised by the sale of land had already fallen from 316,626/. in 1840, to 90,387/. in 1841, and to 14,574/. in 1842 ; shewing that the diminution was attributa-

ble to other causes than the alteration of the price of the land. From the argument as to facts we turn to the last position : —the theory is wrong in principle. The Wellington Independent argues thus : " Imagine two men, each with a capital of 5001., and each a purchaser of 100 acres, but that one pays 100 Z. for his land, and the other 3001. the " former will have 4<oo/., and the latter only 200?. with which to cultivate his land. Can there be any question, as to which of these parties is placed in the most favorable position, both to ensure his own success, and the prosperity of the community to which he belongs ?" To this we reply, imagine two men each possessing 100 acres of land, the one with a capital of 400/. in a country where there is no survey, no means of communication, no labour ; where, for the want of the first, a long time must elapse, and much of his capital be wasted, before he could occupy his land at all; for the want of the second, he could not get his goods on to his land when chosen, or his produce to market when grown ; for the want of the third, he could not till his land at all. The other with a capital of 2001. in a country where there were surveys, means of communication, and labour ? " Can there be any question as to which of these parties is placed in the most favorable position, &c. ?" Surely the matter is thus brought to a simple issue. There are certain things in a colony which are absolutely necessary for its formation. How can you get them ? They are things which can be got much more cheaply and readily if the whole community will combine to get them, than in any other way. For example, every man who has land, wants labour in proportion to the quantity of land he possesses, then all*should subscribe to import labour in the-, same proportion. A similar argument applies to other things of common importance. It is apparent that there must be some limit to this,. ;-that the problem to be solved is, how much of a settler's capital had/he better subscribe for public matters, and how much retain for private expences, so that the whole capital may produce the largest return possible. That is exactly the problem which is involved in the fixing of the " sufficient price" and which the colonists of New Zealand will some day have to determine for themselves. Arguing upon these principles we hope to be able to shew that the price of land in Canterbury has not yet exceeded the " sufficient price." But this we must keep for a subsequent opportunity.

We are glad to notice the formation, at Lvttelton, of a Company for the insurance of vessels belonging to our numerous coasting' fleet, and of their cargoes. The risk continually attendant upon the shipment of goods for other parts of the settlement, and more especially for the plains, has hitherto been a serious obstacle, peculiarly disheartening, because meeting the settler at the very commencement of his career. While as a speculation, therefore, we believe the proposed Marine Insurance Coinpauy will be eminently successful, it will tend to relieve the settlement of one of the hindrances to its prosperous growth. To be able to ensure the reimbursement of losses by fire and water, and to secure a pecuniary reversion to relatives on decease, are no mean advantages, and these we now happily posssss.

We have been requested to attract public attention to the Licensing- Amendment Ordinance, recently passed by the'^Legislative Council, by which any person not duly licensed who " shall permit to be removed from his premises for the purposes of sale, any quantity less than two gallons of liquor at any one time." is subject to a penalty of Fifty Pounds. This will put a stop to a custom, at present existing- amongst the Shopkeepers in this town, of selling two or more gallons of liquor, and alloying it to be removed in bottles from time to time as it is wanted.

We have examined in the past week a portion of peat, an extensive bed of which exists on the banks of the river Heathcote. It appears likely to answer well as fuel, if used upon a sub-stra-tum of wood of coal, and to prevent much of the waste caused by the quickness with which our fire-wood burns away.

The following Correspondence hag passed between the Local Government and Mr. Godley with reference to the Memorial on the subject of appointing a Harbour-Master, and laying down moorings in this harbour :— Lyttelton, September, 1851. Sib, —I have the honor to forward to you a memorial on the subject of appointing a Harbour Master, and laying down moorings. I have not been able to arrive at any satisfactory estimate of the expence of laying down moorings for six vessels in this harbour, there being no one here who has had any experience in a similar case. I beg leave to lay before his Excellency, for his consideration, the following suggestions with respect to this matter. If his Excellency will be pleased to direct a letter to be. written, to me, to the effect that he will cause such a sum as he may think fit to specify to be placed on the next estimates for the purpose of providing moorings for this port, I will write to the Canterbury Association, recommending them to send out proper moorings from England, and to defray, out of the Land Fund, whatever expence (if any) may be incurred over and above the sum proposed to be appropriated by the Colonial Government for that purpose. I think by the plan suggested above, we should obtain the moorings cheaper and better than by sending for them to Sydney. I have the honor to be, Sir, Your obedient Servant, (Signed) John Robert Godley, Agent Canterbury Association. The Hon. the Colonial Secretary.

Colonial Secretary's Office, Wellington, Sept. 30, 1851. Sir, —I am directed by His Excellency the Governor to acknowledge the receipt of the memorial signed by yourself and other gentlemen on the subject of appointing a harbourmaster, and laying down moorings in the harbour at Port Victoria, and to return you the following reply on the several points raised in it. Firstly, His Excellency observes that, when he was made acquainted with the opinion of the memorialists, that it was requisite that an officer combining the duties of harbour-master and pilot should be appointed, he at once directed the resident magistrate to appoint such an officer, and he presumes that their request has already been to this extent complied with. Further, His Excellency thinks it right to remind you, as your name stands at the head of the memorial, that had he followed the dictates of his own judgment alone, he would have made such an appointment the moment the settlement was established, but that you, as the agent of the Canterbury Association, expressed yourself so strongly against the propriety or necessity of so doing, that the Government, from the peculiarly delicate position in which it was placed in reference to that Association, hesitated to oppose the wishes so decidedly stated of their agent upon this subject. With regard to the other points mooted by the memorialists, namely,—that His Excellency will be pleased to cause such steps to be taken with as little delay as possible as may tend to avert a recurrence of the disasters which have occurred to the shipping at Port Lyttekon,— I am instructed to add, that His Excellency regrets that it is not in the power of the Local Government to do this. It would, in such n case of emergency, have immediately made the requisite advances from the land fund of tho district, or on its security, to provide for ihe safety of vessels in the coasting-trade. At present it is not in His Excellency's power to do more than to undertake that when the Local Provincial Legislature is constituted at CanU-r----bury, he will, as far as depends upon himself, assent to any measure for devoting any portion of the surplus revenue of the Province to the provision of moorings at Lyttelton. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient servant, Alfred Domhtx, Colonial Secretary. John Robert Godlet, Esq , Agont of the Canterbury Association.

and prosecuted at the public expense 72S in-' stead of 1643. In regard to the expense of the public in subscriptions to charitable institutions, it appears that in ISSO there were 417 iiimates of the Benevolent Asylum of Sydney, of whom 327 adults were known to have arrived under sentence of transportation, and only 90 of other classes. A curious fact may also be noticed with regard to the prevalence of insanity among the convict class, involving as it does another branch of public expenditure in the maintenance of lunatic asylums. In 1546 the proportion of lunatics in New South Wales among the free population, was as one to every one thousand seven hundred and eighty persons; among those originally convicts, as one in every four hundred and fifty. Such facts as these, taken almost at random, may serve in some measure to shew the tendency of the present system of transportation, not only as deteriorating the general tone of society, but as adding greatly to the public burdens. The resolution is as follows : 2nd, —That although, as it is to be hoped and believed, there is no immediate danger of any attempt to send British convicts direct to New Zealand, nevertheless, from the frequent and easy communication existing between the various Australasian colonies, the welfare of each is deeply involved in a question -which affects the moral character of any one among its neighbours. Mr. Templar seconded this resolution, remarking that the difficulties in the way of getting rid of convict transportation were greatly increased by the want of unity among the Australian settlers. Those at Swan River declared themselves favourable to the system. They had seen what steady, proper resistance would accomplish in the instance of the Cape, Government might being obliged to succumb to the right; as regarded transportation, there was little doubt that the Swan River Settlement was one of the points where Government would continue to maintain it. The resolution was unanimously carried. Me. E. J. Wakefield, in rising to move the third resolution, said—that as a proof of the danger of convict transportion being extended at any time to New Zealand, he could state that he had heard, that Sir George Grey a short time since offered to send convicts at any time to the settlement of Otago, if the inhabitants should be desirous of that kind of labour. He might also state that expiree convicts had already found their way into this settlement; in a circuit which he had lately made as a member of the Fire Committee, lie had discovered a house in which several were living, who had come in by one of the vessels from Van Dieman's Land. From these facts he thought the meeting would cordially agree with the resolution he had to propose, which was to 4 the following effect: — 3rd.—That this meeting desires especially to express its heartfelt sympathy with the people of Van Dieman's Land, whose country, in spite of their constant and earnest complaints, as well as of the solemn engagement of the British Crown, conveyed through the Secretary of State, continues to be made a receptacle for the criminal population of the British islands. Mr. Bowen seconded this resolution, which was unanimously curried. Mr. 0. W. Bishop proposed the fourth resolution, remarking that he thought it of the highest importance. He had taken his stand herewith his wife and family, and if his fellow colonists desired as he did to keep at a distance these immoral influences which attended the convict system, they would urge their utmost to prevent its continuance. The resolution was : 4th.—That in order to give effect to the views expressed in the foregoing resolutions, this meeting desires to urge upon the inhabitants of Canterbury the duty of joining the Australasian League, &c, and that a Committee be appointed for the purpose of procuring the adhesion of members, and otherwise promoting the objects of the League. Mr. Doeson, commenting upon the difference between a free colony and a penal settlement, seconded the resolution, which was put to the meeting and carried. The following gentlemen were appointed to act as a Committee for the purpose of organizing a branch of the Australian League in this settlement. Messrs. John Robert Goclley, William G. Brittan, Henry J. Tailored, J. C. Watts Itussell, E. J. Wake field, Edward Templar, Charles W, Bishop, Edward Dobson, Francin Knowles, Wai pole Feudal], W. Donald, and J, E. Fitzgerald.

The meeting then separated with a vote of thanks to Me,. Godlet for his conduct in the Chair, proposed by the Rev. J. Wilson, seconded by Mr. Wedge,