WELLINGTON ITEMS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 8123, 21 March 1887, Page 5

WELLINGTON ITEMS.

[By Telegraph.] [from our own correspondent.] WELLINGTON, March 20. Yesterday morning's Times contained a sub-leader purporting to give a digest of Mr Ballance’s proposed Bill for the acquisition of private estates for settlement purposes. As all the “facts” published by the Times are wrong, and as I have reason to believe the same “ facta ” have been telegraphed to some southern papers, it may be as well to correct any wrong impressions that may be formed thereby, and also to state generally what are the provisions of the measure. First, then, the Bill does not propose to deal with landowners “mortgaged up to the eyes,” or to take over the land of any such landowner, “with his consent,” as stated by the Times. “ Over-burdened landed proprietors ” do not enter into the consideration of the proposals at all, nor is the Bill in any way “analagous to that of the Irish encumbered Estates Act.” What the Bill does propose is that large estates may be occupied by associations, who, without the consent of the owners, may require a certain area of the land at 10 per cent upon the Property Tax valuation. A certain percentage is to be paid down, and the rest remains over. The landowner is to be allowed to retain a thousand acres, and his homestead is not to be touched. There will be Courts established to deal with certain questions arising out of the acquisition, and there will be Commissioners through whom the application for expropriation will be made. As for the assertion of the Times that “no attempt will be made to pass the Bill during the approaching session, but that it will be merely brought in and circulated for the information of the electors before the pending election,” that is partly an “invention,” to use a mild term. Mr Ballance intends to press the Bill through the House this session, if it is possible to get it through, and it will only be because the House or Council rejects it if the measure does not go through all its stages in the legislature during the coming session.

I mentioned recently that a forcible article, by a well-known contributor to the Evening Post signing himself “Cameo,” had directed the attention of the Chamber of Commerce to the evils of the present credit system, and that that body were taking steps to ascertain in what way the evil could best be restricted. It was suggested by “ Cameo ” that a Bill should be brought in during the next session, making tradesmen’s accounts for £ 2O, and under irrecoverable by law. The Government have, after due consideration, determined to give effect to this suggestion, and the Colonial Secretary will introduce into the Legislative Council during the coming session a Bill embodying the proposal. It appears that last year the total of such accounts under £2O sued for amounted to .£20,380, while between .£2O and .£SO the amount was .£2325, and .£SO and upwards J 6674. The Government thinks the present system of indiscriminate credit not only vicious in itself, but that the Resident Magistrate’s Courts are used to far too great an extent for the purpose of debt collecting, and that by the proposed change in the law the work of these Courts may be so reduced as to render possible a considerable saving in their cost.