INDUSTRIAL FARMS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIV, Issue 10785, 24 October 1895, Page 5

INDUSTRIAL FARMS.

DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE. [from our own correspondent. |

WELLINGTON. Oct. 23. _ This afternoon, when the House was in committee on the Land Act Amendment Bill, there was a short discussion on the proposal to read a second time a new clause to provide , for the establishment of industrial rescue! and reformatory homes. The clause provided that persons desirous of establishing such homes should have the right to select on lease an area of Crown lands not exceeding 100 acres, the lease to be for twenty-one years, with perpetual right of renewal for a like term. Mr Collins said that he could not allow the clause to pass without some explanation. Who were the persons or societies to which the clause referred ? Ho pointed out the great danger which would ensue if the House agreed to the clause, and asked if it was introduced to give effect to any promise made by the Ministry to a certain gentleman who had recently travelled through the colony. Similar industrial farms had proved to he centres of demoralisation in the Mother Country, and it was altogether wrong that the State should relegate to private persons this particular kind of charitable aid. The Minister of Lands was surprised that Mr Collins should consider that only the State should deal with this matter, and he expressed the opinion that if private individuals provided assistance in this respect, there was nothing seriously wrong in the Government accepting it. Dr Newman said that the provisions of the clause were excellent, but there was one danger, that was that these industrial farms might be made dumping grounds for paupers from other parts of the world. The Premier said that the regulations would provide that the land could only be taken np to provide for refuge work in this colony. The State should have some control, and the Government had no desire to encourage the bringing of people from the Mother Country to bo put on these farms. If they got a hundred men on one of these farms it would bo doing a great deal in the w«y of settlement. The proposals of the clause would, if carried out, be a good thing for the country, and he hoped that the House would adopt it. 1 Mr Collins was just as desirous as the Minister of Lands that some effectual means should be found to deal with the class referred to in the clause, but the present proposal would bo both detrimental and dangerous to our own settlers. The Salvation Army farm colony’ at Hadleigh, on the lines of which those dealt with in the clause were to be established, had proved a deadly failure, and residents in its neighbourhood had petitioned the Home Parliament for its removal, asserting that it was destroying their means of livelihood, as they found it impossible to compete with a farm which had unlimited funds at its disposal. The Premier said that the Government had proof positive that a large percentage of the inmates of these establishments who were given a helping hand were reformed. In the other Australian colonies it had been found advisable to accept private aid in respect of reforming criminals. He was willing that Mr Collins should have the draft regulations submitted to him. and any suggestions he might make would be considered. He hoped that that gentleman would affirm the principle of the clause. Mr Collins said that it was not a question of whether or not a helping hand was to be extended, bub of how it was to bo extended, and the proposed help would do more harm than good. Ha was aware that many considered the question one of sentiment. To him it was one of principle. Ha predicted that if farm colonies were established in the colony they would prove as unsuccessful as the one in the vicinity of London. As for the Premier’s statistics, he had no hesitation in saying that they wore unreliable and untrustworthy. The Premier, to show that the farm colony near London had not been the failure Mr Collins had said it was, stated that the Salvation Army had originally bought the land at .£lB an acre, but a short time afterwards, when more was wanted, it had to pay £56. If the increase in the value of the land was a sign of demoralisation, if turning a wilderness into peaceful homes was demoralisation, all he could say was the more they had of it in the colony the better. Mr G. W. Bussell expressed sorrow at the stand Mr Collins had taken in the matter, and pointed out that his objection to refuge colonies applied as strongly to village settlements. Mr Collins said that the figures quoted by the Premier upheld his (Mr Collins’s) contention that the establishment had proved detrimental to residents in its locality by increasing their rents. The effect of the establishment of these farm colonies would be to benefit paupers by pauperising those who had previously been able to earn a comfortable livelihood. This was one of the dangers of the scheme, and the House onght to be aware of it. The Premier concluded the discussion by saying that Mr Collins’s objections to unfair competition applied to the State farms, a form of State aid which he understood Mr Collins approved of. The clause was added to the Bill by 43 to 4, the minority being Messrs Collins, O’Kogan, Pinkerton and Allen.