THE FREEHOLD TENURE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CV, Issue 12535, 24 June 1901, Page 6

THE FREEHOLD TENURE.

It has been so persistently asserted by Conservative speakers and writers during the past few months that Mr Seddon lias admitted'that the freehold is “bound to come,” that some of his supporters may be misled into believing that the Premier has renounced the land policy which ha enunciated with so much vigour at the last general election. But there is nob the slightest need for any misapprehension on this point. Mr Seddon is as enthusiastic as ever in his advocacy, of the form of tenure. He has seen too much of the evils of land monopoly and of the advantages of close settlement to be tempted to return to the old, order of things. We hope that he may be encouraged, during the nest session of Parliament, by a strong expression of opinion from the Liberal Party, to go even further than his old colleague, Sir John M’Kenzie, and introduce a measure for the periodic revaluation of Crown Qea;ses. This, rather than the granting of the freehold, is the reform that is “bound to come,” and wo should like to see it associated with the name of the statesman, who- has stood so long in the van of progressive politicians. The defect in the lease-in-perpetuity is, of course, that it deprives the State of the share it might fairly claim in the “unearned increment,” which even the Conservatives are beginning tc recognise as a real and tangible thing. If this were removed the' objection that the .tenant secures a lease that is' better than a freehold, and makes no adequate return to the State, . .would load all its, point,. In-the

meantime, it would be interesting to learn 'where gentlemen like Mr Charles Lewis and Mr R. H. Rhodes ’have found gyound for the statement they have made to- their constituents. We can discover none in tbs reports of the Premier’s public addresses. If his opponents have been more successful perhaps they will be good enough to satisfy our curiosity. 1 .