Established 1866. The Marlborough Express. Published every evening. Saturday, September 19, 1903. THE LAND QUESTION.

Marlborough Express, Volume XXXVII, Issue 222, 19 September 1903, Page 2

Established 1866. The Marlborough Express. Published every evening. Saturday, September 19, 1903. THE LAND QUESTION.

When the Government docs bring down its promised Land Bill we may look forward to witnessing a very determined struggle between the respective supporters of the freehold and leasehold tenures. It looks us if the Government were destined to find itself on the horns of a dilemma. Rumor 1 hath it that heads have been counted, and that it has been found that there is a majority of seven in the House in favor of granting the right to convert leaseholds into freeholds* If then the Government allow the question to come to a vote, it will either have to give ths party a free hand, and so agree to what wonld be practically a reversal of the old MelCenzie policy, or stand to its guns and go down. As a matter of fact we are inclined to think that a sane sort of a compromise will be effected. Compromise is allpowerful in politics, and is often made to advantageously take the place of what might be entitled capitulation. The Government will neither perform a somersault by agreeing to a reversal of its traditional land policy, nor will it, on the other hand, so we believe, challenge a direct vote and get beaten. All depends upon the terms of conversion. Heads have beau counted, it may be, but those who are all nominally agreed upon the broad question of converting leaseholds into freeholds are not likely to be agreed as to the terms. Some members, we know, want to see the terms of conversion based upon the original capitalised price of the land, its capitalised value at the time it was taken up. Bat such terms would, in our opinion, be far too advantageous for the settler and most distinctly unfair to the State, the general community. In hundreds of instances the value of the sections has been increased ten or twenty fold by the expenditure of public money, and the capitalised value of a leasehold acquired ten years ago and its similar value to-day are two essentially different things. The Government may, it is true, nominally give way, and give the State leaseholder the right to convert his leasehold into a private freehold, but we are very much mistaken if it will agree to the terms of conversion being based upon the old values. And, when once it is understood that the leaseholders are not going to have suoh a brilliant bargain at the country's expense, as some oi them are foolish enough to believe they will, wo should not be surprised to lind that many members vow nominally supporting the conversion cry will be glad to " cry off."