ESTABLISHED 1876. Manawatu Daily Times. The Oldest Manawatu Journal. Conducted by E. D. HOBEN. Published Every Morning. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1911 MORE MOKAU.

Manawatu Times, Volume LXV, Issue 1459, 10 November 1911, Page 4

ESTABLISHED 1876. Manawatu Daily Times. The Oldest Manawatu Journal. Conducted by E. D. HOBEN. Published Every Morning. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1911 MORE MOKAU.

We are evidently to hear a great deal about Mokaa before December 7th. Mr Gothrie dealt with it last night at Feilding. Mr Massey the previous night at Pnkekohf, Mr MoNab referred at Terrace Ena tn misstatements oonnected with it, In the wilds ol Pukekohe Mr Massey declared that he was "prepared to repeat his statements on every platform in the Colony." No doubt he is, for Mr Massey is "built that way,"~bo.t lie wasn't prepared to repeat them befoi-3 the Native Affairs Committee where they ooold bs cheoked with the oold fauts. Iu view, however, of how much has been said and written about Mokau it is very curious ,to see how completely seme folk havß failed to giasp the facts. Our contemporary last night, tor instance, completely excnerat:s Mr McNab of everything excepting the crime of interesting [himself in a freehold while being a lease-holder. Mr McNab has already explained that he is an out air] oot leas-:lio'der only in regard to endowment lauds and it must surely be obvious that it would-be impossible to at-once keep a land endowment as an endowment and part with it as a freehold. But apart from this feeble argument, onr contemporary's admission is a oompleta abandonment of the attitude, or lather attitudes, for each differed except that all were wrong-adopted by Mr Massey at hia Wellington, Auckland and Levin meetings, and which he himself abandoned - when he had to faoe the music at the Native Affaiis Committee. Similarly the Mokau is not a "huge freehold specnlation", since wl.at the company has is not a "huge freehold" at all, but merely the right to act as developing intermediaries in the passing on of freehold in retail quantities, which they are themselves specifically debarred from holding. Again them was more than one reason (and Mr McNab gave more) why it would have been extremely injudicioDS for the Government to have purchased from Mr Lewis, In the Hist place, as Mr McNab pointed out, they wonld have had to pay at least as mnch as Mr Mason Chambers paid, but they would have had several additional handicaps. One of these is the right of petition which the individual disregards, but a Government has tp suffer, as well as the right of law. Theie wonld have been at least three sets of law suits, there would have ( bß6u Mr Massey's friend, Mr "Mokan" Jones, there was the statetory liability on the Land Transfer Department of finding the; whole value of the registered leases (which Government would have thus had to pay twice) if the natives, as Mr Bell advised them ta do.'socoeeded in upsetting the Jones' leases, whioh had been pnrohased by Mr Lewis, and there was the right of the New Plymouth Harbour Board to rate on Crown lands, if the Crown acquired these. The net result of all this ' wonld have been that it wonld have cost the Government at least twice- ' as mnch as the land is worth, and the ultimate settler very much more thßn it will cost him under the pre- < sent arrangement. ( r , 1 ID 1 ! a And had Government purchased what i a howl would not Mr Massey have set e ap! "This CORRUPT GOVERN- o MBNT," he would ory, "has bought P i PIG in a POKE to relieve tl e ? jlients of the Attorney-General's partner, a property that has been j.: EIAWKED over the Dominion and h ;lie Unitod Kingdom for over H CWBNTT YEARS. It was hawked D torn the North Uape to luvercargill Jt :ruitlossly before a Palmerston busies man succeeded in doing what lis predooefsurs had failed to do aid , nterested Mr McNab and others iu ol] be cansi of settlement wliiih would go therwiso have been kept back for iUI nother 20 years. Picture to yourself ap the Strong Mau Now Zealand e » pants" roaring in his Strength from ' Re

one end of New Zealand to the other this crowning scandnl of the Government having actually purchased the notorious Mokau!

WHERE WE. DO AGREE. fc-w, Therßare, hnwevor, two points in which we want to record onr most hearty eudersament of onr contemporary. It gays: ].

"If a man can obtain vory long leases of native buds under such conditions as to make him the culy possible purchaser of the freehold, then there mest bo a very seiions weakness in the legislation governing soch ttsnsactions." And again it refers to the Order in Council, 2. $ "Which swept Psirie the legislation protecting natives.trom the exploitation of speculators." Regarding l\ it was absolutely wrong that Mr Mokaa Jones should have get leasss at pepperoorn rentals, which resulted in blocking a great district from settlement for tweuty years. This was permitted by, tha Conservative party under Sir Harry Atkinson, which is now under Mf Masse-y jumping Jim Orow over the matter, and it was the Liberal Part? (whicli has hal to clear up the mess twenty years later) that removed "the very serious weaknesses in the legislation governing such transactions," aud creatad the "legisiatim protecting the natives from tlie exploitation of speculators," which was oulyielaxed at the joint request of all conoerned, native freeholders and European leesae (Mr Lewis) in the interests of public polity. And this is what we are told from platform aftsr platform and in paper after paper, is "a very serious charge to answer on the part of the Government."