Nelson Evenign Mail. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1896.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXX, Issue 285, 2 December 1896, Page 2

Nelson Evenign Mail. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1896.

One of the methods adopted by the Ministerial nominee for Nelson at his meeting when he " replied " ■ to Mr John Duthie was to turn up ponderous departmental reports and quote from them in refutation. Now the most simpleminded person must know that a Ministry constituted as the present Government is would hardly scruple to make the departmental reports tally with . opinions and projects rather than with faots, It is notorious that permanent heads of departments and the whole oivil servioe are under the thumbs of Ministers, and that the ' reports are drawn up to suit Ministerial ideas. The only public officers who are really beyond the control of and manipulation by Ministers • are the Comptroller-General, and, in a lesser degree, the fiegistrai- , General. Those officials have to ■ deal with figures as they represent faots and not as they suit the - Ministers of the day, and hence their statements, when published in time io be of any real use, are of value. ) It will be remembered that Mr I Duthie declared that land settled in the Wellington district under Mr John M'Kenzie's system had been a failure and that though the cast of the Lands Department remained - large, holdings were being abandoned, and that settlement in the Wellington provinoe at least was not sprea - ing. Mr Graham, obedient servant of the Ministry as he is, denied Mr Duthie's assertions, and of course quoted from departmental reports, i wh cb, as often as not, are not worth the paper on whioh they are printed. But the data furnished by the Registrar General are sufficiently trustworthy to show that either Mr Graham has misquoted the departmental reports, or that the reports themselves are wrong somewhere. Mr John M'Kenzie and the Ministerial henchmen claim that the present Minister for Lands has settled more people on the soil than his predecessor, but the appended table from page 336 of the Registrar General's Statistics under " Se.ectors and Land Selected" tells its own tale. It gives a comparative statement of conditions for 10 years ended 31st March, 1896, and the figures are lumped in periods of fivo years each : —

It is therefore apparent that, setting aside tho actual decrease in the number of se eo.tions, land set t lenient is at a standstill, not only in the Wellington provinoe, but on the basis of the colony's returns. It must be remembered that in the numberß given Wrt only are there inoluded persons who have seleo ed Crown lands, but also those who have purchased under the Land fqr Settlement Act. It must also be borne in mind that the figures and the deductions here given are reprinted from the " Wellington Evening Post," whose fairness as the leading and representative Opposition journal Mr Graham praised at some length on Monday evening. That paper, whioh Mr Graham invited his hearers to ' i

acoep f as an authority, oompn eitbat " probably at least three times as rnuoh money has been spent io effect settlement under the M'Kenzie rule as under previous Ministers " It should be borre in mind too that the increase of aettlera under special settlement associations is not a general increase, Many of the su-called settlers have never tiken up the land, and never lived on it. It is a mere settlement on paper,forth.especialaettlementshavo broken down lamentably. During 1895 436 settlers presented their holdings to be forfeited or surrendered them, and o-t of the 1349 persons i..oluded in tho reiurn only 857 are resident on their selections. " Where then," asks the " Post," " does tho boast or' the s ccess for the land settlement under Mr McKenzie come in ? The fact is that the colony is being governed on boastfulness. Ministers think that if they can make statements they will be believed, whether the statements are true or false." The statistics here quoted — on the authority of a newspaper which Mr Graham commended for its' fairness — show conclusively at least one of the abject failures made by the Ministry which was to convert New Zealand iuto a working man's Paradise . The fact chi efly demonstrated is, as Mr Duthie showed a Nelson audience, that under Mr M'Kenzie from 1891 to 1896, notwithstanding the increase in population, settlement haa not been greater than it was from 1886 to 1891 — has not equalled what it was in what were termed the years of depression — and if the cost be considered, the result is distinct y disappointing. If there were time between now and polling day Mr Graham's other "replies " to Mr Duthie, based as they are on fallacious and misleading departmental reports and Ministerial inaccuracies and suppressions, could be exposed as worthless. But enough has ben!) done to show how right was Mr Duth : e and how implicitly the Nelson electors might depflnd on hia statements and figures. Mr Graham has failed to controvert one word Mr Duthie said, and above all ha hag failed to disprove the accusation that as Chairman of the House of Representatives Banking Committee he was the ready agent of Ministerg,in helping to shield Mr Ward behind the cover of " the Order of Eeferetice."

t Ftom 1886 From 1801 to 1891 to 1896 For cash 270 D 2409 Deferred payment ... 1836 541 perpetual leaso ... 2951 1286 Lease in perpetuity ... nil 1806 Occupation, with right of purchase ... nil 1451 Agricultural lease „, 45 16 Occupation lease ... nil 69 Village Settlement— pash 522 206 Village Settlementdeferred payment... 484 85 Village Settlement — perpetual lease „., 168 856 Village Settlement— homestead 1259 370 l SpecialSeUlemontAssooiations 1021 fill Homestead 116 324 Small grazing runs ... 310 363 Totals 11,420 11,363