THE LAND BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13450, 29 May 1907, Page 5

THE LAND BILL.

VIEWS OF .READERS.

We continue -to receive numerous letters from our readers on the subject of the Land Bill, some of which we give below: —

THE EFFECT OF LIMITATION.

' Sir,— correspondent "Small Farmer" in to-day's Hebald has evidently _ not studied the subject on which ho expresses an opinion. He suggests a limit of £15,000, beyond which no one shall be allowed to hold land. Does he understand the effect of his proposal so far as the value of land as security is concerned? I think not. Let me suggest to him that he consult someone who understands financial matters, and he will be told that the effect of limitation will be to increase tho rate of interest by from 1 to 2 per cent., because by a limitation proposal such as is suggested it will be made impossible for any financial institution to realise- in the event of, default on the part of the borrower. It is evident that the "ad captandum " arguments of Mr. McNab appeal to the less intelligent section of the community, but the only feasible and workable form of limitation which has been suggested is that put forward by Mr. Massey— that is, subdivision at the death of the owner. The others, whether by an increase of land tax or by the methods proposed in the Land Bill, will cause hardship, and would be scouted in any other country but this, where any fad, however ridiculous, will find supporters. What the country requires ( is a satisfactory settlement of the native lands and tho remaining Crown lands, and "in the meantime we might send Mr. McNab and some of nis friends on an extended trip round the world to study the land systems of other countries. They never would be missed. ■■"'"■:■ Individualist.

Sir, —"Small Farmer" would like to know what benefit the £50,000 limit would bo to the Auckland province. I can tell him what disastrous effect it will have on New Zealand as a whole—how it will completely check further settlement of unoccupied lands. For coupled with a restriction of "purchase to £12,000 unemployed value it will divert £12,000,000 from investment in the farming industry. These are Mr. MeNab's own figures. Buyers with £12,000,000 have to be found, and the demand for unoccupied land will be proportionately affected; that is to say, if the improved estates are the more attractive there will not be a single applicant for unoccupied Crown or Maori land until the £12,000,000 worth has been bought up. And if they are not more attractive to "Small Farmer," why does he desire that they shall be forced on the market? And what investment is to be permitted for the £12,000,000 which is to go out of land? I think with the prospect of an all red route, of a Panama Canal, of an Onehuuga Canal, of a service to Melbourne, of the bid the Government now panders to Auckland for her support, to say nothing of a dim vision I have of Auckland the federal city of federated Australasia, that a good tip would be the unearned increment city and Onehunga property offer. There is one remedy for the rabbits and Californian thistle which will take, possession of the remnant of Government lands if they are set aside as an endowment. I know Mr. MeNab has an abhorrence of the idea, but necessity knows no law. It is a State canning factory for rabbits and tinned vegetables (thistle makes an all right spinach). I have- some influence with merchants on the • West Australian goldfields and would promise to help the Minister off with his dead stock. I am quite, sure with £12,000,000 of property on the market in addition to the Maori lands, and Mr. Millar's assurance to -'the workers of Auckland that "he believes in New Zealand for the New Zcalanders," it will be;a thousand years under such administration before the remnant of Crown lands can be let on the least desirable terms, and that is what are offered. Let* -■■•' Small Farmer" '. cultivate a larger mind. Time enough to limit areas and drive £12,000,000 -out of the land into the cities when our volume of trade has attained dimensions sufficient to make us independent of a fall in values. Otherwise having absorbed our sinking funds, mortgaged our best lands, prevented natural increase, and stopped immigration, we shall not.be able to pay to ;the tune of £20,000,000 in interest on our debts during the next decade which is the music we have to face. But then Sir Joseph Ward will land shortly and it is wonderful what he can do. Argyle, Hawke's Bay. Eustace Lane.

PIONEERING AND THE FREEHOLD. : &f-~THe letter signed " Liberal" in this mornings Hebald is a good illustration of the;old adage that "A little knowledge is a dangerous .thing:" Were the lands held by „ /the freeholders, of whom " Liberal " complains so much, always in the heart of civilisation ■■ or. enjoying the advantage of roads ; and railways? The adjuncts of civilisation which the people of the colony now. enjoy are the result of foresight, determination, and self-sacrifice through long years of privation by men— women, too —whom "Liberal" is annoyed to find occupying the front seats. These men were freeholders .every' one, but they were not afraid to go out into .the wilderness and put their hands in their pockets, or their hands to personal labour' to make goads to give access to their homes. The times of pioneering, of native wars, and of commercial uncertainty are gone; ; ■ free schools stand where formerly settlers' sons learnt the history _of the self-reliance of the British race by, the light of home-made candles at their mothers knee; roads'" and railways have been made, and the refrigerator has 'brought us .within reach of the world's markets. Afterwards comes "Liberal," who, seeing the'comfort and prosperity, says, with the assurance of the irresponsible, "We, the people, did it." But he wants the wilderness, fitted with modern aooliances before he-will go near it. It is so easy to point to individuals, and show that this one has made a fortune and that one is wealthy, but "Liberal ' either does not know, or he hides his knowledge of the many hundreds (I believe the ; great majority) of those who, after years of thrift, industry, and deprivation from all that an intelligent family loves, ended, in financial ruin, or in a crippled old ago, whoso only consolation is to see their children enter into the rest they were unable to attain. Would any body of men have undertaken the conditions necessary to the development of New Zealand under any ■. but a freehold tenure? Emphatically no! And the conditions of back block settlement to-day are similar, only much milder in degree. . Your correspondent instances the Northern Wairoa. Let mo tell him that there are here no privately-owned lands lying unused, save such as" are wisely held to preserve the valuable timber they carry. The lands that are checking the progress of this,district are— native lands, which a Liberal Government will not allow to be used; second, large areas of Crown land which the same Government will not open up,, but leaves to become a breeding-ground for , noxious weeds; ..and third,, large areas _ held in sections bv tenants of the' Crown, which they "-have neither the t means nor the • ability 'to use profitably. I except, with honour, all those who, under a > harassing tenure are still doing all they can. If these throe classes had - been, open to occupation: on option of acquiring the freehold, the produce from this district would be many thousands of pounds annually above what l i*i S «T^ r ' Eeferrin 8: to the dairy industry, did 'Liberal" inquire how the company was*started, or how it has been'maintained? I think not. Of those who came forward to start the industry not one was a leaseholder! Those who took tho burden of initial management, with risk of financial loss if the venture failed were freeholders every man. The great majority of suppliers are freeholders, and the institution neitherwould, nor could, have been carried on without them. I cannot reciorocate "LiberalV' thankfulness for the advent of Mr. McNab. or rather the spirit that at present dominates that Minister, but, for the comfort for all true Liberals, of whom I feel to be one, claiming equal' opportunity for all, I recall Matthew Arnold's apt saying that "There remains a great body of quiet, reasonable folk who are not heard," In them we trust. Edwin Habdixg. Dargaville, May 25.

I find tho land business here one mass of speculation. Some of the largo owners ar« (•veil land agents. I interviewed an official here in the Land Department (Government!, who told me fa© knows nothing of what is in London done to induce people to come out. I have also written the Commissioner, asking for advice, but cannot even Ijet him to reply. Can one wonder at the [thousands who are going to Canada? You don't, see in their _ Year Book that _ 87,003 acres are surveyed in the Auckland district, but not jet open for selection. You can go there, and get 180 acres given to you free. .1 can give you the names of a good many who came by the lonic who have now gone on to Canada, which place we might just lis well have gone to in the first instance, and saved time and money. Is this the way you expect farmers to come out and help 'to swell the population, and be an asset to the country? Instead ! of saying "' the man with slender means," why not advertise "those in search of speculation?" I may mention I was told by an official at the Government Inquiry Offices, when I said I must have some means of keeping myself and family now that I am here, "Oh, go to the Labour Bureau," which I did, where I was offered a job on a farm at 15s a week. Am I to pay rent and keep a family on that? What I want is land where I can put my little capital in, and I have no wish to be hid away in some back wood, where I have to spend 10 years of my life clearing bush before i I can earn a penny, and not even have a chance to fend my children to school, or even see inside a church. To my mind, your land laws or your advertisements want a great alteration. W. Dandkidge. A GROSS INJUSTICE. Sir,—l was not a little annoyed on taking up your Saturday morning's paper to see the "cool impertinence of a nodescript over the signature of " Liberal," commending Mr. Thomas Allan for the timely, if unsophisticated, exoosuro of the freehold fivstem. Sir, this '^Liberal" has either wilI'iillv distorted mv argument, or is so wrapt in his Liberalism that he sees only through green spectacles. My letter clearly showed the toll and hardships that a family or anyone taking- up land out in the country was exposed to, and showed the gross injustice, nay, the cruelty, of refusing tho right of purchase in his lease. I do not desire to enter into a dissertation or further argument with such Liberals," but prefer, according to Solomon, to censure a fool according to his folly. Avondale. Thomas Alias*