THE LAND BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13454, 3 June 1907, Page 6

THE LAND BILL.

VIGOROUS CRITICISMS BY' MR. RUTHERFORD. ~ ":

Mr. A. W. Rutherford, M.H.R., speaking at Lyttelton tho other day,. said with regard to the Land Bill, the endowment clauses were the most objectionable. .Sir,

/oseph Ward himself was in favour of -the jpfcional tenure, but, with th© exception of Mr. McNab, : who would not say where he yas, the Ministry was in favour. ,of the easehold, saving one member, who was a iingle-taxer. As it stood now,' Sir Joseph fVard was subordinating his opinion to the •est of th©. Cabinet. .Was not this a ridiculous attitudo for the iFrime Minister of ;he Colony? The opponents of the ' Land Bill had fought only for th© optional* tenure, md if clause 3 had been deleted there would savei been 1 no trouble among the Liberal party over th© Bill. All that they asked 'or, was the maintenance of the- present system of land tenure, as supported by Sir Joseph Ward. When the Land Bill had been brought down, those members .of the government party who supported the optional tenure could do nothing but object to the' endowment clause. ... " , Mr. Rutherford, then proceeded 'to dissuss the Land Bill, clause by clause, fron the short title to the schedules. With re yard to the limitation of value, Mr. Ruther lord said that th© clauses covering this sug jesticn were the only ones in the Bill whicl in any way tended to" put people on the land. "You'll wait under this Bill 1( weary years for th© chance of bidding fo: the excess," said the speaker. The partj be belonged to had a better solution o th© problem, for they proposed to' double th© graduated tax on the excess. But, a: 3ne landowner had said to him, "For God'i sake let it alone. The 10 years' relie: would suit us better', than an ; 'increaset graduated tax, which would come into opera tion in a few years." The objection to the £15,000 limit in th© purchase of rural lane was that it did not* apply also to city land. The Premier had pointed out that it woulc be impossible to limit big firms, with manj branches, to a value of £15,000; his replj was that surely a clause could' be draftee with the necessary exemptions. Of course ho meant that the limit . should apply tc town and borough lands, not to land ir townships or in town board districts. .'■■_■'.' He regarded the freehold as the salvatior of the colony. He had no time for a Stat* landlord, and if they only knew the crooked work that went oh in Government''Depart ments they would be as satisfied as'himsell is to the objectionable nature of a State landlord. Ho looked with alarm' on the institution of the present Cabinet, mainlj >n account of the inclusion of Mr. -Fowlds ivho was an acknowledged single-taxer. Mr VlcNab's views upon th© land tpiostioi generally indicated that he was a ' Scotcl humorist of the- first water. Mr. Rutherford proceeded: "Not onlj lo freeholders object to Mr. Fowlds being .n the Cabinet, but a number of those whe lid not support us, those who believe ir 'reehold ' for themselves and leasehold foi rthers, assure me that they, too, had writ en to Sir Joseph Ward urging him not tc ,ako Mr. Fowlds into th© Cabinet. If Mr fowlds had the power he would confiscate be freehold. In addition to that he is £ ireetrador, and i'reetrade would shut up svery factory in the colony. Why Mr. Fowlds was taken into the Ministry .is £ mystery to every man. in the.place." Mr Rutherford then read a number of extract: from Mr. Fowld's speeches. " Mr. Fowlds,' he concluded, " may have, to subordinate his views, but he is a bad leaven to hav<

in the Ministry." Speaking, on the native land question, Mr. Rutherford said that the appointment of a Commission was due to the desire of the Government to discover .a new native land policy. Mr. Rutherford made some references to the_ Cabinet as at present constituted, complaining that caucuses were not now held, nor were the opinions of members ascertained by the Whips as they had been in Mr. Seddon's time. : The House should pass an Elective Executive Bill, and then dissolve. The present system was intolerable. Ministers were not selected by the party, and kept themselves in power by very questionable proceedings. "As you are aware, he concluded, "I told you at the last election that I would support the Ministry as it was then constituted, but that if there were a reconstruction I should exercise my own discretion. That reconstruction has taken place, and I am now a free man. Henceforth I, shall bo an Independent Liberal.'*,