CURRENT TOPICS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1191, 28 December 1894, Page 30

CURRENT TOPICS.

4C THE MASTERTON REFORM

ASSOCIATION. This is another case in which the Minister of Lands is showing the firmness so neces"sary to the successful working of the Ministerial land policy. The complication is aggravated by the fact that the Minister has to contend with enemies in his own household. In this connection we say at once that the principal opponent on the Land Board of the Ministerial policy occupies an anomalous position. Every member of the Land Board occupies a judicial position. If the Land Board is to command the confidence of the public its members must not be interested in the questions which are discussed and settled at its meetings. A difference of opinion between the Commissioner and a member of the Board is not a thing to be astonished at in the ordinary course of business. But when the member who conducts one side of a very animated discussion about a question of administration is closely interested, the public gets a painful shock, just as it would get if a Justice of the Peace were to sit in judgment on a case with which he is closely connected. The rights and the wrongs of the Masterton Reform Association may be

what anybody likes to proves them, but the proper person to represent them before the Land Board is not a that member of the Board. Mr Hogg in that respect occupies a false position. There is nothing to prevent him from opposing the Lands Department in any way he thinks proper/ as a private individual, or as a member of the Legislature. But as a member of the Land Board he is not in a position to act with the independence expected of him. If he cannot refrain from advocating what is practically his own case on the Board/ we .may suggest to him the propriety of resigning. Resignation would free his hand considerably, and free the Board from the suspicion of bias, which it certainly ought not to be subjected to. That point we leave to Mr Hogg's sense of propriety. As to the main question, that lies in a nutshell. The facts, which we publish elsewhere, are plain enough. The settlers toolyXip their selections at a'certain stated price, on the understanding that the Government would do the necessary roading. They protest that the cost of the roading, which they admit they must pay by loading on their properties, is excessive when spread over the long term of their leases in perpetuity. Now that is a question of time. They are perfectly ready to pay in 26 years, but object that payment should continue over the 999 of the lease. That is practically an admission that for 26 years, at alljevents, they are liable. The time therefore has not come, for the question to be raised. If after 20 years they can prove that the loading has been paid off, they will have a good case for - remission. But for the present, the fact for them to face is that they have agreed, with their eyes open, to a certain valuation, and that agreement they must carry out. There is a further complaint, so far as we. can understand from the discussion, that the amount' expended on roading is inadequate. This is a different, count altogether. As to the first, it is clear that the settlers are bound by their agreement to take the land at a certain figure. As to the second, they may trust the Government to devote a fair share of the moneys at their disposal to making their properties accessible. That puts the whole case into a mvtshell. Moreover, they have had a, great advantage so far. They not only had ample notice of the first payments, but they had what is practically a year's delay of payment. There is no getting away from that fact. Neither is it possible for them to contend that under the Act of 1892 which they accepted, they are better off than under the Act of |IBBS, under which they made their bargains with the State. If they want further time for meeting their obligations they can apply for it. But they have, no case for any repudiation of the just claims of the State. We have no doubt that the Minister will not be hard. He cannot, however, permit any change of their status. The economic results of the whole land policy of the Government are in his hands. It is a policy of the greatest moment, and at the same time of the greatest difficulty. The great necessity of the time is to settle the people on the land; the difficulty consists in settling people who have no. means. The Government policy is a policy of assistance to those who requiro it to enable them to settle. It is an economic problem, which has been placed on a certain basis, after mature thought and careful calculation. The people who have accepted the assistance have accepted the calculations. It is for them to abide by their agreements, and it is for the Mm*

ister to see that they do it. He cannot risk his policy out of deference to political agitation. He showed that pretty clearly at Pomahaka.; and there will be no more trouble there, for "the Pomahaka settlers have admitted practically that their agitation was what is known as a "try on." His attitude towards'' the Masterton Reform " Association is the same. "Mr McKenzie is very properly 'consistent. He has under him reliable officers, who have to administer the Act as they find it, and who are entitled to his support. If he gives way to agitations, he opens the floodgates for the deluge. The essential condition of success is- the maintenance,of the conditions originally established in every case. The Government is doing its part: in aiding, people to get on to the land. -.lt is for them to do theirs. Their part_is to make the best of their position, with the courage, self-reliance and determination which have enabled other settlers to conquer the wilderness. Agitation will do them no good. "Work" is their best motto. And the safest course for them is to work and trust the. Government which has devised means to : help\them;, to help them through their difficulties. The sooner they realise that: the;.Minister's firmness and consistency have the support of the whole Colony the better.