LAND SETTLEMENT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1424, 15 June 1899, Page 34

LAND SETTLEMENT.

As has already been announced by cable, the Sydney "Daily Telegrams” of June 6th contains an editorial survey of land settlement in this colony. After discussing the C’lnu iot Estate transaction—No obviously a success that public desire for the extension of the principle grew strong"—the journal goes on- to say:—Apart from great ventures•• .of this kind, tho New Zealand Government has done a good deal in endeavouring to promote village settlements, both by providing land on easy terms for those who wish to make homes for themselves and become cultivators on a small scale, and m making advances of .money to them. There seems to be little reason for thinking that any such valuable results will spring from this form of State-aided settlement as are already assured in cases where large areas have been made available, but at least little direct loss has yet been incurred by the 'State, while a, number of wage-earners in the vicinity of the cities and towns have been furnished with better homes than they could otherwise have obtained. Neither in I ictoria. South Australia, nor here have settlements of this kind proved very successful, for a variety of reasons, the chief being that those who enter upon them are persons without means or knowledge of the work entailed in even the humblest forms of cultivation and home-making. The great element of success in the 3 system of land resumption on the larger scale for re-distribution among settlers which has been adopted in New Zealand is' that it makes good Land available on easy terms and in sufficient quantities to be capable of providing a livelihood. to those willing and able to work it. The recently^acquired Waikakahi Estate, in South Canterbury, consisted of nearly 50.000 acres. this was resumed at a cost of over £300.000, the rate paid being £6 Iss per acre. It has been laid out in 130 farms of sizes ranging from 46 to 1.48 acres, and a township site lias been surveyed. The land has been divided into two classes, the rent in each case being one shilling in the pound on the unimproved capital value paid annually. The demand for the best allotments and farms was so great that the claims cf from twenty to thirty applicants in each case had to be decided by ballot. Considering the great advantage to persons not possessed of considerable capital of the perpetual lease system, this eagerness for holdings under it is not- to' be wondered at. All they are required to do is pay £6 10s per year for the use of 130 acres as long as they like to hold it. absolute security of tenure being afforded. Every, penny beyond that which they earn or produce from the land is their own. and can be devoted to making improvements upon it. which will belong to them. There is little danger, according to die present outlook, that the New Zealand Government will lose' anything by its daring pioneer movements in land settlement. But what its action strikingly suggests is the unwisdom of selling land in tlie first instance which has to be bought back in the end. It is obvious that if the perpetual leasehold principle had been established long ago, instead of quite recently, an immense revenue would now be derivable by the New Zealand Government out of annual rents.