Land Commission Report

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXI, Issue 8835, 15 July 1905, Page 4

Land Commission Report

The folowing are the more interesttaj portions of the Land Commission's 7eryrt laid on the table of the House of Representatives yesterday. As the repo* would take about twelve columns of.o>r paper, wo cannot publish it in its ent/rety. J The Constitution of Landßoards. i The present constitution of /and Boards, I nominated by the Uovernor,Avas approver by a majority of the witness's, who at the I same time expressed satisfjction with the impartial administration otfthe boards. A considerable number of wi/iesses, however, advocated elective land boards, but on examination, none could /uggest a satisfactory franchise on which h elect them. The general consensus of evidence was that the nominative system ha? produced boards which have dealt fai*y as between the State on the one hand and the tenants on the other. We recommend as follows: — (a) That the presej't 6ystem be adhered to. The desirability of the boards being composed of members having practical' acquaintance and experience in,' agricultural, pastoral, and mining/settlement of the colony was emplfisised: also, as far as practicable/ they should be selected so as to £ivc representation to the various interests and localities of the respective land districts to which they are appointed. In order to give effect to this, we recommend : (b) That in some of the larger land districts the maximum number of nominated members be increased to six. (c) That the remuneration of members —at present 10s a day and locomotion expenses while on duty—should be substantially increased. To effectually administer discretionary powers, the need was acknowledged for the members of laud boards being in an independent position, and at the same time in sympathy with the land legislation of the colony, und in touch with the Minister of Lands, with whom they have to cooperate, and who is primarily responsible to Parliament and the colony for the efficient control of the great estate of Crown lands and the rapidly-growing estate being acquired, under the Land for Settlements Act. The lands settled under this Act up to 31st March, 1905. aggregate 642,829 acres at a cost of over £3,000,000, and are occupied by 3127 tenants. In the ordinary Crown lands, including Cheviot, there are 17,686 tenants occupying I on settlement conditions and on pastoral lease 16,324,542 acres. From these facts and considerations, and with a view to make the members more representative of the several interests and localities of each land district, we affirm: (d) That it would be desirable to subdivide each land district into ridings, and that a member, who shall be either actually residing in or have special local knowledge of the riding he represents, should be nominated from each, (l) That it is necessary to competent administration that at least one member of each Land Board shall be a Crown tenant, and that all the members of the board shall be men with practical experience as farmers, or with special knowledge in matters relating to land occupation and settlement. We have much evidence to show that when boards consist of members possessing proper qualifications, friction between them and the tenants is almost entirely absent. Crown Tenants' Restrictions. A very geat deal of evidence was tendered in Southland, Otago, and Canterbury, and to a lesser extent in other land districts, regarding the existing cropping regulations, which prescribe a rotation not to exceed two white crops and a green crop followed by three years' grass: some witnesses contending for the right to take more white crops in succession where the land was rich, and others —one or two of them of high authority—maintaining that there was no need of any restrictions whatever.

Your Commission found that the regulations appertaining to land settlement were, with the exception of a few minor points, just and equitable, and these your Commission respectfully recommend should be altered in the following respects:—

(A) Cropping restrictions, whilst necessary, should only apply to white straw crops and periodical grassing : no limit should be placed on the number of green crops grown. On some of the heavier and stronger land the restriction to the two straw crops before regrassing. as laid down in the regulations, operates to the disadvantage of the tenant occupying such land. In such cases some extension should be granted when, in the opinion of practical men, such concession could be allowed without any damage being done to the land. The boards should have statutory power to Telax such cropping conditions as may be deemed by them to be necessary in exceptional cases. (b) All restrictions should be removed as to the disposal of straw, the cutting of crass for hay or seed, and the area of the land" to be kept in permanent pasture. (C) Your Commission, recognising that it is obviously impossible that one set of cropping regulations should be suitable for land in every part- of the colony, would respectfully recommend that all land in future" opened for ■settlement be carefully classified as to cropping capabilities and regulations he framed in accordance. (d) All cropping restrictions might be removed whenever a tenant has ful- ' filled his conditions, has resided on his land for ten years, and has im- • proved free of encumbrance to the value of one-third of the capital value of the land, the value of improvements in no case to be legs than 49s per acre. (b) Evidence shows that some of the tejiants have gone on over-cropping in defiance of the Land Board. In the Canterbury Land District during the last four years there were 411 breaches of the" cropping regulations. The penalty of forfeiture for breaches of trie regulations, as stated in section 100 of "The Land Act, 1892," is too severe: power should be givc-n to Land Boards to impose fines in lieu thsreof. It) That in the "Lands for Settlement Amendment Act, 1901, clause 10, the words "on the happening of any extraoTdiraTV event" be struck out, and the fcillowing words inserted: "or on sufficient reason being given." (G) That the Land Transfer Act be an-ended to enable selectors to subdivide and transfer portions of their leases, to convert- their leases, or for other transactions of a like nature; to empower the district land registrar to bring down existing mortgage* on the new leases in the same way as is done in.the case of freehold titles, without lessees having to incur th? expense of preparing and registering new mortgages as at present. (i) That ihe ambiguitv in wording of the section of "the" Land AcC 1892," defining the powers of a devisee, be Temoved, and that full power to will without reference to the Laud Board to Jinv qualified person be-substi-tuted.' (j) That tha restriction of borrowing 1 for improvements during tV.e first year of occupancy should be abolished, j and only limited to the tlate when

improvements are actually completed, is) Th"f the prohibition of cropping by holders of pastoral licenses be removed, and the cultivation for winter feed for stock be allowed, subject to the land being properly laid down -with grass. Residential Conditions.

The compulsory residence conditions, as : Lsid down in section? 141 and 145 i n'The •jLand Act. 189," and "The Bush and Swamp i Crown Lands Settlement Act, 1903," are .'none too exacting, seeing that in bush .: lands there aTe exemptions from two to ifive years, according to circumstances, and [even total exemption may be granted in 'lexceptional circumstances by the Land i Board. i Evidence throughout the colony shows .•that the various Land Boards have exercised the discretionary powers vested in them wisely- in regard to relaxing residence conditions on Crown lands where ; good cause has been shown, and that there is no necessity to furtheT extend that : power. There are variations in the dura- ' tion of residence required under the following tenures, for which sufficient reasons I do not appear—thus : Under the Lands for (Settlement Act and on small grazing runs ' residence is continuous without a break to |the end of the term. In ordinary Crown ; lands Tinder lease in perpetunity continuous !residence is-for 10 years. In occupation with the right of purchase it is only for six years. There does not seem any rea•son why there should be any difference in

[ of residence under the rariotw [ tenures of onlinary Crown lands. It is recommended 1 that exemption from residence in no case should exceed four years, and that residence be continuous thereafter for six years under any tenure, including land sold for cash, thus bringing all tenures under similar residence conditions, with the exception of pastoral runs. The reason for including cash purchasers and for insisting on fulfilment of residence conditions, as was pointed out by backblock settlers, is to the necessary support for schools, churches, tradesmen, and so on; otherwise if residence is not enforced the settler and his family who do reside are placed at a great disadvantage. The Commission Teoommends that residence conditions should not be enforced until reasonable road access is provided, but that when such access is provided, residence should be strictly enforced except j where sufficient cause for its relaxation, can J be shown. ! Where country settlers under any tenure j in bona fide occupation of and residence i upon their holdings take up Crown land there appear to be no sound reasons for j enforcing residence on the latter, and it is recommended that residence on either hold--ing sliall count as residence on both. The residence conditions have amply proved that they are the surest safeguard against speculation and dummyism, and that when reasonable road access is provided the bona fide settler seldom finds these conditions irksome or impracticable. The Law Regarding Tenure. Your Commission sees no reason to make special provision for the various land districts under this heading, as we believe the general provisions of the existing land laws and the suggested amendments are applicable to the whole colony. We disapprove of the present system of grouping and second ballot, which often cause applicants to take a section they do not want, and also prevent many desirable settlers from applying at all. We would recomend a system similar to that described by Mr Humphries in his evidence before the Commission of grouping sections in accordance with the means required for successful occupation, applicants to apply only in the groups to which their means entitle them. That a ballot be taken for first choice of any section in the group, and the ballot then continues until all the sections are disposed of. Any applicant may withdraw at any time before or during the drawing of the ballot, and his deposit be returned, so that he shall not be compelled to remain m the ballot after the sectiou he would have liked had been drawn. Any sections not disposed of on the first drawing of ballot to be re-offered at an early date to be fixed by the Land Board. All applicants for a ballot of Crown lands to be examined as to their suitability and bona fides. That the limitation of area to be held by a married woman —320 acres—be withdrawn, thus making the area for married women the same as a single woman or any other applicant, provided that only the wife or husband—but not each—may hold any section up to the area of the present limit, and the means of husband or wife may be calculated as possessed by both for the purpose of applying for a section. Any person disposing of his interest in any section to be ineligible for any other ballot for a term of at least three years, except for causes that the Board in Us discretion may deem satisfactory. We recognise that certain classes of applicants, especially married men with families and persons who have been repeatedly unsuccessful at a ballot, have some claim to preference; but are unable to recommend a regulation for this purpose that would be equitable to other applicants. That the Land Board should have power to allot residents of long standing on estates acquired under the Land for Settlements Act such areas as they deem fit without competition, but in no case to exceed half the area allowed under ''The Land Act, 1892." That in clause 5 of the declaration on application for lands, the word "or benefit" be struck out, and the words "and bona fide occupation" be inserted. That provision be made to allow holders of small areas under the Land for Settlements Act to ballot for larger areas, on giving an undertaking to dispose of their present holdings to an approved person within a reasonable time after acquiring the larger area. Loading for Roads.

Firstly, of roading country already setled, and secondly, the roading of new .■ountry. In regard to this matter, the question at once arises : How much of tho required outlay shall be provided by the State, and how much in equity should be a. local burden? A careful review of every phase of the question leads to the conclusion that road construction must be re-

I garded as a State responsibility, and that road maintenance, properly viewed, should, subject to the recommendations subsemade as to finance, become the task of the local bodies. Road construction is defined as meaning the formation and metalling of all main roads, and the formation only of by-roads for wheel traffic. All roads to be Government roads, and to be under Government control until the foregoing work is completed, and then to be placed under the control of the local bodies, by Gazette notices, as county main roads and county by-roads. The right of handing over such roads wholly or in sections as completed to be a power entirely in the discretion of the Government, subject to the condition of the continuity of construction. It is apparent that if roading is antecedent to settlement, the process of recompense to the State quickly sets in by means of the increased upset values obtained for the land and through the benefits arising from speedier and fuller returns. When roaded and sectioned much greater care is necessary in fixing upset prices for settlement. This work should not be done upon the suggestions and recommendations of surveyors alone, but the same care as that exercised in the valuation of land under the Land for Settlements Act should be used. "Thirds" and "Fourths."

For many years local bodies have labored under the disadvantage of insecure and inadequate finance. Spasmodic and uncertain Government grants in aid of ordinary expenditure, or as assistance in meeting extraordinary damage by fire or storm, is too intangible a method of coping with difficulties often needing definite and prompt attention. Throughout the colony assistance by Government grant as a, system is in disfavor. It is difficult, however, to see how the repair of unexpected and extraordinary road damage can be undertaken except by grant. The Commission recommends that (1) subsidies as now existing, (2) Government grants, except in cases of extraordinary damage from storm or fire, (3) loading for roads, and (4) "thirds" and "fourths" from land revenue, be entirely abolished, and a graduated scale of subsidies upon county rates upon the following lines be set up:—

Where general and separate rates levied are together less than Id in the £ on the capital value, subsidy as at present. Where general rate and separate rate together equal Id in the £, 10s subsidy: in the £, 12s 6d subsidy; in the £, 15s subsidy ; l|d in the £, 17s 6d subsidy; 2d in the £, 20s subsidy. No subsidy over £ for £>. Subsidy on all special rates to be 7s 6d in the £. Advances to Settlers.

In future, from a recent decision of the Department, advances will be more liberal than in the past. The lessee's interest in the land, as well as his improvements, being acknowledged as security for the money borrowed. In view of the fact that up to the present not a single loss has occurred, and that already a very substantial reserve has accumulated, the percentage of advance to the security ottered might safely be increased to 60 per cent., especially as under the system of repayment by instalments the margin of security to advance commences to increase almost immediately. And seeing that in respect to land leased from the Crown, the Crown still retains control over it, there appears to be no reason why a greater margin of security should be required than in the case of freehold.

Holders of some Crown leases are under a disadvantage in borrowing from private sources, inasmuch as difficulty is often experienced in giving lenders prompt security. We aee no . reason why a tenant having a property in a leasehold should be debarred from facilities for pledging it for necessary, temporary, or fixed loans, so long as a realisation in case of default did not conflict with the conditions of tenure.

This involves giving mortgagees the right to take possession and hold such property for a limited time, pending the finding of an approved tenant. Where a Land Board has given consent to a mortgage, it should ensure that forfeiture shall not take place without due notice being given to the mortgagee. Many tenants, especially on cultivated lands, require loans for very short periods, at almost immediate notice, and all obstacles to their doing so from private

sources should be removed, seeing that the Advances to Settlers Office can scarcely undertake loans of this nature under present regulations. It would be well worthy of consideration by the Advances to Settlers Office whether it would be possible to introduce a system' whereby a settler might increase or decrease from day to day the amount of his loan within the limit of the advance made. Condition of Tenants.

The condition and position of Crown tenants throughout the colony can, on the whole, be described as progressive and satisfactory. In the South Island much progress has been made of late years bythe settlement- under the Land for Settlements Act and of Crown lands chiefly oi moderate quality. We expect to see steady progress in this district consequent on closer settlement, draining, liming, bushfelling, and grassing, etc. The keeping in check of noxious weeds and vermin must, however, receive careful attention. Where the land is not of first-rate quality, holdings should not be too small, whilst on the richer lands, small holdings are suitable for dairying and providing homes for many prosperous settlers.

Southern and Central Otago present no exception to the general rule of prosperity. A comprehensive scheme of irrigation for its unwatered areas is the great need for its future expansion and prosperity. In North Otago the benefits of the Land for Settlements policy are very striking, pros-; perous settlers and a thriving town replacing uncultivated areas and restricted business enterprise. These remarks apply equally to South Canterbury, where the ] great increase in its harbor returns bear witness to the increase of productiveness and prosperity of settlers during the past few years. Throughout this land district the increase of production and prosperity of its settlers, consequent on closer settlement, is apparent, and one cannot help contrasting the thriving condition of the settlers of the Cheviot Estate (which was practically the initiation of the closer settlement policy) with the gloomy predictions of many when the estate was acquired. The position of the tenants of the pastoral runs in this, as well as the other districts, calls for immediate attention, the lack of a secure tenure discouraging all attempt at improvement and regrassing. Seeing that the prospects, not only of these tenants, but of the important freezing industry, depend largely on these great breeding grounds, this question should receive prompt attention.

Aggregation of Estates. In respect to private estates there is very little aggregation at present taking place, the tendency being for owners to subdivide and dispose of their land in smaller areas. But in some cases owners of small and medium-sized estates are acquiring additional lands. We are of opinion that the carrying of these operations to an undesirable length should be prevented by legislation. On Crown lands more minute classification is necessary. On open lands and land suitable for dairying the land should be divided into at least three classes, according to quality and situation. A limit of 640 acres in the case of our best first-class land is much too high in some cases, and also at least three distinct classes are necessary for purely grazing country. It has repeatedly been shown that areas as at present settled have in many instances proved to be unsuitable, and "power should be given to aggregate two or more sections where, in the opinion of the Land Board, it is proved to be desirable, whether the lands were contiguous or not. ISfoxious Weeds. Your Commission is of opinion that immediate attention to stay the spread of Californian thistle, ragwort, and other noxious weeds is necessary all over the colonv, but the two former more especialy in the Southland district, where they are spreading to an alarming extent. Tf has been stated in evidence that river beds and Crown reserves are a hotbed for these weeds, and it is generally admitted they exist more or less all over the colony in Crown lands. The Question of Tenure.

Messrs M'Kerrow, Hall, M'C'ardle, M'Cutchan, and Matheson report: Throughout the colony a general desire to acquire the freehold has l>een expressed by -witnesses, the favorite tenure being the occupation with right of purchase. A con siderable number also testified in favor of the Te-enactment of the deferred payment and perpetual lease systems, and now only in operation in working out engagements entered into while these tenures were in force. It may be mentioned here that the Land Conference suggests the reintroduction of the deferred payment system. The main objections urged atrninst tbn lease in perpetuity are the difficulty of ob*, taining money on it as a security, t-ha fear of revaluation, and that the settler is precluded from incvesting his savings in his own holding. The difficulty of obtaining adequate advances, either from the Ad vances to Settlers Office or from private sources, was much in evidence from mime rous witnesses, and the fear of revaluation, also very general, due, as many witnesses affirmed, to what they Tead in the Press of proposals to that effect. Even if the fear of revaluation were removed, it is evident there is a deep-seated desire to have the freehold, something, as settlers say, they can call their own, free from restrictions, inspections, and paying of rent. To obtain the right of freehold they would willingly pay up with interest the difference between 4 per cent, rent they are paying now on the capital value under the lease in perpetuity, and the 5 per cent, paid by settlers who hold undeT occupation, with right to purchase. On being questioned why they took up land on lease in perpetuity, the reply was that in some instances the land Was opened on that tenure only, and that they had no choice. The land being supposed to contain metal, minerals, or valuable stone, and, under section 136, subsection 2, of "The Land Act, 1892," it could only be opened on lease in perpetuity, and that whore the full option was given, lease in perpetuity was choson to secure the lower rental, but- in ignorance, of the disadTa.nta.ges of that tenure afterwards disclosed by practical experience.

In the Land for Settlements, tie-re is to some extent, the same fear of revaluation, difficulties in finance, and a desire ultimately to obtain the freehold of the land at the original price of the land on which they now pay a rent of 5 per cent per annum. A number of settlers expressed themselves as quite satisfied with, the tenure of lease in perpetuity, and wished to be ! left alone. Evidence of this is shown by the unwillingness expressed to pay any advance on the original price of the land to obtain the. freehold. When confronted with the fact that the value of the land I had increased, their argument was that whatever increased value the land mayhave gained since they took it up is due to their work and improvements, and to the , rise in price of produce in the markets of ! the world. But even if it should be permanent, it is theirs during the currency of the contract for 999 years, to deal with ns they may think fit. I It is evident that any sense of insecurity in the minds of settlers must serioiisly injure rural progress. Stability of tenure is of necessity a condition antecedent to and inseparable from the energetic development of the colony's resources. Revaluation of present or future leases would, it is considered, exercise a very harmful effect upon settlement. It is questionable if the remaining Crown lands, which are chiefly of a Tugged character and remotely situated, would find occupants undeT a system of lease providing for periodical revaluation. Revaluation for rent purposes as a feature of land policy is open to even graver objections than in older countries, and it is thought its introduction would unfavorably affect this colony, financially, and in the estimation of a desirable class of British farmer-immigrants as a field for settlement. It is contended that no private landlord would be so unwise as to grant a 999 years' lease without a periodical revaluation clause, and that, inferentially, it would be equally unwise for the State to do so. The parallel does not hold. The private landlord gets his fixed rental, together with the constitutional right of a further levy in the form of taxation., unlimited except by the sense of justice of the people, and as this power is the hands of the people's government, the plea for re-valua-tion, with its disturbing and injurious influences, is not well founded. We are firmly of opinion that in the disposal or what may for distinction be called the .ordinary Crown lands, option of obtaining freehold should be granted after fulfilment, as subsequently outlined, of residential improvement and other conditions, this to apply to existing holdings, as well as to those in the future; the payments to be gradual, and extending over a term of years; the instalments to be £lO sterling, or a multiple of £lO, as may suit the settler best, at each half-year when the rent is due; no certificate of title to issue until all the purchase money be paid; rent to be reduced proportionately to the payments made in reduction of the original price of the land. The granting of the right to obtain the freehold will bo the source of great satisfaction to the laborious settler, • struggling qq from year fo yoaar through

many obstacles and privations to found ft home for himself and family. Those who advocated the re-introduction of the deferred payment system admitted that this tenure is open to two objections—viz., a 25 per cent, increase in capital value of the land, and heavy half-yearly payments during the years that settlers were meeting the' heavy initial outlay involved after occupation of waste lands. It was considered that right of purchase option undeT •'■' the Land Act,1892," would contain all the advantages of the deferred-payment system and none of the drawbacks, if the capital value were taken in instalments from settlers after the purchasing clause became operative, with a proportional reduction in rent. Tjuder the Land for Settlements Act the case is very different; the settler has had the rough pioneer work done for him, t.ie land is improved, accessible, and a gomg concern ready to produce. Further, the main object of the system is to render the country more productive by settling a larger population on its lands, and enable settlers to obtain holdings on suitable lands, which they could never do if they had to purchase the freehold of them. Many settlers testified that the Land fot Settlements system had been a great boon to them, that without it they never couk: have got on the land. It has also to be borne in mind that by the Government retaining these improved lands, the opportunity is left open from time to time of others in the future participating in the advantages of obtaining on lease what the;-, could never obtain as freehold. From these considerations we are of opinion that there should be no variation whatever in the terms of the contract already entered into between the State and the tenants, nor any variation in future contracts under the Land for Settlements.

It is only right to add that there is evidence in favor of the proposal to permit tha payment- of a part of capital value, as the tenant could do so in good years, with the laudable object of making his farm his bank and reducing the amount of rent, as a precaution against bad seasons or low prices of produce, when the higher amount of rent might be difficult to meet. This has much to commend it, both from the State's point of view and that of the tenant. But on the whole it is thought best not to tamper with the system.

It seems so unnecessary to accentuate that there should be no infringement oi contract as between the State and its tenants. Any serious attempt upon its inviolability of the compact by the State of the State's tenantry is believed to be impossible in any British community. W ? hilst this is the case, it would be unwisely conservative and non-progressive not to effect modification and changes which time and experience have shown to be necessary to national advancement, .and when such changes are considered mutually advantageous by the State and the tenants, legislation in the required direction clearly does not constitute a breach of contract. We recommend:

(a) That the lease in perpetuity tenure under "The Land Act, 1892," remain on the Statute Books. (b) That after the sixth year from date of lease holders of leases in perpetuity under "The Land Act, 1892," desirous of doing so be permitted to convert to occupation with right of purchase tenure upon payment of the accumulated account of 1 per cent difference in rental between the two tenures, with compound interest added, provided the improvements required within the first six years of occupation have been carried out, and also provided the residence conditions have, in the opinion of the Land Board, been com plied with. (c) That all lessees under the right of purchase option of "The Land Act, 1892," be permitted after ten .years' occupancy and fulfilment of conditions to pay off the capital value of their land in sums of £lO or any multiple of £lO upon Ist January and Ist July in each year during the currency of the purchasing clause, their rentals being proportionately reduced. In) That changes under headings (n) and (c) apply to present as well as to future leases. (js) That undue aggregation of land from any source is undesirable and should

be" guarded against by legislation. (f) That it- be understood that in parting with land for agricultural or pastoral purposes the State retains all mineral rights.

Mr Mathe6on adds:—My signature is attached hereto, with the proviso that it does not apply to the paragraph relating to settlers on land for settlements. lam firmly of opinion that- settlers should have the option given them of purchasing the freehold at original upset price, as suggested for other Crown tenants. On small grazing runs they report : - This is an important class of agricultural and pastoral country, which in theMiddle Island has been promoted to some extent to the detriment of the higher country held under pastoral tenure. As it may become desirable to resume some of the country held under this tenure, it is unfortunate that under "The Land Act, 1892," there is no power of resumption at the end of the 21 years' lease; there is only the power of revaluation; the holder has' the right of perpetual renewal. It will be advisable to amend the existing law, so as to have the power of resumption at the end of each 21 years, as in the Land Act of 1895. Of course, there must be no interference with the contracts entered into under the existing law, but the future lands taken up on this tenure should be subject to resumption if required for closer settlement.

Messrs Forbes, M'Lennan, Paul, Anstey and Johnston report:— We, your Commissioners, after having taken evidence from one end of the colony to the other on this subject, feel that the opinions of many witnesses must be largely discounted on account of an unconscious bias, caused by individual interests and political leanings. The desire for freehold which was prominent in much of the evidence brought before the Commission during its travels is, in the opinion of your Commissioners, amply provided for in the vast area of land in the colony held under that tenure at present. A large number of the witnesses who favoured the freehold were already holders under the tenure, in many cases owning large areas, and admited having little or no experience of leasehold. Some of these expressed great concern for the Crown leaseholders, but, as can be seen on reference to the evidence of most of the Crown tenants themselves, combined with the fact that only an exceedingly small proportion of these came before the Commission, they are well satisfied with their tenure, and resent any suggestion whatever of interference with their titles.

We cannot- deprecate too strongly the action of political and other organisations in fomenting an agitation for the upsetting of existing titles. We believe that interference with existing titles in any direction is dangerous and likely to establish a precedent which would have an unsettling and extremely unsatisfactory effect on the people of the colony. If a title can be granted to-day ami repudiated to-morrow by either the State or its tenants, we fail to see how any stability can exist or solid progress be made. Y'our Commission would therefore lay down the principle that no alteration of existing tenures should be allowed in any case, except on payment of full compensation therefor. The provisions of a title should be held sacred, excepting in cases where it is found to conflict with the interests of the community as a whole. Then, and then only, on the. payment of the fullest compensation, should it be terminated or its provisions varied.

We recommend that provision should be made by statute securing to all tenants under proper limitations the right to full valuation for their improvements, and this should be made to apply to tenants on all public reserves. It must be recognised that there are two interests in the lands of the colony—the State's and the tenant's, —and a system of tenure, to be fair and equitable, must conserve the interests of both parties; therefore, all future leases for Crown lands should contain a, provision for the periodical readjustment of values. It is of the utmost importance that a laxgo area of land should be maintained under a leasehold, and as the area of land remaining in the hands of the Crown is very limited, it would be a wise provision to retain it for that purpose.

A serious objection to parting with the freehold of these lands is the probability that they will be required for closer settlement in the future. An area, which is considered moderate to-day very probably will be too large when the population of this colony will have doubled or trebled, and will then require to be repurchased at a greatly enhanced figure. The high prices being paid for the acquisition of the large estates to-day should be an object lesson in this respect. xwo things stand out as essential to the successful occupation of land—viz., security of tenure and good access. The evidence taken by the Commission in the hash districts of the colony emphasised th« fact

that tke question of ro»ds is of far greater importance to the settler, and a far greater factor in his success or failure, than any question of tenure. The remaining Crown lands are situated in districts remote from settlement, and, from their rugged and inaccessible nature, will require a large expenditure in rouding, more especially in the bush districts, helore settlement can be effected. In fact, in most cases the cost of satisfactory reading will exceed the value of the land. This was emphasised by Mr Uobinson, district road engineer, in liis evidence before the Commission at Wellington, in dealing with the estimated cost of rouding near Ctiki, in the Awarua block of Crown hind, just jpened for settlement. It is in the first few years of settlement , that the settler requires the most assistmce. Good roads should be afforded him .mmediately, or within a reasonable time A his taking up his holding. Any financial assistance required should be liberally Afforded by the Advances to Settlers Act, aid for the first few years his contribii.ions in the way of rent should be made is light as possible, even in some extreme ■uses an exemption altogether for a period ;ip to ten years. It is on this system that your Commissioners believe that future settlement ihould proceed, and as a large expenditure uy the State will be required to carry out as conditions—viz., good roads and in some cases relief from rental for several rears, a tenure which may possibly ro"oup the State in the future for this out,ay should be substituted for the present forms.

We therefore recommend a leasc-in-per-petuity, with readjustment of rental by arbitration at periods of, say, 50 years for ihe first term and subsequent periods ot >A years, the tenant's interest in his improvements to be fully conserved to him ■n all cases, the value of which to be also .ixed by arbitration. Vu small grazing runs they recommend •ome of the tenures on which small grazing .uns are held do not provide for power oi resumption at the end of the present leases. Lu others there is insufficient provision to irotect tenant's improvements, and in ithers no right of renewal. In all these :ases a secure tenure, conserving to tiie enant his interest in his improvements and i right to renewal, should in future be ; riven, subject to the right of the State to resume, in part or in whole, any portion | required for closer settlement. The Homestead System. Although the homestead system of granting land without payment on the condition jf live years' residence and effecting certain improvements has been successful in settling 465 settlers on_ 76,097 acres in the Auckland district; o9 settlers in Westland on 91,480 acres; and 19 settlerß on 2689 acres in Otago, the Commission do not recomend the reintroduction of the system which was abolished by the Lund Act, 1892, because it can only be successful if applied to good land easy of access U markets, and the satisfactory settlement oi this class of land is amply provided for under the existing forms of tenure.