THE GLEN DHU RUN.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20412, 19 May 1928, Page 17

THE GLEN DHU RUN.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—ln a letter in to-day’s issue concerning the Glen Dhu run, “A Runholder ” delivers hiraself of one sentence which is calculated to injure seriously the cause of land settlement. To strike at any opponent on religions grounds is a most uncalled for attitude on a national question, and in the case under review particularly so. Had a statement such as that indicated been made in a moment of anger might be some excuse, but to introduce it wantonly and without provocation reflects little credit on the writer. The present lessee of Glen Dhu is a settler worthy of the beat traditions of the country, and advocates of close settlement must realise that the average runholder of Upper Clutha is second to none of the qualities which go to make a good citizen. I have worked with and against them for years, and have. never had cause to complain of unfair discrimination in any question concerning close settlement. Many of my most faithful and valued friends have been, and are, of different creeds, but one and all worked loyally together for what we considered the best interests of our native land. It should be clearly understood that the land sytem is not a personal one, and that we differ with the system, not with the individual. In the ease under discussion the lessee of Glen Dhu has opened up once more a question of vital interest to all. Hitherto the Otago Land Board has dealt with the Crown lands of the province in secret, barring the door to close settlement by renewing each lease as it fell due. With an election coming on in the near future a different policy has evidently been ordered —locking the door after the horse has been stolen. There is ample room to establish scores of additional settlers on the Crown lands of Upper Clutha alone, and no runholder should be permitted to acquire a permanent tenure until every acre has been as closely settled as is consistent with prosperity. The “ unearned increment ” belongs to the nation, not to traffickers in Crown lands. In the Upper Clutha to-day there are scores of, returned men and others seeking land on wliich to build their homes,

but, where the runholder is often the employer, land seekers are not always anxious to advocate subdivision before any public body. The demand for land is genuine and unsatisfied, but the impression that the dice are loaded will be hard to remove, and will only be removed by a Government truly representative of the people. An unexpected but not the less welcome opportunity to reopen the land question has been given by the Otago Land Board in calling a public meeting at Pembroke. Residents and land seekers of Upper Clutha can now appoint their delegates to press their claims to a share of the country they fought for and their fathers made. Should they fail to do this, that faliure will be made tise of by politicians for years to come. By this method and by petitioning Parliament to repeal the iniquitous land legislation of recent years, there is some hope of attaining the desired end, not by regrettable persona! attacks, which have no effect but to sully and belittle a good and righteous cause.—l am, etc., W. P. Cotter. Pembroke, May 17. [The statement that religions considerations were introduced in the letter by “ A Runholder " is surprising. There was a reference in the letter to “ the popularity of the applicant and his association with various local lodges and societies,” and, if the introduction of religious grounds was involved in this, we regret wc did not detect it, — Ed. O.D.T.]