Land Settlement. TO THE EDITOR.

Otago Witness, Issue 2106, 5 July 1894, Page 34

Land Settlement. TO THE EDITOR.

Sib,— Your correspondent Mr J. A. Drury begs tho question. Abusing me for using a wow de plume is not answering the argument. Mr Drury made charges against settlers of dummying land— by the help of their families — under the ballot system, and said he knew one man who held from 10,000 to 12,000 acres acquired in this way. As I pointed out, it would require 18 or 19 persons to hold this acreage. Mr Drury has kindly lowered the acreage, too, from 2000 to 4000, which gives a fair idea of his veracity. My ridicule was directed against the highly-coloured tales of Mr Drury, and not, as ho states, at tho injustice done to squatters. I hate injustice, bo the victim squatter or swagger. Land reformers aro as plentiful as rabbits, but for crass ignorance of the land laws of New Zealand Mr Drury will "take the cak,o " From a land guide, bearing the name of tho Hon. G. F. Richardson as Minister for Lands, I extract the following: — "Perpetual lease: No person who holds . . , together with the area of lands applied for . . . a greater area than 640 acres of first-class or 2000 acres of second class land shall be capable of becoming a lessee." This lease carried the privilege of purchase for cash or on deferred payment ; and yet Mr Drury poses as an authority, and reiterates his nonsense about the Atkinson Government limiting a selector to 360 acres and enforcing residence. I know at least a dozen selectors — perpetual lease, grazing run, and deferred payment— who acquired their holdings without residence, and I know them to be bona fide Settlers. Re social pests, I am awaro of the corrections Hansard is subject to, but perhaps Mr Druryprefers the " unbiassed " statements of a party newspaper. Mr Drury said he knew one person who held five or six runs— one of 8000 acres — acquired by dummyism — (what price Munchauscn now?>; — also that small settlers put bogus improvements on to their selections, corrupted tho valuators, and robbed tho country. And after such slanderous writing be accuses me of discourtesy for not signing my name ! Like Mr Drury's, my name will add nothing of valuo to my argument, and if he has a desire for notoriety I certainly have not. I have the honour of being one of those unfortunate settlers who have fallen under the ban of the immaculate Munchausen J. A. Drury, who has threatened to write again if I will sign my name. But life is too short to waste on his lucubrations, and thanking you in anticipation, — I am, &c, June 20. A Maorilander.