THE LAND FOR SETTLEMENTS BILL.

Otago Witness, Issue 2371, 10 August 1899, Page 6

THE LAND FOR SETTLEMENTS BILL.

In pursuance.. of an admirable plan, the /land for - Settlements "Act • Amendment Bill has been reprinted at the Government Printing Office- in the form in which it emerged from the committee stage. The amendments in the bill — • the erasures from it and the additions to it — are thus shown at a glance. The vital Importance of the amendments secured by the Opposition in this particular measure is plainly to be recognised from a perusal of its amended provisions. The bill haa been

practically recaat. This will be seen from a comparison of the original with the amended terms of the bill respecting the area of lands which may be brought under the provisions for compulsory sale, and respecting the compensation payable in respect of the land so" compulsorily taken. With' regard to the latter point, the Government's proposal was that the court should allow compensation only on the basis of the " fair actual market value " of the land. This was a proposal to which the Opposition strenuously objected, and for .very obvious reasons. As was pointed out in the discussion, the land which is seized from a man — a small dairy farmer, say — may represent the work of his lifetime, and to deprive him of it may be to deprive him of his means of livelihood. In such a case the fair market value is not by any means adequate compensation to the owner for the loss of his land. Mr Seddon strongly opposed any modification of the provisions of th« clause, and was backed up in this attitude by his faithful supporter, Mr Hogg. Eventu&lly, however, finding that the feeling of th-) House was against him, Mr Seddon agreed ',0 amend the section by providing that the court, in de.termining the compensation fays.ble, shall " have regard only to the valu? 0/ the land and the loss, if any, to the claimant's business caused by such compulsory taking." This was a concsssion wrung from the reluctant. ' Premier by the Opposition. The amendment embodying it was, it i 3 necessary to say, carried on the voices. With the knowledge of how this particular section came to be amended, the electors will learn with surprise that the Wellington correspondent of tho Lyttelton Times — a paper which is strongly Ministerial in tone, and as a result enjoys special favours from the Government — declares that " the Opposition cannot claim to have had ar.y appreciable influence on the provisions of the measure," and actually refers to this amendment as an " amendment carried by the Government." The inference which is meanly sought to be conveyed is that the amendment was one effected by the Government, instead of being dragged by the Opposition out of the Government. r An alteration which considerably improved the bill was secured "by the Oppositim in section 6. Under this section, as subr litted by the Government, land might be compulsorily taken in a borough or town district or within five miles of one, subject only to the limitations that not more than 100 acres should bs so taken in one year, anc* the owner should have the right to retain, out of the land proposed to be taken, an area of five acres, including the site of his dwelling house, his garden, and his grounds. This clause was objected to with great persistence by members of the Opposition, and it is to their efforts that the amendments that were made are due. The provision of the * bill was altered so that the principle of compulsory acquisition should be applied only within a borough having a population of not less than 15,000 inhabitants, according to the latest census returns — that is to say, only in Auckland. Wellington, Chrislchurch, and Dunodin — or within a radius of 15 miles from the boundary of any other borough, and the owner is to be entitled to retain an area of not more than 10 acres in a. borough or 50 acres in any other case. These amendments, like that in the previous clause, were proposed by Mr Seddon, but they were dictated by the Opposition. The alertness of the Opposition was shown also when a new clause of an objectionable character was proposed by the Premier, dealing with the taking of trust lands, and again Mr Seddon gave way, and his amendment was modified to the extent that land vested in trustees without power of sale may be acquired by the Crown by purchase or exchange in the same manner as if the trustees were the beneficial owners, with power of ■ sale. This provision is, however, not to apply : to land held in trust for Natives, and it is only to apply to the area of land taken for workmen's homes. Moreover, a new clause ' was carried by Mr Massey providing that " no ! land shall be taken compulsorily for the purI pose of workmen's homes until after tenders I have been called for land suitable fov the purpose, nor until, in the opinion of the Land ' Purchase Board, every other means of obtaining suitable land has been exhausted." The scope of the bill was, as the effect of these amendments, substantially altered, and the Opposition was perfectly justified in claiming that the bill, as reported from the committee, could no longer bo regarded as a Government measure, but had become substantially an Opposition bill. One amendment which Captain Russell failed to carry proposed to remove the retrospective i force from section 4, which provides that in the disposal of claims for compensation the i provisions of section 60 of " The Public Works i Act. 189 V in so far as they relate to assessors, I shall apply to the case of an assessor who re- | signs or refuses to act. The section in quc?- | tion in the Public Works Act specifies that I in the event of an assessor dying or becoming 1 incapable of acting, the person by whom the j appointment was made shall appoint a fresh * assessor, and the inquiry before the court ; shall proceed as if no such change in its members had taken place. It was suggested that the object the Government had in new in including this section in the bill was to supersede ono of the assessors in the case of the Hatuma estate, who placed a much higher value on the property, which the Government wishes to acquire, than it considers it is worth. However that may be, there are patent objections to a fresh assessor being appointed after the hearing of a claim for compensation ! has been commenced. His estimate of tho I value of the land in dispute wil? be based on j a portion of the evidence. The necessity of securing ihat assessors who have been .appointed" for the hearing of a particular case should be continued in office until the conclusion of the case was strongly urged by Captain Russell. Otherwise, as he said on the second reading of tho bill, this imputation is always liable to be made: that the Government may appoint an assessor to assist in

deciding the value of a property, and subsequently, if that assessor arrives at a value which the Government disapproves of as too high, but which the other assessors are likely to agree to", the Government may endeavour to put pressure on the assessor and compel him to resign, and have the whole valuation commenced de novo. The Jeader of the Opposition endeavoured to have some permanence given the tenure of office of assessors when the bill was in committee, and again when the measure arrived at the stage of being reported he proposed that it should be recommitted, with the view of having this clause reconsidered. Because the Opposition supported this proposal as against the proposal of the Premier, that the amendments made in committee should be agreed to, an extraordinarily laboured attempt has been made to show that the members of the Opposition voted against their own amendments ! By this process of reasoning, a party which has succeeded in improving a bill out of all recognition in committee is not justified in supporting a proposal to recommit the measure in order to further improve it. That is surely the height of absurdity. The Opposition is, however, entitled to take credit to itself for having converted the Land for Settlements Bill from a possible instrument of oppression, especially upon small settlers, into a workmanlike measure.