THE LAND COMMISSION.

Otago Witness, Issue 2660, 8 March 1905, Page 15

THE LAND COMMISSION.

EVIDENCE AT OREPUKI.

SOME AMUSING WITNESSES. (By Ottb Special Reporter.) OREPUKI, February 24. The Land Commissioners were up at 5 o'clock this morning 1 , and after a cup of nffee they started out towards the Waiau Valley, with a view to getting some idea of the country. There is a fine stretch of excellent farming land here, in all about 10,000 acres. The fertility of the seil was very marked, and the poorness of the farming even more so. Fences were in bad 'repair, and ragwort and other weeds much in evidence. It was, however, a very pretty bit of country, growing splendid root crops and oats up to 60 or 70 bushels to the acre. Wherever the bush had been cleared there were luxuriant pastures, but apparently a dearth of stock in places. The sluices of the miner flowed past carrying splendid soil to destruction in the sea. The view from a, scenic point of view was very"fine. On the left was the sea, with the grim Solander afar^ ofi\ looniing out of the haze; ahead th& fine sweep of Tewaewae Bay, a haunt of the old whalers, bent round td^ards' the broken outlines of the barren Princess Mountains, with their gaunt precipices and splashes of late snow. To the right, over a wide tract of grass country and forest lands, the Takitimos reared their massive shoulders, a wash of bluish grey, against a greyer sky. In _. this district the very interesting problem of miner versus farmer met the Commission. The land is largely held under occupation leases of 100 acres. The provisions of the Mining Districts Land Occupation .Act are supposed to apply, though they are impracticable and unworkable. Most of the settlers, however, have been miners, and they do not place obstacles in the way of the miner. They are, however, anxious to get greater eecurity of tenure and larger holdings ; while the miners, on the other hand, want to see their rights jealously guarded. The problem of the destruction of some fine agricultural land by sluicing has also to be faced. There., can be no doubt that much fine land that' would support families for generation after generation has been, and is etill being, utterly destroyed, and in some c&sesfor the sake of a very small present return of gold. After a late breakfast the Commission sat at Waiau -to take evidence. The keenest interest was evidenced in the doing^- jof the Commission and £he land question generally, and the courthouse was crowded. James Wempes, the first witness, has a ' freehold "of 15 acres and 140 .acres held under occupation license. He suggested a Jejuse-in^perpetuity^ instead of occupation licenses, with verier residential conditions. • A man could not make >a farm out .of bush land here in 21 years. The Government . should not chaTge more than'sixpence an acre rent. The cost of getting a bush farm in good order would "be£B 15s an acre. The miners had thej option of runnin graces thro,ugh the cleared lajid, and some-'&llowance should be made for this. As it^ would cost the miner much less to take a ' race through cleared land than through bush land, the mirier shouldpay compensation at the rate of £8 15s an' acre for the land he used for his race. The occupation licenses were not of much value, seeing they gave no security of tenure. William 'Brown, another holder of an occupation license, ,said he concurred entirely with the last witness. Being on the goldfieldo, he would be satisfied with the lease-in-perpetuity with the oinJinary privileges accorded to the miners, but if he were not in -a goldSeids' district he would most certainly prefer the freehold. He' had no hesitation in saying that the free- ; holder would make- the better -citizen. With • the*- leasehold, and regulations regarding . cropping, etc., it would mean that they would soon have an army of f-Jovermnent inspectors? Six months ago Ire thought the leasehold was all right, but he had changed Kis views on the subject. Witness got jio compensation for mining races taken through his land v ' Wiliiem Watson, mirier, and holder of a temporary grazing license, said he wished to get greater security of tenure in the shape of a lease in- perpetuity, but he would snueh prefer the freehold. The freeholder would mate better use of his land. William IBrownridge, who. had in 12 years spent £600 on his 100-acres occupation license, wished for a better tenure and more land. He would like the freehold if there was any chance of getting it. He would be quite satisfied even to have his land revalued in order to get the option of a •freehold. Cail Otto Reichel, a jrold miner, engaged in sluicing, said he and his partner had a i claim of two acres. He wished to put the miners' side of the question. In the first place, he pointed out that the miners were here long before the farmers. The right to the water-race to his claim was granted before he was born. 38 years ago. In answer to questions, he said a good deal of agricultural land had been washed away by sluicing where driving- would have paid. Sluicinar. of course, gave a very much better net return. The miners did not study the interests of the •farmers in taking races throucrh " their lands. The miners would not like the lease in perpetuity or any alteration that would ma"ke the farmers' titles stronger Mr" Matheson pointed out that the- miners would have the same privileges under the lease in perpetuity system. Witness said in that case there would be no objection to it. Oswald Reichel, miner, complained that only farmers were appointed on Land Beards in mining districts. Miners should be represented on the Land Board. Within a mile radius of Orepuki there were 100 miners at work, and they often infringed on the rights of the occupation licenses. As carried out in practice the present system was all right; as laid down in the act it was impracticable. T>he fanners were paying too much rent in cases where their licenses had fallen in and the land had been revalued. Sixpence an acre would be sufncie»t rent -for the bush land. He* thought that gold mining paid better than farming in the local mining area. There couLi not be more than 1000 acres sluiced aVfl^ in the Orepuki district, and at a guess that must have yielded £6000 a year for the past 40 years. Witness would like to get the freehold if he could, but he thought the "leasehold was better for the country. Personally, he would like to be a freeholder, but he was a leaseholder for the country. — (Laughter.)

Patrick Mooney, gold miner and farmer for 37 years, said he was a strong frcc-holde-r. Every industrious man who wanted to make a home for himself and his family was entitled to make thd land his own. (This emphatic declaration drew fortli applause from the settleis and miners assembled in the body of the courthouse, where the commission was sitting.) He was a believer in small farms, and thought the Government held too many reserves. He had tried leasehold and freehold, and found the latter much better from a business point of view. He would give the Land Board more power than it now had.

Henry Hirst, a farmer, resident at Orepuki for 40 years, and an ex-member of Parliament, said he thought a great mistake had been made when the- policy of the two R.s — Donald Reid 1 and Rolleston —^as departed from. Their deferred payment and perpetual lease systems were the best fo* settling that country. A great deal of th© Otago district so settled was very prosperous. It went without saying that he was a freeholder. He approved of the leasehold with the right to purchase. The Government had put some funny characters on the liand Boards. — (Laughter.) In regard to ragwort, Canadian thistle, and other weeds, the Government was the greater sinner in this district. — (Applaufo irom the body of the court.) Thousands -of acres of Crown lands were now a breeding land for these weeds. The Government should be , made to keep them down. — (More applause.) He had heard complaints of late about the Advances to Settlers Department refusing loans. He also pointed out that the department did not car© to advance on lease in perpetuity. No money-lender would lend under that system. There was no tendency towards the aggregation of large estates in South.land; the tendency was quite in the opposite direction. Large estates were being sold and out up. Ragwort first made its appearance at "Winton. The contractor who made the railway" to Orepuki got his chaff there, and ragwort spread all up the line. The Government did not clear it, and it spread orver the country. Henry McQuillan, farmer, was a strong advocate for the right to purchase. Me had .been all ov^r the world, and wherever he had been he. found in the people a strong desire for the freehold. In block XV.. where his section was, the Government broke faith with the perpetual lease settlers, and had ' brought into force ths mining restrictions after it "had made its bargain with the settlers. If, therefore, under this system the Government had broken faith with the settlers, the danger undsr the lease-in-perpetuHy system would be still greater. Asked about sluicing destroying the land, witness said when he first came to the district he thought that future generations w_ould curse this one for swilling away the good land into the sea, " but after you are married," he added, ■*' and your family is making a few pounds out of th© gold, you change your opinions. — (Laughter^) Mr M'Lellan, one of the commissioners, in -asking witness some questions about tenures, mentioned • i;hat he himself was a working man and a holdter of a lease-m-To this witness replied: "'Well, my advice to you is to go away home and get your bit of ground converted into a freehold." — (Laughter.) - Hugh Erskin.e, who has a selection of 630 acres which he had cleared and grassed, said fa& was a strong advocate of tie freehold. On his 630 acres he was now running 600 head of- -acbtle, IGOO sheep, and some horses. He had put nearly all he had made out of the"**laud on it in the shape of ' improvements. None of his stock died from ragwort, they, throve on it. He .thought it one of tiie best plants that had ever been introduced into the country. — (Lauglvter.) The noxious weeds inspector camo to him' and said : "I see you have some yellow weed here." Witness replied, "Yes, but I have 700 cutters working at it."" " What, do you mean to say you have 700 people cutting it down?" asked the inspector. "Oh, no," replied witness; "I mean 700 sheep," and with that the inspector left, and did not trouble him any more. Thomas Gjeorge Pearce, sawmiller by <traiUe, but now a farmer, strongly favoured tlie freehold. He had lost no stock from ragwort. There was plenty of grass, and the -cattle did not eat it : but now thai he was compelled to cut it down he had no doubt the cattle would eat it when it was dry. and that then he would lose some stock. He also complained that the Government had broken faith with the perpetual lease settlers in block XV. He thought he should .get the freehold at the original value, as t^e value of his land to-day was just what he had made it.

Thomas Howard, a bush settler, holding 1004 acres under occupation license, with the right of purchase, came next. This witness, who came originally from the Isle of Erin, caused much amusement by his depreciation of in© bush land in his locality. On one section ,he said, taken up by O'Connell, there was not a Jiving for a dead duek — (laughter), — and O*Conn«H knew it — (more laughter.) Witness said he was a freeholder.

Joseph Wilson, freeholder, complained that the Land Act was unfairly administered. A section of his had been forfeited for non-residence, and "given to a neighbour, who still held it, though to this day the neighbour had never resided on it. A member of the commission suggested that when the section had been offered the second time the tenure had been altered.

Bernard Horrel, farmer, said he was in favour of the freehold. H*e did not think there could be any perfect settlement without the freehold as the ultimate object. Settlers had not the same heart in their work, and not the same desire to effect improvemnts on a leasehold. Most of the lease-in-perpetuity settlers were anxious for the right to nurehase at the original cost The increased value was put on th© laud by the settlers themselves. He thought revaluation would be unfair and likely to keep the settlers in poverty. He was afraid rthe leasp-in-perpetuity might be tampered with in the direction of revaluation if the land reformers were allowed to have their war.

James J. H. M'Lean. farmer, spoke strongly in favour of the freehold. He thought every effort should be made to get their boys on the land, and that would not be so easy under the leasehold system. Ho had fears that if he died and his young children could not carry on satisfactorily his section would be forfeited.

Mr Hay, Land Commissioner, said that that was so, but every consideration would bo shown and valuation given for improvements.

Mr M'Kerrow assured the witness tfcat the Government was thp best landlord, .nicl in such a case the family would be treated

■with every consideration possible — (\pplau«e from die settlers present.) Besides, the Minister of Lands was always a man of character and ready to foe full justice* done. He (Mr M'Kerrow) had been head of the Land Department for several yeais, and ceuld assure witness that the Government, as landlord, stretched the law m every possible direction in the interests of the settlors.

Alexander Milne Dawson, gold miner, objected to any better tenure being given to the farmers in mining districts.

William George Hodgett, a lease-in-perpp-tuity settler, wanted to get the right of purchase.

Four miners gave unimportant evidence of purely local interest.

The Commission returns to Invercar^iU to-morrow, and goes on to Stewart's Island in the afternoon.