THE LAND COMMISSION.

Otago Witness, Issue 2663, 29 March 1905, Page 15

THE LAND COMMISSION.

EVIDENCE AT RANFURLY.

a^AND NATIONALISERS TO THE

FRONT.

(Bt Oub Special Repobteb.)

NASEBY, March 17.

The members of bhe Land Commission 'drove from Naseby to Ranfurly this morning, and held a meeting in the schoolhouse. at 10 o'clock. There was a good attendance of settlers from the surrounding districts. John Forrester, farmer, said that settlers in that district were in the happy position of having no grievance. He had been in the Eweburn district for 29 years, and owned 212 acres freehold, and held 890 acres under lease in perpetuity. His rent ■was about Is per acre. He was quite satisfied with the lease in perpetuity as long as things remained as they were. The Chairman: Do you think the lease might be altered?

Witness : I have seen some statements about revaluation.

The Chairman: I think that is a matter you need not trouble yourself about. That is my impression. You have entered into & contract with the Government, and it ■with you, and it requires both parties to agree to the breaking before it can be broken.

Witness said he would certainly not agree to the breaking of it.

Further questioned, he said he had 300 acres sown down in English grass. There ■was plenty of water in the district. He got his freehold under the deferred-payment system. He was satisfied with the constitution of the Land Boards. If there was to be any change in land tenure, he thought the old deferred-payment system was the best; it suited the district. Some of the larger runs might b<%- cut up into smaller areas with profit to the tenant and State. A man ought to be able to make a fair living out of land that vrcadd carry 1000 sheep. Puketoi, liinburn, and Blackstone Sill runs we-re suitable for cutting up. They oould be cut up to give a fair proportion of arable land to each piece of hill country. He was satisfied with, the Advances to Settlers Department. If the runs were cut up there were people in the district who would take up the land. He had sown ryegrass, cocksfoot, and clover. Mr M'Cutehan: Do you think that your lease might be interfered with? — Witness: I have seen it stated in the papers over and over again that labour unions in Dunedin want to get periodical revaluations. Are they advocating that revaluation should have retrospective effect?— That I do not know. If they do not it is all right. By taking the rebate in rent in good times, are you not giving the labour organisations good ground for their advocacy of revaluation? Is it not an interference with 4he terms- of your lease? — I cannot see it in that light at all.

Patrick Bkaeh, farmer, said he owned 320 acres of free-hold and held 530 acres lease in perpetuity. This year he had a crop of 80 acres, and 70 acres of turnips. He also engaged in dairy farming, with 40 cows. A branch of the Taieri and Peninsula Dairy Company had been established in the district for 12 months. He was satisfied with his lease in perpetuity. Leases under that tenure laboured under a hardship. He had held his freehold since 1880, and four years a-go he got his leased land. It was poor ground, and six or seven miles from his home. Every year he got notice from the Land Board to show cause why he did not reside on it. He thought that under the circumstances he might not be called on to reside on the leasehold.

The Chairman: I think myself the law requires amendment in that rgspect. Witness, in reply to further questions, said that irrigation was not carried on in the district because the Government had taken the water from the settlers for mining purposes. At the time the Eweburn dam was made there was a conflict on the matter between the farmers and the miners. The farmers opposed the proposal, but on receiving a promise that they would be able to get water on the same terms as the. miners they withdrew their opposition. The miners, however, broke faith with the farmers. The water would be used by the farmers for irrigation purposes if it was available. They would pay a< much as miners now paid for the privilege. His experience with the Advances to Settlers Apt had been satisfactory. He thought liinburn and Puketon runs might be cut Tip, but the people in the district feared that other people would come from all parts of the colony to compete against them. He would like if the Government owned all the land in the colony. There should be no freehold at all. In years to come the population of New Zealand would be large, and where were the people to get land from if it was all sold now? He thought the young people in the district were not marrying in such numbers as they did one time. A clergyman said recently that he was forgetting how to marry people. — (Laughter.) _ "VTr M'Cutchan : I think that is a condition of affairs that applies only to this district. John Law, jun., said he owned 1700 seres of freehold about two miles from Ranfurly. The principal want of the district was to ■ get more land for settlement. to taking up land of his own he 'had tried his fortune at the ballot, but ■was one of the unfortunates. He was never able to get a piece of land. There was always a number of unfortunates in the district for the reason that there was never «umoient land put in the market. The ballot, he thought, was the best plan to gjve people a fair and equal opportunity to get on the land, but there were evils attending it because people who wished to get land did not always get it. The way io minimise that evil was t<y keep plenty ©i land in ihe. market. He did not know any run in the district that was cut up that was not applied for five or six times over. He had read the evidence of Mr "William Laidlaw, of Matakanui, and agreed with that gentleiaa-n when he said there ■was a difficulty in working high country. The man who had it to work wanted some security of tenure. He did not agree with Mr Laidlaw on the matter of area. If a man had a run that was principally high country and carried, say. 17,000 sheep, it would carry more sheep if it had more low country. A man required at anyrate 100 C Seres to run 1000 sheep. An area- to run 5000 eh pen was too large, considering the tiacre was for land.

Mr Paul: Do you think that the leasehold policy should be continued?— Witness : I believe in the State ownership of the coil. I suppose you would limit the area of freehold one man oould hold?— I cannot see how it can be done. I do not see the difference between a number of small freeholders under a mortgage company and a number of small leaseholders under a large freehold landlord. Has your freehold increased in value? — | Yes. " ' Apart from your exertions? — Yes. The fact that the railway has come along has increased ihe value. Do you think that the unearn-ed increment should belong to the State?— No, not mm j n<? . — (Laughter.) I believe in. it as> a principle, however. ! To Mr M'Cardle : The 999 years' lease ought to be revalued when hard times came , and a man wanted a lower rent. — ' (Laughter.) Further questioned, the witness said that irrigation would improve the land in the district. He favotxred the present constitution of Land Boards if boards were required at all. His own idea was that the commissioner and his staff could do the whole of the work. The Land Board was really the buffer between the people and the Minister. If there was any credit it , went to the Minister, and if there was no credit the blame was laid on the board.— (Laughter.) He understood that some of the farmers in the district were not satisfied with their leases in regard to the work of Advances to Settlers Office. The wrtness said he was of opinion that all freeholds gianted by the Crown should be mortgageable only to the Crown, and then, in the event of a freeholder getting into difficulties the land would fall back into tho hands of the Crown. Patrick M'Cluskey, farmer, said he held a. grazing right over 300 acres five miles from Ranfurly. He carried on dairying with 40 cows. He had been in several ballots to get more land, but had so far been unsuccessful. He considered that the lease in neroetuity excelled all the freeholds in existence. If the Government permitted the freehold to everyone there was no power in New Zealand to keep the capitalists from aggregating estates. Aggregation was going on in the district. He opposed the. option of the freehold being given to Crown tenants. It might be allowed if the freeholders could only borrow money from the Government. James Scott, farmer, said he held 94-6 acres under lease in perpetuity eight miles from Ranfurly. He shore about 600 sheep every year, and sold fat lambs. Anything grown on the farm was consumed on it. He had no fault to find with the La-nd Boards. He did not approve of elected Land Boards. He objected to more di.scretionary powers being given to the Land Boards, because it would tend to make people crawl after the board and its members, and there was nothing mcc contemptible than to see people crawlins. The law was there, and let it be executed as near as possible, though not harshly. He believed in the limitation of freeholds by value. The cost of supplying water for the Maniototo basin would be too great to grow ordinary crops. Even if the cost- was within the limit, there was not sufficient water to supply the whole plain. If the Taieri was utilised it would have to be taken about Serpentine, but it would be very expensive to bring it in and maintain it, and the cost would really be too great. The day might come when it woulfl be done — when, the Japanese took us in hand. So far as he had observed, all the runs cut up had been occupied. The Rock and Pillar and Mount Ida had been taken up. When the low lands were settled there would be a greater Remand for the high country. The people on the low country required the high country for summer grazing. He believed that the high country could be used to more advantage in that way than by throwing that country into the large runs. In reply to Mr M'Cardle, the witness said he considered that Land Boards were a superfluity.

William Dowling-, farmer, said he held 1200 acres on perpetual lease five miles from Ranfu-rly. It was a lease that gave him the right of purchase. He carried on mixed farming, and shore about 700 sheep. The wheat yield averaged 25 bushels to the acre, and oats 30 bushels. Potatoes grew well, but the frost damaged them. There was no disease in the potatoes. He was

satisfied with his lease- When he took up his land 11 years ago thero was a creek running through it, but since the Eweburn dam had been erected one-half of the supply had been cut off. He had made no complaint to the authorities. Others had done so without getting any satisfaction.

The Chairman : Well, that is certainly not fair.

Witness said that if the supply of water was reduced something should be taken or? | his rent. He thought that there should be no freehold at all ; it should be all lease--hold. The Puketoi run was one of the best about the country, and would be taken up readily if acquired for settlement. He reckoned that the Blackstone Hill was not such good land- as the Puketoi.

John Law, sen., farmer, said he had 900 acres of freehold and between 500 and 600 acres on lease in perpetuity. He endorsed all his son had said with regard to the hig-h country. There was a disability put upon settlers holding 1000 acres of the low country. If that disability was removed it would be the means of giving greater facilities _ for occupying high country. Small grazing runholders, he thought, ought to be allowed to hold up to the maximum of 5000 acres. The. man holding a leasehold would, Jvc believed, take as much care of his land as the man with a freehold.