THE LAND COMMISSION.

Otago Witness, Issue 2664, 5 April 1905, Page 34

THE LAND COMMISSION.

(By Otir Special Refoktee.)

POSITION OF THE RUNHOLDERS

SIDELIGHTS ON LAND SETTLEMENT

The Land Commission held its third Bitting in Dunedin on the 28th. John Roberts said he was a merchant, runholder, and freeholder.*" He had been a runholder since 1559. He held the Gladbrook run, comprising 35,000 acres, for -which he was paying £750 a year. He had been occupying it since 1872, and on that run, including 9000 acres of freehold and 9500 acres of Higb School reserve, he shore 20,000 sheep. He was lessee of the Patearo* run, comprising about 65,000 acres. tip till last year, when it was taken from him. He had field Patearoa run about 28 years, and latterly he was paying £1097 12s 6d for it. The carrying capacity of Patearoa wa-s about the same as Gladbrook — 20,000 sheep, and in addition 400 head of cattle. • On the Gladbrook run hb had about 600"' head of "cattle in addition to the sheep. In "reference to "the cutting tip of Patearoa, it "seemed a very unfair thing that land which was fit for a large holding at a certain lent .should be let - at a - smaller Tent in Bmaller" holdings. He was told that ,tlie rerits the Government now received totalled CSQY 5s 9d 7 whereas the rent formerly paid by him was £1097 12s 6d, and he was prepared to give an increased rent for a "renewal of the lease. The land on Patearoa ranged in altitude from 1100 ft at the lowest to 4750 ft at the highest above sea-level. A good deal " had been taken off during his occupation of the river frontage, which materially affected the run, and of late rears he "had had barely sufficient to keep his flock going. As for the statement that the settlement had been very successful, it remainea to be seen whether the tenants could pay thsir rents in view of what was due very soon — a slump in both wool and sheep. The Minister of Lands, when talking about cutting up the run, was anxious to take off the low country, and he asked witness to continue with the high. Witness informed him that without the low country the run was perfectly unworkable, and declined to take it. The Chairman : Has the run been so out up now that sufficient low and high oountry has been kept together to make workable runs? — No, that is not possible. Then_Jhe&e people cannot work the country successfully unless they have low ground somewhere else?— There are four ordinary pastoral subdivisions, taking up about 35,000 acres, which run about se\en miles long by an average width of one" ami a-half to two miles. It is high country running down~to "the Tiver, end the amount of courtry in these blocks is necessarily very 6milL So it might be found in a very short time not very profitable to work these runs— of course there must be a great deal ot fencing to go back seven miles?— Yes. 1 may also inform the commission- that the "subdivision of this country caused a great deal of anxiety and- trouble to the Lands Department. Not only did the Land Board Visit i;he run, but Mr Marchant was sent down from Wellington, and it was ci'.ly after the greatest difficulty that the Government arrived at the conclusion it did. What was done with the balance of the nin? You say 35,000 acres were disposed of in pastoral runs.— lt was subdivided into small grazing te ns, and a certain portion at Sowburn was cut up into small sections arid Eafcen up by the residents there. Did this subdivision, so far as you know, result in the establishment of more homes? —I am told that the small grazing runholders are in occupation of their land, but all the settlers were already settled in the district. . , . So that there has been no material increase of what you might call actual settlers?— So far as I know there^ are no Btrangers to the district on any of it. In regard to Gladbrook we had one or two witnesses before us at Middlemarch who said it was very desirable to secure more country for settlement, and they also told us that the Government haJ been negotiating with you for the purchase ot a portion of your freehold but that nothing resulted because a difficulty arose in regard % -fco the question of price: is there any '■ remark you wish to make in .regard to that?— ln reference to the evidence at Miadlemarch as to the value- of land there, although .1 did not deal with the Government there were small settlers there who wanted to increase their holdings, and I have been selling in 50 and 100-acre- blocks to them at what I believe to be a perfectly fair value. One -witness said I was selling land at £14 per acre for which he thought £9 per acre enough. Well, as an evidence of the cheapness and fairness of the -value put on the land, I have produced a sample of wheat this morning for the information of the commission. It is a sample of wheat that has -been grown on the other side of the fence to the land I am selling. The land is of equal value. -That wheat yielded 60? bushels of firsts and M bushels of seconds. Tt has been sold and delivered at 3s 3d per bushel at the MiddlemaTch Railway Station. If you run that out I think you find it comes to £10 K)s 2d per acre. If a man wants land for ±.a per acre that is capable of growing crops like that, I think .he wants to rob the man who owns it. This particular block of land I am offering now, and some of which I have sold at £14 per acre, is land that has been down in English grasses for 26 years. It was put down in English grasses after three crops of turnips had been taken off it. No white crop has been * taken off it. and so far as the fertility of that land is' concerned I say it is fully bert&r than the land on which this wheat has been grown. Was the land the Government treated for similar land to this?— lt was a portion of Are there any other remarks you would like to make? — I wish to make some remarks in reference generally to the position of runholders in the colony. I think it •would be a very great hardship and a very great wrong to ask the men who have been horn 30 to 40 years occupying that country profitably and well io step aside as soon as the land is tranted for anybody else. I urge the fairness and propriety and nghteousn€S?. in the event of any change being ma<^e, to make provision by which the runholder would be entitled to retain a f air portion of his holding. There are men in the country, as you know, who have no Other land to divide amongst their sons and daughters, and surely they have a

right to lie considered when the properties they are now occupying are being dealt with. I have also to s-ugge«t that any new provision in regard to term of holdingought to contain a lengthened lease xip to 21 years with renewal by auction or in any other way at that time and with revaluation and also valuation for improvements. I think the present limitation of the value of improvements is quite inadequate. I think "the improvements ought to be unlimited so long as the improvements are in keeping with the requirements of the run. In regard to buildings, I say they ought to be reasonable buildings for the holdings, and not absurd buildings. I think the runholder should be allowed fencing to any extent, ditching io any extent, and plantations to any extent.

I presume you think it will fcp reasonable before engaging in a considerable outlay for improvements that the runholder ought to consult, the Land Board as the landlord? — I don't think so. A man will not willingly put dowji improvements that he thinks will not be reproductive.

Might they not put down improvements to an undue extent wifh a view to preventing anybody else taking up the country? — Not so far as ditching and fencing are concerned, and I -say that the buildings shculd he in fceeping with the holding. I would not object to the question of buildh.gs being first submitted to the Land Board, but so far as fencing and ditchingare concerned I think the runholder should be- at liberty to improve in that way to any extent. I think the Waste Land Board- members are very reasonable people, and that they would sanction anything in reason. So far as grass seed sowing was concerned, I do not think the> benefit to be derived from, it would encourage it to be carried on to any extent. I have tried surface sowing on my freehold, but not on my leasehold. It cost a very considerable sum, and a sum outside any probable benefit' to be derived.

Is there anything you could suggest with regard to the future disposal of this great pastoral country now in the hands of the' Crown? We have in Otago, Southland, and Canterbury 9,000,000 acres of this oountry, and, of course, the future disposition of this property is a very serious thing. As a matter of fact, a great deal of the low country has been taken away, and a great deal of the high country has been left without sufficient low country to take advantage, of . the summer pastures ? — I think a great deal of harm has been done to the high country by cutting off the low country. But that has been done? — It is still being done.

Suppose this was your own estate, what would you do to make the most of it? — I think it is possible for the Government to repurchase some of the low ground at a price that would pay them well enough to take the' low country to work with the high. I think that is the case with the Rocklands run. It was offered the other day, and there was no bid for it, and I am told that the holding adjoining it could be bought at a price and the rents loaded with the interest which would enable the high country to be worked with it at a profit.

We have had a good deal of evidence about the deterioration of the pastoral country. Whatj is your observation on that point? — I think the country has deteriorated in nine cases out of ten.

What would you say it was due to? — I think the rabbits mostly, and in some cases bad seed.

Do you think anything could bo cone to restore some of the ancient fertility "r — It is a difficult problem. Ido not know how it is to be done. To get quit of the rabbits would no doubt be the first step, but they are not so easily handled.

Do you think resting the eo.uifcry would have any effect? — It would, providing you could keep the rabbits off. I do not know if the commission saw the Barewood run, but that has been half-stocked for the last two year 3, and it ha 3 recovered a good deal. But "half-stocking mears a considerable loss to the tenant.

Still, if it is going to bring back the fertility of the land it might be made part of a future law that the counry should be subdivided and rested periodically, both for the good of tenant and for the good of the country as well? — It will be very difficult to earrv out that system in places.

In regard to the constitution of Land Boards, do you think the present nomination system is the best that could be devised? — So- far as I know it has given perfect. satisfaction. I do not know of any case where a hardship has been : nflio-t&d by the board. I think they have administered matters with a perfectly even hand.

In reply to questions, witness said that the unearned increment was very difficult to assess. In the city, where a man bought a section, he had nothing to do to secure- the •increment beyond letting it lie. To a large extent the unearned increment came in in the city, and only to a small extent in the country. * Much of the Gladbrook land .was swamp. He had drained and cultivated it — some of it for 15 years. He had also had experience in bush lands. Mr Watson Shennan was paying a rental for Puk&toi that could not be secured if the run were cut up. Mr Shennan had a flock of sheep there that was a credit to himself and to the colony, and if the run were cut up the sheep would be. dispersed, which would be a great loss to the colony. In many cases runs were being cut up into areas that were too small. Generally speaking, with regard to Crown lands, he advocated that the State should give the option of the freehold. In the case of lands purchased for settlement the option should not be given. There would be no harm in selling the purely pastoral country. Patearoa run was an instance of the danger of taking low country. For some years they had been unable to satisfactorily winter their sheep owing to the loss of the low lands. Spelling was the only way to improve the grass on the high runs. The. high country in Central Otago was not carving as many sheep as it did 30 years ago, but the rente were about the same. In regard to land settlement, he pointed out that a large block of land near Ofcautau had been settled by private holders. The block comprised the estates of Bayswat-er, Ringway, Gladfield. and Waicola, wifch an uggr-egaxe acreage of 45,000 or 50.000 acres. These estates were sold by private individuals or companies for closer settlement, and he was sure the Government could not show a finer settlement than what was to be seen there. The land was sold at reasonable values, and all the settlers had done well. When the Puketoi run was being put up seven ycar=; ago the late Sir John M'Kenzie said to him: "Shennan is a good settle lj and a ruan

whom th-e country has a right to be proud of. and I am going to do him justice " Witness had tried irrigation on Gladbrook with very successful results.

Arthur H. Heycock, accountant and general business manager for Messrs Murray, Robert?, and Co., was the n«xt witness. He was informed by the chairman that the commission wished to a-k him specially about the grassing of runs. Witness said that his firm had tried grass-sow-ing on some of their freeholds with good results, though the cost was considerable. They did not grass the leaseholds, because the cost was too great. The cost would not be considered too great if they had a tenure that would give them a chance of getting the benefit of the grass, and if valuation were allowed at the end of the term. Such «, thing would largely increase the carrying capacity of the land. He supported the freehold tenure. It gave a man an incentive to work on his land. _

Alfred Richard Barclay, solicitor, said he wished to speak rather from the business point of view than from the practical work- j ing of lands. He knew something of land transactions and of the \alue of land. He , had formed an opinion very strongly against j the State granting freehold, and he desired to offer one or two illustrations of how ] grants of freehold worked. He would speak ! first of the city land. JKe produced a plan i showing Corporation, Harbour Board, and j Presbyterian Church reserves in and about ', Dunedin. Section 39, block ix (Wise's corner, Princes and Kattray streets) was [ obtained by the Crown grantee for £12 10s \ in 1854. In 1885 it was sold for £35,500. j The buildings were not good buildings, j because they were demolished and replaced by the Government Life Insurance Co.'s premises. Court's Hotel was also on the section ; it was not a very valuable building. | Section 65, block ix (on which the Grand j Hotel stood) was bought for £59 10s. It j was Crown granted in 1854. In 1880 it was let for 21 years. The rent for the first , two years was to be £1703 per annum, and j for the remaining 19 years it was to be ] £1965 per annum, the tenant to pay all j rates and taxes. It might be said that in that case the buildings were of great value, j but, as a matter of fact, they were wooden | buildings that were valueless, and there was j a clause in the lease to the effect that the tenant was to spend £7000 in buildings j within a certain time. Th& old buildings were pulled down, -and £7000 and more | was spent on the land. If £1965 was the , rental _of that piece of ground — some 38 j poles — it was equal to a capital value of £40,000, so that from 1854- to 1880 the landg! had risen in value from £59 10s to £4-0,000. , These were facts that would go far to explain that inherent sentiment that was in every man's mind to secure the freehold. He would contrast those figures with the ' rental of the section opposite the Grand Hotel, on which stood the Colonial Mutual , Co.'s building. That was a Corporation ; section. The rent was only £300 a year, j That was all the Corporation asked, and the j Corporation did very well out of it, and was ! quite satisSed. Another Corporation reserve I was that on which Messrs A. and T. Inglis j shop in George street stood. The total j rent paid was £169 7s Id, which was a, I very fair and moderate rent. It had been said that if the freehold was parted with the land could still be taxed, and to show that an unfair amount was paid by way of taxation he would point out that the unimproved value of land in New Zealand in 1904 was £112,629,412. Out of that land j the total revenue collected by the Crown j was £335,000, which included £102,000 of j graduated land tax. The unimproved value , of land was increasing faster than the value j of the improvements put upon it. The increase in the unimproved value from 1891 to 1904 was £36,841,517. and the total increase in the value of improvements was only £23,801,532. After quoting further figures from the New Zealand Year Book and other sources witness said that experience in the city showed that there was no ground for the objection that if a man did not get the freehold he would not make the- best use of the land. The Colonial Mutual Co.'s building in the city was on a leasehold. If the freehold of the Land for Settlements sections were given it would tend to break down the system. The rents charged by the City Corporation were fixed j by valuation. He thought the State would < be justified in purchasing all the freeholds ) at the sum of 112 million, together with the improvements, which were set down at 70 million. As far as Jie remembered the Fair Rent Bill, which was introduced in the House during his term as a member of the House, had no retrospective action.

Robert Ferguson, compositor, said he was a native of New Zealand, end had been 20 years in Dunedin. He appeared on behalf of the Trades and Labour Council, and desired to emphasise what Mr Scott had said upon the matter of the Labour party in Dunedin, and in the whole of New Zealand, not being antagonistic to the farmers. There was no reason why they should be. The only thing they objected to was anyone holding a freehold. So long as the freehold system was in existence a man had a perfect right to buy a freehold, but they objected to the system. They considered the land question of more importance to them than any other legislation passed In New Zealand, and until they got the land laws properly fixed they would never «*et what they considered justice. They contended that parting with the freehold was parting with the birthright of the people. It would be as right to 6ell the air as to sell the land, because the one was as necessary to life as the other. They considered the land belonged not only to this generation, but to future generations. They had heard about the inherent desire to possess a freehold, but if it was inherent in e\eiyone where was all the freehold to come from? The only way to gratify the desire was for the State to hold the land ; then everyone would have a share in it. Under the freehold system, all that was got for land was ite jmarket value for the time being, and no matter what improvements might take

Floejxine !— Fob the Teeth and Bbeath.— A few drops of the liquid " Florilitie " sprinkled on a>- wot tooth brush produces a pleasant lather, which thoroughly cleanses the teeth from all parasites or impurities, gardens the gums, prevents tartar, etop3 decay, gives to the teeth a peculiar pearly-whiteness, and a delightful fragrancs to the breath. It removes all unpleasant cdour arising from decayed teeth or tobacco smoke. " The Fragrant Floriline," being composed in parts of Honey and sweet herbs, is delicious to the taste, and the greatest toilet discovery of the age. Of all. Chemists and Perfumer 3. Wholesale depot, 33 Farringdoa road. London, K)i<iia.Ti(t * "

place, or what railways might be cou.structed, the only per-on who benefited was the landowner." As an illustration of his meaning, he mentioned that a few years back land at Anderson's Bay might have been worth £50 an acie. but tram construct ioi, had taken place at the expense of the ratepayer, and the price of that land went up. Anderson's Bay landowners had not done anything to increase the value of the land, but they benefited by the money spent by the Dunedm ratepayers. The same with Otago Central. If money was spent on railway construction the settlers' land was increased in value, and the landowner benefited, and the railways did not pay interest on their cost. They had to pay a portion of this interest <n railways— to bear an extra burden,— and the landowner reaped the advantage every time. He (the landowner) said: "Go on spending money. The more you spend the more I will put up my rents, and the more I will ask the consumer for my goods." He wanted to be perfectly fair with the landowner, and did not want to take anything from him, and he said if a man improved his land let him have those improvements, but he thought it was not right a man should be allowed by the State to take what did not belong- to him: that was the unearned increment. He reckoned the only way was to retain the land, and have periodical revaluation^.- Speaking as to evidence already given before the commission, he said the farmer was very far from being an unbiassed witness, and that no value should be placed upon what was said by the farmer with a freehold. He considered it an insult to the leaseholder to say he did not farm hie land so well as the freeholder. He farmed it quite as well. Beplying to questions, Mr Ferguson said the resident at Anderson's" Bay paid his tram fare, but he also paid an increased rent as a result of the trams running. Supposing people would not go to settle in remote districts unless they could get freehold, he would still adhere to his principle, but he would offer inducements to people to go to such places:' He did not say that increases in wages would increase rents. The prosperity of a colony had increased bsfore the wages were raised, and immediately a colony was prosperous the value of land went up, and the more ixent a' man would have to pay. Mr Matheson : Don't you think the simplest way to enrich a colony is to make it more productive? — Witness: As a general principle. I believe that is go. Mr Matheson: Supposing by granting the freehold it would make a country more productive, would you be in favour of granting fche freehold ? — Witness : No ; I would not.

Mr Matheson indicated the iesult might be that if freehold could not be got in one- country, people- might go to another where it could be got. John Lethbridge, Dunedin manager for Dalgety and Co. (Limited), said he represented the- lessees of the Morven Hills run. They wished to surrender the lea&e. The Land Board, by direction of the Minister of Lands, however, now that the commission was sitting-, refused to deal with the matter. The run consisted of 320,000 acres, a.nd the rental was £2750, and there had besn a Ices of no fewer than 60,000 sheep in its carrying capacity of recent years. The cost of rabbiting on that station for 14 years was £58,010. The average number of men employed rabbiting each year was 157. In a very exceptional yea-r the return for rabbitskins would about balance the expenditure on the destruction of rabbits, but that would be only in one year in 14-, when the price of skins was high. Rabbits were again increasing on the run. The lease had only five years to run, and the lessees were in a dilemma, as it was no use making improvements, for which they would get no value, or to restock the run. There was not enough low country in the run now. In the damper climate of Southland surfacesowing had been a great success. In Central Otago the land was not so suitable, except in the gullies. He thought irrigation would be a success on the run. He said this because of the success that had attended the irrigation of the freehold on Mount Pisa. The* amount of feed that could be grown on the irrigated land there was simply astonishing. Alfred Dillon Bell, runholder, Shag Valley and Mount Ida Stations, said that the runholders considered that they had not received, and were not receiving, sufficient consideration for their industry and their long settlement in the country. Personally, Ida. Talley run was held by his father before him, and by himself for about 50 years, during which time they had given up without a murmur, as it was required for settlement, every portion that from, time to time was taken by the Government for that purpose. Their country had been taken by tens of thousands of acres, and the 73,000 acres now left would carry only 18,000 sheep. At different times they had lost blocks of from 4000 to 11,000 acres of their best land, and they were now relegated to the worst of the country. As he had said, they had never complained, but there came a time, when a runholder felt that if the process were indefinitely extended he must go. It was, he thought, a fair question for the commission to consider whether, as a principle of public- policy, the runholder ought to be treated in this way, and ho believed there was fair reason to suppose that the runholder, who had kept the country when it wai not wanted for close settlement, might occupy it with profit to himself and to the State. In his own case, and in other cases, he had given up from time to time many thousands of acres of his best oountry. He had been compelled to remove the ewes and the lambs from their proper country, until now they were on oountry that was formerly given up to the mountain wethers. Runholders, in their own opinion, had been fairly good settlers. They had acquired a little freehold and built homes for themselves. For himself. hf* had lived on his land nearly all his life, and that was also the case with other runholders. Some of them were not close to a school, and had to pay for private tuition. They were deprived of many of the comforts and conveniences of town life. He had often worked 14 hours a day. This had been the life of many runholders for 20 years or so, and to-day they only had their heads above water, and all the time they had seen their country disappearing from them by tens of thousands of acres. It was a process that could not bo carried on any further without ruin to the runholders, nor could it be carried any furLher with advantage to the colony. If, having lived frugal lives and done ' their best on the properties, they had anived at their present position without becoming rich men, it yas eerUm that if the rest of

their time was to be dovct-ed to making a In ing en the \vor~L of the lane) they had formeily held, th-eir future was not a veiy Lopeful one He believed that in Central Otago tlie time had arrived when the country wotild not be benefited by the> extermination ot the original squatter. Let him have, at anyrate. a workable portion of the lantl ho now oeexipied. It required expert work and a large holding to make a smcccss of the present runs. From one of (he founders of this country he had the advice given to him never to stand in the way of settlement, and ho had no sympathy with the man who refused to budge an inch from the march of settlement. He had never taken up that attitude, and he had never objected to the taking of any area, though he held that too much had been taken already. He> would ask, Was it in the interests of the State that the runholders should be put out of their holdings? In a. portion of the country of which he had been speakingthere was a factory for the production of merino sheep, but these neets were getting scarcer. He thought that New Zealand required to conserve a certain extent of that area, where men had deliberately given up the attractions of greater profits in order to maintain first-class merino flocks. Already bints had been given, in the paper» that it was necessary to import merino sheep from Australia. If the local supplies were cut off, ie was well known' that the merino sheep would disappear and that halfbred and longwool sheep would take their place. It was, therefore, a question for the commission to consider, as a matter of public policy, wh&ther it was desirable to destroy one of the very few centres of merino sheep-breeding that still existed itt the colony and so make it dependent on. importations from A-ustralia in the future. He now frankly made an appeal for a body of men in Otago and Canterbury who had long been described as an obstruction; to settlement and a curse to the country. He thought the time had com© when, after all, it ought to be realised that the runholders had fulfilled a public function in the past and ought to be- realised as good citizens. William Lindsay Craig, district land valuer, said that all ovor the district in Otago which he valued the values of land! were rising. On first class land there was a considerable advance, on second class. land a moderate advance, and on poorcountry little or no advance. He did not think that the proposal to advance up to three-fifths of a tenant's interest in" hi 3 improvements would be safe.

This concluded the takiag of evidence m Dunedin.