THE LAND DEBATE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2692, 18 October 1905, Page 18

THE LA ND DEBATE.

MR MASSEY'S SPEECH. CRITICISM OF THE GOVERNMENT POLICY. (Froji Ova Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, October 10. Mr Massey, in speaking on the land debate last night, opened his remarks by referring to a statement made by Mr Millar to the effect that the Trades and Labour Councils had never proposed revaluation of the existing leases until the death of the present tenants. Mr_ Millar bad gone on to say that the lease in perpetuity was only intended to last until the death of the tenant. What an astounding doctrine to put forth ! Take the case of a man going out to a bush district, and carving out a home for himself and his family. After spending his lifetime in that work the land, according to Mr Millar, would, at the settler's death, go back to the Crown He (Mr Massey) wished it to be known throughout the length and breadth *of t.h& country that one of the most prominent supporters of the Government (and one who, if he came back to Parliament, would probably become .-a. member of the Cabinet) had put forth this doctrine. When it was asked what had caused the unrest on the part of the Crown tenants and the country settlers, they would be able to point to ihe opinions expressed by the hon. member for Dunedin, and say: " There is a complete answer. It is such speeches at we have heard to-night from the member for Dunedin that have caused the demand for the freehold on the part of ihc Crown tenants of fcho colony." Mr Millar, continued Mr Massey, had also gone on to bay that he would never be a party to borrowing for the purpose of giving t.'iD Crown tenants the freehold. If, however, they gave the Crown tenants the freehold under the Land for Settlements Act it would not bo necessary to borrow, to any great extent at all events, because they would be receiving a certain sum annually from these people, and the .money received from them would, according to the proposals of the Opposition, be used for the purchase of other landsi •• Thus, it would not be necessary to go on the London market year after year to borrow £500,000 or £750,000 for this purpose. Such a course would be more statesmanlike and more in the interests of tie country than the present policy. As to Mr R. M'Kenzie's proposal to abolish the lease in perpetuity, he (Mr Massey) wished to say that, whilst he did not believe in the lease in perpetuity, he desired to know what was going to take its place before he voted to do away with it. If they wore going to have revaluation in its place they would be simply getting out of the frying-pan into the fire. If he had to dhoose between the lease in perpetuity and a lease with revaluation, he would choose the former. Revaluation was an exploded theory so far as

country lands were concerned. It was all very well in the case of city properties, but it did not work in the country. Whenever revaluation had been tried on country lands, what happened? When the revaluation period approached the holder of the land csasrjd to improve, because he knew , that the better his farm looked and the more prosperous he seemed the higher would be bib rent for (he next term. In the course of further remarks. Mr Massey advocated that when a wage-earner acquired a freehold it should not be lawful for him to part with it except with the consent of his wife He referred to a deputation of freehold members, including the Taranaki members, which, he said, waited on the Premier the other day. and asked for an opportunity of placing themselves right with their constituents. The Premier: What is this? Mr Massey : lam referring to the deputation that approached the right hon. gentleman some 10 days ago on the freehold question. The Premier: You are dreaming. Mr Massey: No, I am not. They approached the rig:!vt hon. gentleman and s asked for an opportunity to put themselves right, and this is the opportunity. If the Premier had not been playing with fch« subject he would have settled it by bringing down a bill last year. Instead of this they had the Premier's admission that the Land Commission was set up for the purpose of preventing the settlers getting the freehold. , The- Premier: I never said anything of the kind. Mr Massey: Oh, yes The hon. gentleman certainly stated that he had succeeded in that, and" tihat as a consequence there was a very large saving to the colony. The statement is on record. The Premier: No. Mr Massey, in concluding, said that, as ihe bill was not brought down last year, they should have had it this year instead of the Premier's meaningless resolutions. The Premier, however, was looking forward to the general elections makings a change in regard to the matter. He "(Mr Massey), however, hoped thai there would be a large majority of freeholders in the next Parliament, and that they would vote in accordance with their convictions ; but that night's proceedings meant nothing, and I every member of the House knew it.

A jury which was empanelled at a Southwark* (London) inquest had an extraordinary number of colours represented by the names of tha jurors. There were Frederick ' Pink. Georee Gray. Edward Brown, Geo. Black, and Edmund White.