LAND SETTLEMENT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3102, 27 August 1913, Page 13

LAND SETTLEMENT.

THE METHOD OF PURCHASE

LARGE ESTATES VANISHING

(Fkom Oub Own Cobbkspondknt.) WELLINGTON. August 19. In the House of Representatives this afternoon a question by Mr Clark on the method of acquiring private land for settlement called forth a speech from M.r Massey which foreshadowed a possible chaaige in the method of acquiring private estates for settlement purposes. The question acted was, “AVill the Government this session introduce an amendment to the Land Act giving power to compulsorily take large areas of privately-owned land for closer settlement, the price to be arranged by arbitration i" In a few r subsequent remarks be stated a case where a certain piece of land was valued by the Government Valuer at £7 15s per acre, but when the block was purchased by the Land Purchase Board £2O per acre was given. Because of this the tenants ever since had been loaded up to the extent of at least 200 per cent, more than they should have been if the Government valuation of the land had been taken. He thought some change should be made in the present method cf acquiring the land. The official printed reply of the Prime Minister was:—‘‘The Land for Settlements Act already gives power to take land compulsorily. Previous to 1907 it was provided that the price should be arranged by a Compensation Court presided over by a Supreme Court judge, but the process was found to be both tedious and expensive, and an alteration was made. At present a number of blocks of land in different parts of the dominion are under offer to tho Government for settlement purposes, ‘and suitable areas for small settlement are being purchased as finance permits.” After some general discussion on the point Mr Massey made a speech of some interest. He said that up to 1907, when it was amended on the motion of Mr M‘Nab, then Minister of Lands, the law had been working very satisfactorily indeed. He was opposed to the change made then. The position now was that the landowner practically fixed his own valuation. He was not at all sure that the law as : t stood could not be bettered, for he had not changed his mind at ail since the alteration of the Act in 1907. There was an inquiry held into land matters, and it came out that the legal expenses in compulsorily taking the land were costing in nearly every 'case thousands of pounds. A return had been ordered in this connection, and it would be available, he hoped, during the current session. It would show that tiie legal expenses were out of all proportion to the value of the land. Lawyers, valuers, all sorts and conditions of men, were appointed at high salaries for the time being, and thousands of pounds for legal expenses were added to the value of the ground and the unfortunate settlers were paying interest on them to-day. ‘‘lf we go back to the original system, and I say even now I prefer the original system, then something will be done to prevent the excessive cost of legal expenses.”

Mr M'Callum: The money was earned all right. Mr Massey ; I do not agree with that, and when the return comes along I think you will agree with me that the money was not earned. Members he continued, were inclined to overlook the fact that subdivision was going on very rapidly indeed. In addition to the Land for Settlement Act there was the Land for Settlement Finance Act, and the graduated land tax was going on all the lime. Then there was the fact that sheep land was becoming so valuable for dairy purposes that it was being cut up to provide dairy farms. He knew the Auckland provincial district thoroughly, and he said from a thorough knowledge that there was hardly a large eatate left there He could remera-

ber when the Waikato Valley was full of large estates, but now there were none. In Taranaki now there were no large estates, and the same course had been in operation in other districts. He believed that in less than 10 years there would not be a single large estate left in New Zealand. So far as legislation was concerned for expediting the subdivision of land, he believed that, if nob this session, then next session, they would have to discriminate between the man who was holding unoccupied land and the man who was making good use of his land, irrespective of its area. He did not believe that in a country like this a man should be allowed to hold improvable laud in an unimproved condition. That was the direction legislation would have to take. The man who was holding unimproved land would have to pay for the luxury of doing so.