THE PELORUS GUARDIAN and Miners’ Advocate. FRIDAY, 31st MAY, 1907. FARMERS’ UNION SOMERSAULT.

Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 18, Issue 44, 31 May 1907, Page 4

THE PELORUS GUARDIAN and Miners’ Advocate. FRIDAY, 31st MAY, 1907. FARMERS’ UNION SOMERSAULT.

Since the Land Bill was first mentioned the Farmers’ Unions have not ceased smiting its provisions hip and thigh. That there were the slightest pretensions to virtue in it was scouted, and staid, respectable old men and equally steady young men have lifted their hands in appeal when the unclean thing has been mentioned. And now, we find that not only have the representatives of the Union admitted that there are some good points about the Bill, but they have actually adopted a resolution approving of one of the most contentious provisions in the Bill—namely, the limitation of area clause. Here is an acrobatic exhibition worthy of statesmen ! But what does it mean ? That the big landowners who are reputed to be “running” the Farmers’ Union have voluntarily dropped the reins, or merely that the small men in the Union are getting “even” with the more fortunate owners of large estates ? Now that this clause has been stamped with the Union’s hall-mark of approval there can be little left to fight for except the freehold. And it is not at all likely that the present Government (notwithstanding the big drum solo blared out by the Minister of Lands on the introduction of the Bill—namely, that the Government would stand or fall by the Bill) will imperil their tenure of office by any absurd adherence to principles. If the House show a determination to insist on the adoption of the freehold or the optional tenure they will undoubtedly get it; for did not the Premier himself say, on the day he left Auckland for his trip Home, that “the Government were not pledged to the Bill line for line.” So it seems as if both parties were acrobatic adepts. Where the fight will centre if the Government seriously bring the Bill before the House will be around the proposal of the Crown tenants to be allowed to acquire their holdings at the original value. Here the Government will be in a quandary, for on this question the leaseholders will be aided by the “Independents” in the House who have no particular leaning towards either freehold or leasehold. It is pleasing to see that the leaven of commonsense is working in the ranks of the Farmers’ Union, as was evidenced by one of the speakers advocating that they should not condemn the Land Bill lock, stock, and barrel because there were some objectionable (to them) clauses in it. Only after a calm analysis of its provisions can one give an intelligent decision; and though there is little in the Bill that commends itself to our ideas of land administration (many of the provisions making confusion worse confounded) we recommend its careful perusal by every elector. The somersault of the Farmers’ Union and the political juggling of the Cabinet will, however, result in the original Bill being unrecognisable when the House meet.