THE LAND QUESTION.

Colonist, Issue 62, 25 May 1858, Page 3

THE LAND QUESTION.

.;' (From the Sotitk Australian Register, Apiil :22.) In the disposal of the waste lands of the Crown in these colonies, we approve of the principle of, public competition, becafase the right of selecting sections without competition would have bad the effect of giving a monopoly of the country to speculators and capitalists, and of depriving the honajide cultivators of the soil of the means of purchasing their farms, except at a considerable advance upon the first cost. But there ought to be a sphere of action for the capitalist where his resources can be invested, and his legitimate field of operation is the public mart, where tho article purchased, as a general rula, brings just as much a9it ia worth. There is no more reason why land should be withdrawn from public competition thaa there is that anything else should be so witKdra\Tn. Nor is, there any more reason why a right o£ preemption should Jbe given over land! employed for producing wheat than there is why it should be given

over land on which it is intended to erect a j mill, a mansion, or brick-field. The idea involves essentially the principle of protection to one particular class of producers—a principle Which .ought never to obtain in a community wherV the laws are favorable to political enfranchisement. A love for the protective principle, however; is another of the paradoxes of democracy iv the United States. If the Australian colonies are to imitate America ia ■ any of her social institutions—and we admit that thejp might imitate her in many things with advan-tager-Jet it be in those things which comprise the broad features of equal justice and right, | and not in matters of questionable morality. ! The fact that a thing is American is not per se j a proof that it is worthy of imitation. There i ar-a institutions in America which aro con- | demried by the whole of civilised Europe. '■'■ i We shewed yesterday tihat the result of the land system in America has not been to dei velop the agricultural resources of the country !in a degree equal to that of South Australia, the respectiva periods of settlement being taken into account. Indeed,-we shewed that against 4f bushels of wheat jfer bead of the population produced by the United States in 1850, this colony produced in 1857, in relation to our own population, 23 bushels per head. We may also assert, without hesitation, that in ,the disposal of the waste lands, so far as ..quantity is con.cerned, the United States stand in unfavorable 'contrast this, colony. Up to the commencement .of 1858, or during a period o£ 79 iyears,lth^r(3 had been disposed of iri^theVarious of fhe|Dnion 363^362,462. acres^-oKi j|ss; than 12 acres per head ofthe population, taking it al that time at 32,000,000; whilst in j South Australia at the. end of 1857, or during a ' 'period of 21 years, there had been sold by I public auction and private contract 1,557,740 acres, or. at the rate of 14 acres per head- of the populatioE, taking it at 110,000 souls. From these facts we see that, sd far as results are evidence^ the land system of South Australia works better than the land'system fof America, and that wd have no need to offer further inducements for the cultivation of the soil, her cause up to the present time we have cultivated, not only to the extent of our wants, but also to the limits of profitable exportation. , '

Whatever may be the aspect of the question^ abstractedly, df the upset price of land, the sum of 20a. per acre is fixed as a principle in the three leading colonies of this hemisphere. The land hitherto disposed of, except to a very limited extent, has been Sold at that price, and it would b£ impossible now to reduce the price without great injustice to those who have already purchased. Besides, the colonies could only adopt a differential scale of prices for their lands by repudiating an identity of interests, and with a view of competing with each other for population and money. The ostensible object of the American land regulations is to prevent speculation and to secure the cultivation of the soil. But is that object realised ? Nobody* we iniagivae, will venture to say that it: is. .."■ There' is. no part of the world where speculal ion in land is more rampant than in America.; and we have already shewn that bur own land ■regulations have been productive of greater results. The reduction in the price of land in/these colonies could only lead to speculation". Let the price be reduced to-morrow, and within a week all the available capital that could be' rakied to- : gettier would be invested in land purchasea, .not with a view to cultivation, but for the purpose of resale. We agree with the President oi the Uhitod. States, that our cardinal policy 6u£ht to publiclan^s^as tnaeh be for'actual settlers;" but.' we do not Itbmk that the bast way to do that is to make theoj cheaper than they'ar.e. Reduca the price, andY system of gambling saetL as we have hoWyet seen here would be the result,,, and the Wnds in-' stead of being reserved, for t>o#« fide: settlers would become the pi?ey of abaentee^proprietcra, I orof watchful speculators, who woulcToniy sell them again for a large profit. The poor mm ; has nobbing to hope from a reduction in ( the l price of waste lands. ..-■..;,-', t, \

Another result would follow the; reduction price. Either the lands purchased at the low ; figure would be immediately raised to the value of lands previously purchased at twenty shillings per acre, or the latter would be immediately reduced to the value of the cheaper lands. In both events great injustice would be done, butin the formef such a margin for profit* would be left as to render. it all but certain that the whole of the lands would be kept;out of the hands of the settler in the first instance. As a question of statistics, and ; one • froni which we may hereafter deduce some practical | inferences^ we present the following, tables iii reference to the Government land sales-in this ; colony:— ■ , '; . . • Average Price of Land per Acre, by Public Auction and Private Contract, from 1844 to 1857 inclusive.

Lands, sold at Public Auction and by Private Contract from 1837 to 1857 inclusive,- with the Averse, Price per Aero. ■■.',;..■" :-, , ; .v: ;v\ ;■<_• •.;';.:

Totals., 1,557,740' £2,045,324 ll £1 6 8 From the last table it will be seen that the average price of ail the land sold by public auction and private contract has been 265. 3d. per acrfc. For the last two years, since agriculture has been less remunerative, the average price has been reduced to 255. s£d. and 245. %l. respectively. In 1846, when the a\*eraga price at auction went up to <£4 9s. B£d. per acre, the mining mania Was at its height. We need scarcely say that such a price hast not been approached in any other year. The whole of the proceeds of the waste lands have been spent in providing the colony with labor and in internal improvements;

Dates. Auction.' : :Private Sales. 184* .. .. £2 -6 4| ,i £1 2 8f 1845 ... .. ; 1 U 3i . ... 1 0 0 ■"' 1846 .. .,. 4 9 8£ :. 1 0 6 i 1847 .. ., ■ 1 2 7 .; I ,0 0 1848 .. ■-.-. 1 3 1J ...-. 1 2 1^ 1849 ■ ... .. 1. 2 1 - .. 1 0 0 ;; 1850 .. .. i li 9f -.. i o ii " t$5i ..- .. "T- 3 4J ;. 1 0 '0 1852 .. ..^ 1 73 ...- ■ 1 0 Q 1853 .. ' .. 1 12 3| .; 1 02^ 1854 .. .. i 18 3| .. 1 2 0\. 1855' '■ .. .v 19 10J ' ■;='. 1 0 3^' .■■■18gff'v .. ■■;;■ 1 6 10 .. 10 9 1857 ./ ,.,164. .. 1 .0 2A

Dates. "• Acres.- Purchase Money.1838/ •>" 9,972 f *1J >566 4 : £l 5*# 1839 .. 122,505 122,505 0 10 0 1840 .. 2.446 2,446 0 10 0 1841 .. 7,33i 7,331 Of 10 0 1842 .i 17,001 17,001 10 1 0 0 1843 .. 598 613 13 10"6 1844 .. 3,428 5.566 13 1 12 5 1845 .. 49,658 52,902 8 1 1 3£ 1846 .. 37,682 76,874 8 2 0 9} 1847 .. 33,095 35,428 18 1 1 43 1848 .. 28,914 31,476 13 1 1 9| 1849 .. 5U,957 58,577 17 1 1 3* 1850 .. 62,237 86,557 15 1 7 11J 1851 .. 81,092 87,242 14 116 1852 .. 85,362 97,059 8 17 3 1853 .» 211,985 290,324 6 1 12 3 1851 .. 212,846 376,224 8 1 18 3 I 1855 ..170,730 232,864 13 ' 1 10 8} ' 1856 .. 187,251 235,260 3 1 5 5J 1867 .. 178,087 2"l5,500 18 1 4 2J