LAND FOR SETTLEMENTS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXIII, Issue 19, 21 January 1901, Page 2

LAND FOR SETTLEMENTS.

Thb Ditnedin Star, a paper strongly opposed to the Government, has the following forcible remarks en the aotion of Mr. Purvis E,u«sel in eonneotion with the Hatuma Estate :—;lt is now beyond question that the polioy of the Land for Settlements Act is a marked success, and these Acts are now consolidated in a single statute, with certain amendments suggested by the experience of six years, daring which the system has been in operation. Private land may now be acquired on behalf of Her Majesty for any of the following purposes: —Pro viding for settlement; providing sites for homesteads for neighbouring pastoral Crown lands, or low-lying land necessary for the working of such lands; or for exchanging high land suitable only for pastoral purposes for low-lying or agricultureal suitable fotf settlement; providing land by purchase or exchange, but not by compulsory taking, in order to consolidate estate acquired or to readjust ffe boundaries. The scope of the original Act of 1894 is very considerably extended, and the interests of the pastoral industry are fully recognised. The total area of the estates acquired and offered for selection amounted, at the close of the last financial year, to j 289,660 acres, of which 267,991 acres were leased, 6,278 being occupied by roads and reserves, and 15,390 aores were unselected. The arrears of rent, owing by 213 selectors out of a total number cf ] ,630, aggregated £6,103. The number of estates acquired and which had been offered fer selection (including the homestead sites for runs), was 69, covering, as stated above, an area of 289,660 acres; but these figures do not include 11 estates acquired but which had not been offered for selection at March 31st. These have been offered since that date, and most of the area disposed of. The cost of the estates offered for selection and of roads, surveys, etc., has been £1,486,462, and the lands disposed of are let at an annual rental of £72,656, while the lands remaining unlet are valued at a rental of £3,671. Taki ß g the lands actually let, it will thus be seen that the rentals pay in-' terest on the capital expended at the rate of 48 per cent.; and if the unlet I lands are included then the rentals would bring in a retura of 51 per cent, on capital. Since the interest paid on money raised to purchase these estates is under 4 per cent., they are more than paying their way, even after allowing for the arrears of rentals due, 1 which, however, the department regards as good assets. In the returns quoted the Cheviot Estate is not included, since it was not acquired under the Land for Settlements Act, but under the land and Income Tax Ag-

o-smens Act. It h over six yearss since this estate was taken over, and there are now 222 leaseholders, with their families and dependents, settled on the land. Whilst the valuo of improvements required by law is .£46,599, those actually made amount to £63,274, notwithstanding that a few of the selectors are somewhat in arrear mulethis head. The settlement is a distinct success, and its progress will bematerij ally accelerated when it is connected, as it soon will be, with the arterial railway system. It is remarkable, ii the far e of facts which must now be generally accepted; that the attempt should be made oh thS part of land owners to obstruct the operation of the Land for Settlements Act and maintain a monopoly of large tracts of country for purely pastoral, operation, and to obstruct the close settlement of the country upon whioja the progress and prosperity of the colony so vitally depend. The Government, acting upon the information of competent officers, decided some time ago to acquire under the Act the Hatuma Estate, in the

Hawke's Bay district, but throughout ! hare met with solid and determined - opposition. They offered £121,000, which Mr. Purvis Russel, the freeholder, considered very much below the va'ue, which he estimated at ■£'238,000, The matter, consequently, was brought before the Court of Compensation, under the Public Works Aot, 1894, and eventually a fpec : al case was submitted to the Court of Appeal for a ruling as to the principle to be adopted in assessing tho value of land compulsory taken. This ruling was much to the effect that in determining what sum is to be paid by way of compensation in respect to lahd taken or injuriously a fleeted the Court shall have regard only to the value of the land, and also the low, if any t to the claimant's business by the taking of the land. The Compensation Court do not appear to have been relieved of the difficulty of comiag ts a decision when this bisis of valuation was thus authoritatively but failed to arrive a a conoluaion, A fresh Court was constituted, under the presidency of the Chief Justicflj whose award was to the effeot that Mr Russel shouldbe allowed to retain for his own use 585 acres of the best land in the estate, receive £3OO towards the payment of his oosta, and compensation at the rate oF £5 7s 4d per acre for the remaining 26,391 acre', or £141,618 in all. This certainly would seem magnificently liberal, considering that according to his own contention, the land is only suitable for pastoral purposes, and could not be profitably used for agriculture. Mr Russel, however, is not satisfied, and asserts that the value of the property is to him much greatec than the amount awarded by the Court, and he has made an offer which amounts to buying off the Government namely, to pay £60,000 in order to be permitted to retain the estate. We certainly hope that such an offer will not be entertainep for a moment. The Government, acting within their statutory rights, have treated this landowner with the greatest consideration, and the Court have awarded him liberal compensation. It might be interesting to know what Mr Russel, paid , for his property for which he is now to receivs the handsome fortune of £141,618 from the funds of the ColoDy. The settlement and close occupation of the land are of vital moment to New Zealand, and, beyond what is reasonably just and equitable nothing must He permitted to stand in the way. To allow ninholde: s to buy off fettlemant will be detrimental to the best interests of the people, and the acceptance of such a proposal as that of Mr Purvis Rusfel would open the door to grass abuses. A wealthy syndicate, for instance, might keep the rich lands of Hawke's Bay and other districts as sheep runs in perpetuity, and New Zealand become, in the language of the poet, a country " where wealth accamehtes and man decays."