HUATOKI SETTLEMENT

Taranaki Daily News, 6 March 1934, Page 9

HUATOKI SETTLEMENT

DEPUTATION TO MINISTER POSITION OF FOUR TENANTS. TEMPORARY RELIEF REQUESTED. MR. RANSOM TO INSPECT AREA. Representations that they would have difficulty in carrying on unless some measure of relief was afforded them were made by members of a deputation from the Huatoki Settlers’ Association to the Minister of Lands, the Hon. E. A. Ransom, at New Plymouth last night. The deputation asked assistance to tide settlers over a difficult period. ■ In reply the Minister said the Crown would assist men who were willing to assist themselves to the maximum. Revaluation was impossible but Crown tenants could go before the Lands Board and explain their position. To-day the Minister will'inspect the various Crown holdings mentioned by the deputationS. G.' Smith, M.P., introduced the deputation, which comprised Messrs. Hector Crompton Smith,. S. H. Norns, William Crompton and W. I. Hulme. Mr., Smith said the deputationists wished to. discuss the terms bf. their present leases with a view to a readjustment of values. Most of the settlers were .beginning to lose heart and were finding it Very difficult to meet their rentals and other liabilities; Mr. Crompton Smith said. Their places were certainly going back. Whether they were in regular employment or. on relief work, every peijny, was going to pay rent, and there , was nothing left after purchasing necessities to spend on improvements. They wished to know if there could not be some readjustment to make things easier for them, for the time being at least. Given this relief they would be able to get the land back into better condition, whereas under present circumstances manuring was out of the question and there was not much hope of decent returns; - FEW SURVIVORS.

He was one of the few survivors of the original -settlers who took occupancy when the sections were balloted for 14 years ago, said Mr. Norris. • He had a 4}-acre holding,, half an acre-of which was very steep and the remainder flat. It had' a carrying capacity of two cows. Three had been tried but-as- good results could be obtained from two. He had semi-permanent employment at w a week. When butter-fat-was Is; 6d a pound and wages good he could just about make ends meet, but now he was in rather sad straits with the Crown. His land was valued at £126 an acre ana the total charges were 30s weekly. His case was typical of those of other settlers. It had become almost an impossibility for him to carry on. The place had practically “bled” him for the whole 12 years. It had happened in instances where occupants had got into arrears and gone out after spending £3OO to £4OO on improvements, and the new tenant had received a reduction of £3OO to £4OO. He had had his place valued at £BOO- - margin of £4OO above what the Government put on. He had had a of selling but the former commissioner would not sanction the transaction. The Commissioner of Crown Lanas, Mr. F. H. Waters, who was present, gave the board’s reasons, for such refusal. Mr. Crompton produced a list of noiaings which had been taken up and turned in or transferred to others as many ’as four and five times. In a number, of cases, he said, these persons going Oiit had made splendid improvements when’ prices were good, but the people going in had learnt what the other man had found out. -He thought the Original idea of the scheme was for the product of the holdings to pay the rent to the Crown, but under present conditions the occupants did not have a ghost of a chance to make ends meet. He himself had. now started hand nigging to’ assist matters. The position was that he would have to give up shortly because even his wages and his production revenue could not make ends meet, HO paid £65 a year for seven acres arid £lO in’rates. ■POSTPONEMENT ASKED.

Mr. Smith remarked that he paid £2O 18s for a quarter-acre section. He suggested that what would assist the ends of the deputation would be a postponement of principal for six months. Mr. Norris said it would be better to have a temporary reduction of annual charges and a . suspension of arrears for two years and then a revision. Mr. Smith pointed out that the department had bought the land and had itself to meet interest payments on it. Mr. Waters said that a dumber of the settlers were paying their way. Mr. Smith: Yes, but what sacrifices are they making to pay their way? Mr. Norris said he was not trying to get’ something for nothing. He frequently worked all day with a barrow and then went home, worked all night and went back to his other work in the morning. ± The Minister: I have done that, too. I will not say I worked all night but I have worked pretty late. I did manage to get some sleep. Mr. Norris: Is it fair that a man who served throughout the war and got a clean discharge should be sold up? Mr. Waters pointed out that there had been no question of selling up. Mr. Smith asked the deputation if it would help, at all if the position of each settler was investigated and a report made to the Minister by the commissioner. Some settlers, for instance, might not have worked as hard as others. The Minister and the deputation intimated their agreement with this suggestion. ■ Mr. Hulme put his case before the Minister. He had 18 acres 8 perches at a rental of £24 10s a year. The house was his own. He had nearly four years illness and had got into arrears with his payments. - . Mr. Smith told the Minister that all the deputationists were decent, hardworking men and all they asked wasa little assistance to tide them over a difficult period. Mr. Norris said he had had no holiday in the eight years he had been on his place and even his wife had not been absent from it for more than six hours at a time. He rose at 4 a.m., milked, delivered the milk to his customers, spent the rest of the day in ploughing, grubbing, etc., did the evening milking and got to bed about 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. The Minister in reply said the representations of the deputation were of particular interest to him at a time when he was being pressed to put people on small holdings of from five to 20 acres, the idea being that the holdings should be near town and that the occupants should in the time they were not employed be able to keep their families from the products of their holding. He was disappointed to hear that men who had gone on to similar properties in good times had been unable to make the land pay. The Crown did not want its settlers to lose heart and desired to assist them. It always distressed him to sign" a forfeiture. He understood there had been considerable writing down ana the Government had legislated against further revaluation because with varying prices for products a satisfactory basis of valuation could not be found. However, Crown tenants had the privilege

of going before the Lands Board and explaining their position. There were two courses open to the board. It could first consider the advisability of postponing payments for a period, as it was not advisable to immediately wipe off payments, and then if after 12 months it was found that the tenant was in the same position application for remission could be made. Already this year £500,000 had been written off. A great many seemed to overlook the fact that when default was made that the Crown had to call on the general body of taxpayers to meet the loss. The Government had no common fund to dip into, and there were not many taxpayers who could afford the extra burden. The Crown’s duty was to try to make a balance between the two. Revaluation was out of the question for the reason already given. As far as manuring of the lands was concerned he might almost say this was more important than rent, because unless the land was kept in a good productive state rent would not be forthcoming. There was no intention to put any taxpayer through the Court, and at the same time the Crown had a responsibility to the general taxpayer. Replying to some remarks Mr. Ransom said that his own two-acre section had once been full of stumps but he had cleared it himself and he could now get £5OO a quarter-acre for it. The deputation was not talking to a man who did not know anything about work. Some of the statements which had been made took him back to his own younger days when he had worked by lantern light. He thought it rather an exaggerated st'.tement on the part of one settler to say that they were expected to paint their houses every four to five years. There were such examples as one speaker had referred to in respect of advantages to tenants taking over at a reduction after forfeiture, but on the other hand in cases where it had been necessary for a forfeiture to wipe off the liability if the tenant was worthy he was given a chance.to go back, and when a holding realised more than his liability to the Crown he got the balance. The board would be happy to consider tiie question of sinking fund payments if necessary. Mr. W. Robertson, Under-Secretary of Lands, said the matters were purely for the Lands Board. Regarding the suspension of capital charges for a period, if the board made such a recommendation only the interest would come forward.