Untitled

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 16607, 3 December 1919, Page 2

In Invercargill Sir Joseph Ward is, of course, held in tho highest esteem as a heaven-sent statesman, so it causes no surprise that the Southland Daily Times writes in a very aggrieved tone about the criticism to which tho leader of tho Opposition is subjected by the Reform press and candidates. Working up at tho finish to a fine climax, the Times says: “The whole Parliamentary record of the Liberal leader gives the charge that Sir Joseph Ward is shining in reflected glory tho lio direct. Let those w'ho doubt trace his Parliamentary career from its source to tho time when his political reign was cut short by the illogical demand for a change of Government arising from an excess of prosperity.” One is almost moved to tears at tho picture of a man who has made the country so excessively prosperous that the people turn him out of office and put in a rival politician. Sir Joseph might well quote the well-known song from “As You Like It”: “Blow, blow, thou winter wind. Thou art not so unkind As man’s ingratitude.” As a matter of fact Sir Joseph Ward was rejected at tho general election of 1911 bccauib the country was weary of him, aud because the farmers did not approve of his toying with tho advocates of leasehold and single-tax. The theory that ho made the country so prosperous that people waxed fat and kicked him out has no foundation except in the minds of his faithful Southland supporters who have benefited so greatly during his years of office from tho expenditure of public money.

A few days ago wo exposed tho dishonesty of the New Zealand Times in its uso of official statistics relating to tho occupation of land. The Times has not replied—there is no reply— but the Wanganui Herald in its issue of Monday last makes the same misleading uso of tho Yearbook figures iu an effort to prove that aggregation of land has been “going the pace” during the last few years. It ignores the fact that under the Reform Government, between 1911 and 191% the number of estates over 50,000 acres was' reduced from 90 to 61 and the area held in those large estates from 8,128,742 acres to 5,385,717 acres. In view of tills very great reduction it could’ not well bo otherwise than that tho number of estates from one to fifty thousand acres should increase, apart from tho fact an additional three million acres of land, chiefly suitable only for large holdings, was brought into occupation. Our Wanganui contemporary also copies tho Times’ misleading use of statistics relating to the number of owners, as distinct from occupiers, and the areas owned, seeking to prove that while under Liberal Governments from 1889 to 1910 the number of freeholders was reduced by 79, there has been under the Reform Government an increase of 1730 in the number of big holdings. The dishonesty of this comparison lies in the fact that in the one case freeholds only are dealt with, while in the other both freeholds and leaseholds are included. The Napier Telegraph also has something to say about the subdivision of land, taking up Mr. Massey’s reply to a question in the House as to why tliege was not more subdivision in Hawke’s Bay. Mr. Massey’s reply w - as to the effect that a groat part of Hawke’s Bay was fit only to carry sheep and not suitable for dairying. This, of course, is, perfectly true, but the Telegraph says it is absolutely unwarranted, and in support of this quotes the official statistics show-

ing that there are more ’cattle in Hawke’s Bay than in Taranaki. The worthlessness of this argument will be apparent when wo say that Hawke’s Bay has 4,570,223 acres under occupation, while Taranaki has only 1,705,800 acres. No one who knows anything of the subject will deny that “a great part of Hawke’s Bay is only fit to carry sheep.” Our contemporary further argues that land which will feed and fatten a bullock will keep a cow, and that the reason there are not more dairy cows in Hawke’s Bay is because of the large holdings. Certainly land that will feed and. fatten a bullock will keep a cow (and fatten her), but it is not necessarily good dairying country.