THE LAND QUESTION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7922, 29 January 1904, Page 4

THE LAND QUESTION.

MEETING IN THE CANTERBURY HALL. A public meeting to protest against the jftle of the freehold of Crown lands was jeld in Canterbury Hall last evening. Mr jr. Ensom occupied the chair, and there I ere also present — Messrs T. E. Taylor, :. G. Ell, G. Laurenson, W. W. Tanner, . Witty and G. 'Fowlds, members of the ouse of Representatives, G. W. Russell, '. M. B. Fisher, W. Radcliffe and J. A. [ooper. The floor of the hall was crowdThe chairman briefly opened the meetMr T. E. Taylor, M.H.R., said that he elieved that if Mr Chamberlain would deI ote his splendid energies to the solution I f the land question in Great Britain, he 'ould render a much more real service to lis country than by any discussion of the ■seal issue, which waa a pure matter of fixation. There was no question that was . ■ore imperial in its nature than that of a •roper method of dealing, with the land, ft was one of the most complicated questions that a man could* discuss, but an Itfective solution of it was urgently needed. I'he speaker ought to be able to speak kith authority on the land question, assumfcg the correctness that a man who had listed the sweets of both sides was pecuBarly fitted to take a proper judicial * attifude. It had been asked how he found it lonsistent to speculate in laaid'. His answer was that there was nothing immoral fi any man taking advantage of tbe state of civilisation in which he found himself, and fcoing in for the bargaining which formed I part of the commercial life of his day. put while he held that he_was quite justified in taking advantage of existing conations, he would fight as hard as he could lo bring the people to a better state of bind in the matter. He asked his audiwice to consider what was the truo principle (hat should underlie any land policy. He believed that the principle should he the bayment by the user of a fair amount, to the State for the right of exclusive use arid Enjoyment of any part of the world's surface. Tlie State ownership of the land had fcever really been disputed* in any civilised country. The right of the State to tax land was always admitted, and that admission, followed out to its logical conclusion, ■must mean that the State had a primary tight to the land. No man resisted the tight bf the State to take awa^'jjart of his freehold pr its revenue by meapis of a landtax. -Herbert Spencer had once said that it was conceivable thatthe day might come when every acre of tbe earth's surface Would be freehold in the hands of one Owner, arid when every other person would be a ; trespasser in the world, not entitled to nse or consume any of the produce of that •"World. In saying that, Spencer had touchtd upon a fundamental truth. Afterwards, when he had become a friend and associate ■of the landed classes of England, he had (■wallowed the remark, but it, .nevertheless, ■Etood out as a striking truth. The Jjflws, in tho very 'beginning of their national life, tad recognised the principle of conimercial ownership of the land, and had endeavoured to deal with the land question by providing that every forty -nine years all land •should be "pooled" again. The -Good Book had recognised the same principle when it eaid: "The land shall not be Sold for ever, for the land is Mine, says the Lord, for you are strangers and sojourners Vith Me." Even the most barbarous people recognised the principle .of the communal ownership of lands. The problem of how to, deal with the land had troubled eve*ry civilised race in history. The Romans haid attempted to Ideal with it by measures similar to those {adopted in New Zealand: In England, at the present day, the trouble of private iewnership of the land was peculiarly acute, «nd it was to England's land tenure system that the British Empire owed that land •Jkunger which was the source of many of the Existing land evils. JVilliam the Con-

■n-MBTTanranirm/i^ queror had passed an Act. of Confiscation, taking all the land from the people, and giving it to the happy few who constituted the classes. The people had been* taught by hard experience that land ownership meant power, wealth, luxury, education and everything pleasant and easy in life, and the classes, learning a similar lesson, had invented the system of entail, so as to secure to their children the privileges they possessed. The result was that the people of England had learned to associate- everything that was desirable with the possession of land, and it was only natural that this idea should have been transported to New Zealand. Thus, in the early days, very large freehold estates had been amassed, and the result was the great land hunger in the eighties that resulted in the colony's moves towards land reform. But New Zealand's measure of reform was only slight. The owners of land continued to reap the full benefit of the increa-se in land caused by the efforts of the people, and by the expenditure of public money. Turning to the freehold, Mr Taylor said that the demand for that form of tenure- was a real demand. "For the previous ten yeara the colony had been buying land for close settlement, and at the same time selling what remained of the people's estate, about the maddest policy that could be conceived. The colony had, besides selling its estate outright*, parted with land* on the 999 years' lease without any provision for revaluation, and had exempted the holder of such a. lease from' direct taxation. That tenancy for 999 years was points worse than the freehold ; it was less a land policy than a form of national insanity. There was growing up moreover, a demand that the freehold should be given to thos© Crown tenants, at 'the value of the land when they had taken up their leases. In other words, the Crown tenants wanted to break the bargain they had made with the State, though not in the direction of doing away with their lease and putting the land again on the market Yet, surely, if the lease was to be broken, all the people should have an op. portunity to secure the benefits of the freehold amd the enhanced value that must resuit from the State's efforts and progress In conclusion, Mr Taylor said that, if the Government were serious mi desiring land reform, it would put -through a Bill that wo*uld provide for a. re-valuation of Crown leases and a land "tax heavy enough to bring the lar-re estates into the .market without repurchase. (Loud applause). _ Mr H G. Ell, M.HX said that the meeting marked the outset of a campaign against the effort being made to create a S plit in the Liberal Party on the land question. He moved-" That this meeting protests against the public sale of Crown tod? in any manner, or by any methods as being., opposed to the best interests of the com-, munity and not in accord with the prmSples of the Liberal Party, as lai^down by Slate Mr John Ballance," He sa.dthat Sown tenant-, should gui te ™*«taxid Sat was the alternative of their leases If- the contract with the State was to be broken, then the land must be thrown upon the open market and cold to the highest bidder, as it would be a gross injustice to fte State to give -it to the tenant at what it was worth when he took up lease. The Crown tenants already had low rents and freedom from land. tax. Yet they demanded to be given the* freehold titles of their holdings, in order that they and not the State might reap the advantages of tße increased value caused by the general publie, arid the expenditure of State money. If tiie colony had in the past sold none 'of its land, but instead leased it at • 2s per acre, it would be drawing an annual revenue of £1,473,000. Yet the land tax then was yielding only £297,000 annually, less than it had in 1893. Many people were under the impression that the Oovernment had ceased to sell Crown lands at less than £2 per acre, yet tho last Califomian Syrup of Figs gently quickens the sluggish liver and bowels, and has a permanent strengthening effect. It-corrects tired Nature. 16

*^° 1^» J -^gTi-nßriini-~'-""ißrir™"TiTTTit«ir*iiTiiinr-«-ii»)iiii.ii.»'-»iniii -___-»_ "Gazette" showed tliat thousands of acres were being ofiered at prices ranging from 5s to 17s per acre. In the future the colony would have to buy that land back again, at a greatly enhanced value. The leaso-in-pcrpetuity system was one that offered enormous advantages to the tenant, yet these tenants were clamouring to be given a still further concession in the shape of the freehold. Why did they not demand that the lessees of private land should liave a right to the freehold? He hoped that the colony would continue to return to Parliament men who would resist to the last any proposal to alienate more of the people's estate. The chairman said that a petition was being circulated, protesting against the alienation of further (Jrown lands, -and he hoped that all present would sign it. The question at issue was a live, all-important . one, and every person who gave the reform movement his support was ( rendering valuable assistance. Mr W. W. Tanner said that one speaker had inferentially condemned the Provincial authorities in the past for the manner .in which they had disposed of tile land. What would happen, he said, if a meeting was held in that hall, or some , other one, forty or fifty , years hence, in regard to the manner in which land was disposed of in 1904? He deprecatetfany suggestion which" would bring the individual to the surface as opposed to the public gain. Ho went on to say that any man who had been lifted by -the votes of his fellow-elec-tors to the position of a representative had cast upon him a duty in the nature of public trusteeship, and in carrying out that duty he must first consider the general welfare of the community, sinking tne idea of personal gain or personal profit. He briefly traced the change that took place in the public feeling of the colony about- twelve years ago. The feeling, he said, was soon translated into political action, and there was a general and sweeping reform in the direction of land ssttlement and ownership. He had been a supporter of the present Government in the main. He had exercised his own judgment, and he thanked God that .he had never voted for the disposal of an acre of the land belonging to the colony. Now, what had been the state of things during the past twelve years? Over six million pounds worth of the lands of the colony had been absolutely sold for cash, and the process was going on to-day as merrily as ever. If the mass of the people of New Zealand allowed that state of things to go on, ■before, the present generation had passed away there would be no Crown lands left. The Ajusteeship which, it was urged, was owed to the future, would be as the liight p:B§bhe swallow in a sucn'mer evening. He Adealt'. at some length with the three tenures at present granted, and said that they tended towards the granting of the freehold. There were the cash purchase system, and the option with the right of purchase, which allowed a man to take up a piece of land and later on to decide as to whether he should acquire the freehold. Both of those systems ended in the freehold. Then there was the lease in perpetuity. That system had not been violated with, regard- to land acquired by the Crown, settlement; but in