Untitled

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9916, 3 August 1910, Page 1

There, are seventy mills iu Germany engaged exclusively in the, man.ul'acture of tissue, paper. Germany turns out mere tissue paper than any other country.

LEASEHOLD ADVOCATES I . * —. ! FREEHOLD DEMAND CHALLENGED. MKMBER. FOR HURUNUI ON LAND. [From Our "WELLINGTON, August 2. The member for Huruntii, Mr G. W. Forbes, one of the original settlers ou the Cheviot Estate, rarely neglects an opportunity to commend the Government's land settlement, policy and-"tes-tify to the value of the leasehold to the bona fide settler. Mr Forbes made a characteristic speech during the financial debate to-day. in the course of which he ranged himself unequivocally on the side of the out-and-out leasehold. "The freehold members have an idea," said Mr Forbes, "that legislation containing further freehold proposals will be brought down, but if that is to be the case I know tins, that it will not be in accordance with the growing feeling of the'people, not, only in this but in other countries on the subject of land settlement. Ihe Chancellor of the British Exchequer recently brought down, proposals on land tenure far more radical than anything in New Zealand to-day, and this notwithstanding the fact that England has always been held up to us as a pattern to follow, whenever any radical legislation was proposed. The action of the Chancellor says clearly that the freeholder has not an absolute hold on the land, that the State has an interest in it, and will insist on its share being paid over. That is a startling advance in conservative old. England.' A RETROGRADE STEP.

"Any legislation brought down in thin House/' s*id Mr Forbes, '"that will sell the public estate will bo a retrograde stop, which will have to be, retracted in the next few years, and that not over the same track but in a mor.e radical direction tha*i we have ever seen." Speaking of Mr. Massey's amendment of last year to give the ..fee simple to tenants holding renewable leases and small grazing runs, Mr Forbes said that he had never seen a more barefaced .attempt to bribe the electors. Under renewable lease there were 657 tenants holding 247,243 acres which, if put on. the market to-day, would" be worth twenty shillings an acre mere than at the original valuation. This would mean a free gift of £247.243 to 657 settlers. There were 417 tenants on small grazing runs, aggregating 260,679 acres. If these lands were submitted to public auction, they would produce at the lowest computation an advance of £2 an acre which would mean a gift of over £400,000 to 417 settlers. The proposal of the leader of the Opposition to give away £647,000 worth of the public funds was the most immoral he could imagine. (Hear, hear.) TO SELL CHEVIOT. " I crii speak with personal knowledge of the effect of that proposal," Mr Forbes continued. "On Cheviot there are 47,424 acres held under grazing leases, on which there are fifty settlers' hemes. If that land was auctioned to-day it would bring over £2 an acre more than the original valuation," (Members: "More than that.") That would amount to £IOO,OOO distributed among fifty settlers, and as he held one of the runs it would have meant a gift of £3OOO to him. "I will nover sanction such a piece of political treachery," said Mr Forbes, " and I have sufficient confidence in the people of the country to leave the matter to them. It would be a public calamity if a party with such a low ideal ..of publio duty should ever occupy .the Treasury Benches." BUYING OUT ONE'S NEIGHBOUR. " Why should wo give ' the freehold?" asked Mr Forbes. "I know instances of land that has doubled and trebled in value in four or five years. The freehold is a splendid investment for private individuals, but if I am to have any voice in the management of the country I will say to the State, 'hold on to the freehold as an investment.' " Without going into the sentimental aspects of the case, or the rights of the people, Mr Forbes pointed out that there was no difficulty in settling land under the leasehold, and challenged the leader of the Opposition to show how he could give the freehold and prevent aggregation. Mr Massoy: It is the law now. Mr Forbes: It is not the law now. Any man taking land on occupation, with the right of purchase, is,free to sell as soon as he has paid, his purchasemoney. Mr Massey: You are hopelessly wrong. Mr Forbes: I would be rvleased if you would prove me wroiLg. ißesidence is vital to settlement, and those who desire the freehold wish merely to buy their neighbours out. The main question is how to get settlers on. the large estates, and it is necessary to relieve the position by legislation. The graduatod tax should be increased. This country cannot afford to let individuals monopolise large areas. It is starving our railway system and crowding the people into the towns. Mr Massey: And Cheviot. Mr Massey said that his amendment had had no reference to Cheviot, which was held under a special Act. Mr Witty: Why omit Cheviot? Mr Forbes: When the leases fall in six years hence Cheviot will be dealt with under the Land for Settlements Act. I would like to ask Mr Massey if, when ho was at Cheviot, he did not promise the settlers the freehold? They came to me asking why they should not get the freehold, and I said to them that no party in the country would have the audacity to give it to them at the original valuation. Well, they replied, "Mr Massey promised it." (Laughter.) Mr Massey: That is not a personal explanation.