WHO SHOULD GO ON THE LAND?

Tuapeka Times, Volume XXIV, Issue 1904, 15 June 1892, Page 6

WHO SHOULD GO ON THE LAND?

An inspection of the land to the north of ' Auckland oan leave little donbt in the mind fof anyone of what ought to be done. The land there is like the figs spoken of in Soriptnre. What is good is very good ; what is bad is very bad. The inferior land should be left severely alone for many years to come. Settlers should be placed on the good land only. No Bettler should be allowed to take dp inferior land. We ought to leave that for posterity, who will have better means of dealing with it, in the shape of improved means of communication and otherwise. Looking at the fertile, beautiful valleys, separated from each other by considerable tracts of inferior or of forest land, one cannot help coming to the conclusion that colonisation should be forwarded by means of special settlements, a little community being placed together where they can be mutually helpful, and where they may have the essentials of civilisation — a ohurch and a school. The Byatem under which land has been taken up in the South is not suited to the North.

The plans of settlement in the North may be briefly *<*ummarised. Between thirty and forty years ago John Williamson, who was a far-seeing man, and who had devoted much thought to the work of colonisation, planted settlements in various parts of the North, under what was called the forty-acre system. His exertions were put partially successful, for the reason that many of these men were placed on inferior land and in inaccessible situations. They were not placed sufficiently together, and many men who went to make homes for themselves in the depths of the forest quite wearied of the struggle. The forty-acre settlers were in great part men who had lived in cities at Borne, and were not suitable for the task which they undertook. Still, many fought and conquered, and the remains of John Williamson's settlers are even now the backbone of the North. Of late years we have had Mr Ballance's special settlements at Hukerenui, Panakitere, Waimamaku, and other places, tbe land being selected and the settlers placed by Mr John Lundon. These must be reckoned successful, though we should not advise a resumption of that system except with considerable modifications. In almost every case the land on which the settlers were placed was good, so that they had that advantage. One weak point of the system was, however, that a good selection of the men was not made. At that time there was a great cry of unemployed, and the streets of Auckland were relieved of these men to make country settlers of. As may easily be imagined, the unemployed were many of them failures in every sphere. Some of these men— not a very large proportion—have left their holdings, notwithstanding the advantages they have had, and have drifted back to town. But we do not believe that any man has left who ought ever to have been sent there at all. When this system of settlement is resumed no man should be placed on a piece of land who is not fitted for the work and the life. Young married couples are the best, and perhaps in such cases the wife and her capabilities should be looked to as well as the husband. But these settlements, young as they are, have made progress. Each has its school, where the children are taught, and which by giving a meeting place forms a gathering point of mental life for the district. — • New Zealand Herald.'