HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXXVI, Issue 11609, 11 August 1892, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wellington, August 9. (Continuation of evening sitting.) LAND BILL. The Hon. Mr Seddon pointed out that when Mr Hutchison had contested the Waitotara seat he was a supporter of the Hon. Mr Ballanca. and knew that the policy of the latter in advocating land for settlement purposes was to award fair compensation for land obtained. Ho denied tho Bill contained any reference to '.and nationalisation, and also that it proposed to abolish freehold. He challenged Mr Hutchison, on his political reputation, to prove that any of the Ministers advocated doing away with the freehold, or that they would interfere with the freehold— that already existed in the country. On the question of large estates, he instanced the case of the Canterbury district, where he said salwart sons of settlers were driven from the counti y because they could not obtain land owing to these large estates, and the Government wore determined not to allow this state of things to continue. He defended the proposal in the Bill for making perpetual lease in perpotuity,and said that by onacting that <t per cent, on tho value of land be paid to the Government it made the security all the better. Mr Bruce was heartily at one with the Hon. Mr McKenzie in desiring to prevent the accumulation of large estates aud preventing speculation in. land. The Bill, however, did not make sufficient provision for obtaining freehold, and would hamper Small Farm Associations, which the Hon. Mr Seddon so strongly favoured, and the members of which had been denied the right of acquiriug the fee simple ot their land. He moved as an amendment, " That, while in the opinion of this House the Land Bill contains some useful amendments in the existing laws, and should at an early date be read a second time, this House considers the extent to which the Bill aim3 at restricting freehold tenure is unsatisfactory, and calculated to be injurious to the best interests of settlement." The Hon. Mr Ballance asked whether Mr Kolleston approve J of the amendment and whether it had hissanction. Mr Eolleston said he aoncurrod in tho amendment entirely. The Hon. Mr Bailancesaid in that case he accepted the amendmont in the spirit in which it was given, and as a motion traversing; the policy of the Government. They could not possibly accept a motion of this kind in any other spirit. The Government were not alarmed by it at all.; aud it would dear the atmosphere, .t was, however, in opposition to the sentiments expressed by Mr Eolleston, who had said the Bill should not be made a party question, but that it should be allowed to go to tho Waste Lands Committee. The debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr Richardson, and the House rose at 1 <i.in, August 10. The House met at 2.30. Mr Richardson resumed the debate on the Lind Hill. He said a fresh turn had been given to the debate by the Premier deciding to accept Mr Uruce's amendmont as a no-confidenco motion. The Premier might well, in his opinion, have accepted that amßadmsnt in a con-party spirit, as the Minister for Land3 had stnted the Government wore not averse to freehold tenure. The Minister for Public Works 'had also emphasised that, and vet tho Premier treated the amendmont as one of no confidence. If the leader ol the Opposition had moved the amendment the Premier might well be justified in treating it in a party spirit, but as it was movod by au Opposition member who was known to I;e not p,a extreme party man it had altogether a different aspect. The Hon. Mr McJCenzie, iu his speech the previous night, had stated that there had been only 4{ per cent, transfers, whereas in the Crown lands report the number of transfer were stated at 10 per cent. He quoted from, returns to show that the figures qujti'd by the Hon. Mr McKenzie ltot jnglit as. to tho. number of selectors n.ero not co.wet." ■ Miuisteta had • been crowing all over tho country in the recess about the suoo-ss of sp cial settlements, i»nd yet tho Crown lands report stated that settlement was being starved for want of roading. A groat deal in the present Bid was proposed to be done by regulation, and far too much was left to Ministerial patronage instead of to ordinary departmental administration. As to the proposal for elective Land Boards, all he would say about that at present was that the3B Boards required men with special qualifications, who were not likely to be secnre-1 by the elective principle. He had no objection to the perpetual loase proposed by the Minister, as long as the optional choice of tenure did nop include cash. There should be two systems of perpetual leaso, one with the right to acquire the freehold and the other without that light. The great blot in the Bill was the provision for special settlements, and he said that out of the whole of these settlements in the colony only about one-fifth of tho original settlers now remained. He pointed out that the Bill contained the sime absurd provisions for small gracing runs as last year's measure— a fact which would prove a serious check to pastoral enterprise. He did not regard the amendment as ono of no-confidence jn the Government, but he thought it very tnivise to alter the law as related to freehold, for people would have the freehold. Mr Lawry said he had been prepared to oppose the present Land Bill, but the speech of the Minister for Lands last night fully satisfied him, If the Hon. Mr McKenzie bad declared he would stick to the "Bill as brought down he should have voted against it, but after his explanation with regard to freehold I he was prepared to support tho Government and vote against Mr Bract's amendment. Captain Russell strongly condemned the proposal made by the Hon. Mr McKenzio last nisht to grant perpetual lease in perpetuity at 4 per cent. That proposal struck out all classes of the com- . munity, and such a clause would govern entirely land tonuro in the future. It was tho most iniquitous clause that could possibly bo introduced into the Laud Bill, aud was a direct fraud on every poison in the colony. It was such a monstrous propos ! tion that the Bill should not be allowed to proceed further till this proposal was telegraphotl from one end of tho colony to the other, so that people might know what was contemplated by the Government. What, he asked, was the cause of the Hon. Mr McKenzie's change of front in regard to freehold tenure? Simply that the Government had treated Mr Bruco's amendment as one of no-confideuce because they were afraid to allow their supporters to express their honest opinion on this freehold question and wanted to force them into the Government lobby against their own convictions. Whilst ho approved of perpetual lease to a ceitaiu extent, he thought no Land Bill was a good one that did not provide for tho sale for cash a large quantity of land. Mr T. Thompson (Auckland) said he would oppose the amendment. Mr Buck-land said the Government wanted to steal the freehold, and when they could not do that wished the country to think they allowed tho freohold to romain. The Houso> resumed at 7.30. Mr Scobie Mackenzie contondod the Government had done' their own suppcrtera a great wrong in treating Mr Brnco'B amendment as one of no-con-fidenco, Having mado tho question a party one, the Government tnus forced some of their supporters to vote with them apainst tho amendmont, when thoy wore really strongly in favour of it, and these members would Ivivo to answer to their constituents for their action. He denied that the amendment, was intended to be a motion of no confidence) in the Government. Messrs' Mclntosh, W. Hutchison, McGuire, Buchanan, and Blake also spoke. Mr Fish was generally in accord with the land policy of the Government, and said he was sure tho Hon. Mr Mackenzie was nctuatod by i desiro for the welfare

of the colony. His chi.jf reason for rising to speak was to offer hi? most determined opposition to tho Alinister's proposal to' grant perpetual lease for evur at 4 per cent. If the members of the House who called themselves Liberals votod for such a proposal, he did not know what Liberalism was. Mr Taylor supported the Bill.