SOLDIER SETTLEMENTS.

Waikato Times, Volume 98, Issue 16096, 20 September 1924, Page 6

SOLDIER SETTLEMENTS.

REVALUATIONS AT HAND. MANGATEPARU DISSATISFIED. •": PUBLIC MEETING OF PROTEST. Not, long "ago a Revaluation Committee was set up, the members of which visited each soldier-settler's ; section and forwarded recommendations td the Government in connection with the revaluation of those sections. '■»' This commission visited Mangateparu ■V (a soldier settlement five to seven ' miles from Morrinsville), and as the . result values in some cases, it is understood, have been reduced, some - to the tune of £1 10s per acre and others from £6 to £8 per acre. On : the other hand, some of these settlers are not to .enjoy any reduction. On this settlement there are sixty '.: soldiers, and as a result of what is described as unjust treatment a meet- . Jng of those dissatisfied with the Gov-' ernment's deliberations was held in 5 the Mangateparu Hall last Thursday. There were 25 settlers present, and ; the chairman, Mr E. C. N. Robinson, apologised for the. absence of seven settlers. In all, the meeting therefore represented over 50 per cent, of the total number of solders on the !-settlement.. The fact tli.afc the meeting was convened at very short notice, and consequently a number of settlers had unfortunately not been communicated with, illustrated that the grievances are not remote ones. Chairman's Address. The chairman said he had been requested to convene the meeting by quite a number of settlers on account •', of the widespread dissatisfaction at the results of the revaluation. The . commission consisted of three memV bers, two of'whom had previously , valued the property, for the Governf ment io purchase. ; He understood '{■ that these two. members of the >) commission valued the individual sections, yet despite this fact the comi parative value of the sections as oriV ginally vauled had been entirely ignored in the present valuation, and for no apparent reason some sections had \ had no reductions at all, whereas quite .. considerable sums had been struck off the capital value. If there has been any method at all it has been in the

direction of bringing the sections to approximately the same value per. acre regardless of the facts of whether they . were originally in good grass, in fescue ;>or danthonia, or whether the land was *!, broken or lying •well,, swampy or well ;' drained, hilly or flat. Further, loca- • tion had not been taken into considera- * tion. "in'some cases waste land had f not been considered,, with the result .' that the. whole position bristled with :;* anomalies.,: ln:"s.ome. clse'stthef' settlers Were quite satisfied, arid there was no doubt that their adjustments were ; quite satisfactory. Qn the other hand ; several settlers, as. fs.r as. capital value

• was concerned, had received no relief , at all. It appears that as far as the "•speaker, could gather the men who had received the most consideration were . those; who drew the sections which 'were in good pastures when taken , river,',:, The additional cost of. those .better sections was considerably less than, the cost of the fescue sections

plus, the cost of re-grassing at the • time'.-- Moreover, it was possible for '5 those" who'drew sections which were ~ Jn good' pastures' to milk immediately, . with good results, whereas those on fescue., land suffered the loss of re-

turns, of a whole season and also suffered considerable losses in stock,

added to which any permanent pastures sown would take some years to make a.good sward. As an illustration of the foregoing the speaker quoted a certain farm which returned to Its owner for one season for butterfat £7O. Had this farm been in good

,; pastures the returns would have been ', five to six times greater, which would ■ have more than paid off the present

arrears of rent. He therefore considered that 'in such cases as these (Of which there were many) complete remission of rent might well be allowed $ for .. those seasons, especially in view.of the fact that the Government insisted on the soldier dairying on his section immediately. With regard to captal values, the speaker considered that in view of the fact that it is impossible for the commission to visualise the conditions of each individual section in its original state the. fairer method would have been to have,deducted a certain percentage off the capital value of each section, this percentage to be based on the compara. tive value of products at the time of settlement and those existing, at ;thepfcsen.t • day. Although anomalies miß'ht have occurred they would not, by this method, be to the extent they are at present, and further, would have been more easy to rectify. In connection with the forms sent out by the Dominion Board, they were of a very ambiguous nature in respect of one paragraph-—namely, that referring to the remission of adjusted arrears of rent. Is the revaluation retrospective to the date- of settlement? If so, the adjustment of arrears should be in addition to any remission. There is another point in connection with remission. In the case of settlers who had taken over the sections of men who had gone off their farms these settlers had gone on to these sections with the arrears of»rent wiped off and in some oases the mortgages reduced. Whilst upholding' the principle that these settlers should not be asked to shoulder other men's losses, the

speaker considered that as the Govern-

ment stands the loss of the arrears on these sections there was no reason

why it could not do so in the case of others who had stuck to their land and put substantial improvements on it with their own labour and capital. Whilst realising the magnitude of

settling 10,000 soldiers on the land and giving the Government all credit for tackling the undertaking, he could not help pointing out to the Government its failure to recognise mistakes and the tardy redress of the settlers' grievances.

Should bo Judged on ts Merits. Mr Hutchings said he was informed that when the Revaluation Board was formed the policy to be carried out was that each case should be judged on its merits. They had, however, apparently evened sections up all on one footing. Had they revalued each section on its merits the present dissatisfaction would never have existed. "Notwithstanding the fact that a certain man had received notice that his lease had termir.\ted, this man had received better treatment than his neighbours," said one member of the audience. The chairman drew the speaker's attention to the fact that the meeting was not complaining because others had received better treatment than themselves. The fact remained that those present had not boon granted an equitable revalidation. All present congratulated their satisfied neighbours, and the person who quoted the above instance stated that, in his opinion, many that were satisfied had not received all that was due to them. Mr Marwood said he failed to see Jiow those in Wellington could re-

value the sections In a fair manner without first viewing thejand under review.

The chairman said the revaluations were made on the reports of the commission.

The meeting expressed disapproval at the manner in which the commis. sion's inspections were made.

Mr Bishop said the commission sometimes visited six farms a day.

Mr. Hutchings ventured to say that "they had not played the game." "In any case," said,' Mr Barryclough, "it took them 10 minutes to inspect my farm." In this speaker's opinion the commission had their own figures and had made up their minds before coming to the settlement. When on it they were anxious to set home for a good meal. A rough estimate of his manure was all that was required by the commission. "Sending the men round was only a farce," added Mr Hutchings. Mr Bishop said he would like to know what system they had worked on. They had ('if they had worked on any system) now made the lowestpriced sections the highest-priced ones on the settlement., In connection with the arrears of rent, 50 per cent, was to be paid in seven years, the other 50 per cent, in three years. It appeared to the speaker that it was intended to divide the amount into seven yearly portions, thus reducing : the settler's liability with one hand and increasing it with the other. "If butter should fall how," he asked, "can the soldier afford to pay a high rent?" Worse than Ever. Mr McQuordale admitted that if produce should, fall the plight of the soldier.seltler would be worse than ever. Mr Bishop quoted an instance where a man owning a "gorse" section had received nothing in the way of- a reduction. He was thus penalised for improving it.' Another section Cone of the worst on the settlement), which had pot-holes and cliffs, had only been reduced Jn value to the tune of £2. Others, again—sections that were . receiving the drainage from the neighbouring, farms,' resulting in it being a much too costly undertaking for those settlers on the lower sections io drain—were in receipt of a. very' small reduction.

Mr Marwood, in support of this remark, said several acres in the vicinity referred to were waterlogged. Mr Barryclous-h considered that the commission should make known to each settler the recommendations to be made in connection with the settlers' property. If this were done prior to the departure of the commission from the section, the occupier could speak to that report before the land valuers departed from his farm. He did not think the. soldier- settler should be criticised behind his back. Mr Bishop said the Government was not likely to entertain that suggestion. They do things in their own time. What was the use of asking for a fur i ther revaluation if ,the recommendations contained therein were unknown to the settlers? it was only right that the settler should be given the chance of perhaps enlightening the i«valuers on certain questions. If the settler is. not given thciopportunity to see the report What is*to stop future revaluers from recommending exactly the same as the- previous commission. Mr Bishop said he would like to know-if the revaluations were consistent with the recommendations of the revaluers.

On the motion of Mr Barryclough, seconded by Mr McCaufield, it was resolved to ask the Dominion Board to allow each settler to see the report of the Revaluation Committee before the committee leaves his section, so that any objections can be lodged.

It was further resolved to forward this resolution to the Hon. W. F. Massey. Mr Hutchinson moved, and Mr Timms seconded, that this representative meeting expresses its utmost dissatisfaction with the results of the revaluation and presses 'for an immediate inquiry into it, in that each section was not taken on its merits and that the revaluation was in the direction of bringing' each section to ap. proximately the same value per acre and that generally speaking no relief has been ffaorded to approximately 60 per cent, of the settlers of Mangatoparu, as any small reduction in the capital value has been offset by the liability of the arrears of rent. This motion was carried unanimously, and it was resolved to forward copies to the leader of the Opposition, the leader of the Labour Party, the Hon. W. F. Massey, the sitting member, the Dominion. Board, and to also seek the support of the Farmers' and Dairy Farmers' Unions and the Returned Soldiers' Association. It was- resolved to again call the soldiers together on receipt of a reply from the Premier, with a view of deciding: what action to take. , Mr Bishop moved that every dissatisfied settler immediately appeal, as an individual, to the # Dominion Revaluation Board against his revaluation. —This was seconded by Mr Timms and carried unanimously. The chairman drew the attention of the meeting to the urgent necessity of cohesion. Every ounce was required arid an endeavour must be made by every 'constitutional means to get a fair hearing. Every man present assured the chairman that his appeal would be lodged as soon as the necessary form was obtained. .... . "it will take you a week to get a form," said Mr Bishop. (Lausrhter.) A hearty vote of thanks to the chair concluded the meeting. .-, -,