The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1881. THE NATIONALISATION OF THE LAND.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume IX, Issue 452, 9 December 1881, Page 15

The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1881. THE NATIONALISATION OF THE LAND.

OTTCHING the nationalisation of the land, concerning which a good deal has of late been said here, but about which it seems rather an important matter that something less should be said in future, we find that an able paper was lately read at the Social Science Congress by Professor v Goldwin Smith, in his capacity as President of the Economy and Trade Department, and, owing

to its importance and appositeness to the utterances we allude to, we shall borrow as much from it as we can conveniently find room for. — Not that we suppose there is much danger that any such measure as that in question is likely to win the day here eventually, but, as we have already said in a former issue, the report that it is being agitated, if it be spread abroad, and most probably in an exaggerated form, will be likely to inflict serious loss upon the colony by repelling from its shores people about to emigrate from the old country with the fixed determination to become the owners of their farms, and who could not under any circumstances be induced to turn their faces towards a colony in which they were told it would not be possible for them to carry out their design ; or where they learned a political party were striving with any chance of success to make this impossible for them, or to bring about a state of thing by wh\ch the settlement they should make would afterwards be disturbed. This it strikes us is the practical view of the matter which it is of chief importance to take at present, and which should drive all theories out of sight. But now for Professor Goldwin Smith's more scientific dealing with the question : Theorists, he tells us, have advocated the abolition of private property in land, as seeing in it the source of pauperism, but their reasonings appear to him merely the old tirades against capital, irrationally limited to capital invested in land. Pauperism springs from various causes with which land has nothing to do, and it is found abundant in places where land-ownership barely exists, much less exercises an important influence over the economical condition of the people. On the other hand, in some instances where the ownership of land is emphatically the basis of society, pauperism is very little known. The theorists alluded to propose an amelioration of things by a confiscation of landed property by the State, and without compensation to the owners ; but to confiscate one kind of property is to destroy all. And if the State itself turn robber where shall we find security ? Moreover, " confiscation, in the true sense of the term, must always be an economical blunder, as well as a political crime. It will certainly discourage industry, and therefore it will certainly diminish production." "Agrarian Communism would be famine unless you were to put the whip of the slave-driver into the hands of the Government." "One illustrious writer suggests that the State might appropriate, not the land itself, but what he terms the unearned increment — that is, everything which is added to the value of the land otherwise than by the exertions of the owner. But the net of this theory will be found to enclose such a multitude of fishes that it breaks. Unearned increment is not peculiar to land. I buy a pair of boots. Next day leather goes vp — here we have unearned increment. Has the State a right to take toll of my boots ? . . . Every kind of property is the subject of unearned increment, and also, be it observed, of unmerited decrement, which no one asks the State to make good." It is said that land contains elements and forces which no man should monopolise, but everything contains such elements and forces. Providence, it is said, has given the land ; but " Providence gives everything, including the sinews and brain of man. If the land is common, so must be all the products of the land, and we shall be entitled to repudiate our milk bills because the cow grazes on the field." The people, it is said again, have a right to live on the land. True, but that they may do so the land should be thoroughly cultivated, and this it will be only by giving to the husbandman the incentive of private ownership. So far, in effect, Professor Goldwin Smith. For ourselves, we say, once more, an agitation for the nationalisation of the land — to be followed, no doubt, if possibly successful, by an agitation for the nationalisation of the gold mines, with equal show of reason, and so on — will certainly be attended by serious loss to the colony arising from the intimidation caused to those who would otherwise bring their capital here. Nay, more, it may in very many instances drive people who have actually made their money here, to take it with them elsewhere for investment in freehold land. It cannot, therefore, be too firmly deprecated. To those advanced "thinkers" who are bent on it in spite of all arguments and whatever consequences may ensue, we will venture to propose that, at least, on this one point they keep quiet, awaiting the day towards which, according to their notions, we are progressing, and when enlightenment,

such as that -which now elevates them above the general stature of their fellow colonists, may have become universal among us ; and then, with one accord, all our land-owners together will throw up their private rights voluntarily and with delight, and nationalisation will at once become the order of the brighter day. Meantime, let it be the effort of everyone to secure the settlement of a population on the lands, unnationalised but open to the easy acquirement of those who are able and willing to cultivate them. To do this, and thwart the designs of land- sharks of every description, in Parliament and out of it, is a practical task worthy of attention, and should outweigh, to the great advantage of the colony, all high-flown theories and philosophical vapourings. To accomplish it moreover will prove a sufficient labour for our legislators, whomsoever this day's election may prove them to be, and they will find it needs all the clearness and strength of their faculties undivided to do so.