Land Tenure.

Here I may say that I am quite at a loss to understand what views are held by Major Atkinson on this question of land tenure. He says that he is favour of free-trade in land. When did free trade: in land ever answer, and what does it mean? It means that a person who owns land can do with it what he likes. It means that if one person owned Dunedin he could say to the people of Dunedin, "Clear out. The land is mine." It reminded him of what a Maori member once said in the House. The Maori was objecting to the form of fee simple, as their lands were going away under it. He believed in communal rights. He said that if this mode of depriving the Maoris of their land was not stopped, the only thing left far them would be the main roads on which to stand and view their former possessions. If you once admit that there is to be free trade in land, then the State has no right to control contracts relating to land. In Ireland it has been found necessary to pass a law which says that the landlord shall not fix what rent he likes. There the State has said: "We will not recognise free trade in land. We appoint Government officers, who will step in between you and the tenant and fix what a fair rent shall be." In order to meet the difficulty in another way, what did they do in France? There the State has said: "You have no right to dispose of your land on your death as you please; but the State will step in and dispose of it for you." Major Atkinson says that after next session there will be free trade in land in this Colony, but this will simply be the beginning of our difficulties. Until this question of land tenure is faced—until Major Atkinson understands the difference between free trade in land and the nationalisation of the land,—we cannot hope for any wise land laws. Now I come to deal with the Major's scheme of