The Argus at KellyGang 20/7/1869 (2)

From KellyGang
Jump to: navigation, search
(full text transcription)

see previous

rents for sheep stations - squatters

A station stocked with 20,000 sheep, consisting of sound, healthy pastoral country, not likely to be much interfered with by selection, and with a ten years' lease, subject to operation of the 42nd clause, given in, would be worth probably 15s per head, or £15,000. Deduct the value of the sheep, say at 5s each, £5,000; do the cost or value of the various improvements, such as house, woolshed, yards, fencing, dams, &c, £4,000-leaves £6,000 as being the net value of the Crown lands. On these Crown lands, as fixed at this value, interest at the debenture rate of 6 per cent, per annum might the charged, payable half yearly as at present. This would give the rental of the run at £360 per annum, whereas the Government propose to charge all stations 8d per head on the sheep depastured. Eight pence per head on 20,000 sheep is £666 13s 4d; therefore in the case of a run with 20,000 sheep a squatter is charged with interest on his own capital expended in improvements and stock to the extent of £306 13s 4d per annum. This virtually amounts to charging him interest at 6 per cent, per annum on £5,111 sterling of his own money. If the interest were calculated at the present borrowing rate of five per cent, per annum, a still more glaring inconsistency would be apparent. I have cited a first-class station as an example of the application of the rule, but it would apply with equal force to an inferior run, because on inferior country the sheep are not nearly so valuable, nor would the improvements be worth so much. Probably a valuation of not more than 2s 6d per head would be fixed on the sheep.

No wonder that whilst such a system is prevalent the Victorian settlers are involved in difficulties. In order to assist them the banks and agents have materially reduced the rates of interest, but the Government adopts precisely the opposite course, for no matter how much wool or stock may decline in value - no matter how much their runs may have diminished in area and grazing capabilities - the same rentals must be extorted from them. I consider that, taking into account the altered times, 4d per head is equal to 8d per head in 1862.

I could cite individual instances of stations which at this present time are paying interest to the Government to the extent of twenty to thirty per cent, per annum on the value the bare Crown lands would realise if offered to public competition. In these instances the owners have erected valuable improvements, which they cannot afford to forfeit, and they continue paying the rents in the hope of an equitable adjustment. All their efforts to obtain this have, however, been fruitless, and their deposits of £5 each have been paid to little purpose.

So much has been said about making the squatters pay a fair rental for their runs, and so much indisputable evidence has been brought forward to prove that they are already paying considerably more than a fair rental, that I need scarcely refer to the question.

If the interest on 20s is calculated at the rate of ten per cent, per annum, which is the present bank rate on overdrawn accounts, it must be evident that the selectors will, under the proposed new Land Bill, acquire a Crown grant of their lands for nothing, the mode of payment being neither more nor less than a free gift of the public estate. They are to pay only the interest on the purchase-money of £1 per acre, the principal being given to them. Even if interest is estimated at the debenture rate of six per cent, per annum, it will be found that the total cost at the end of the thirteen years would be only 10s 5d per acre, and if the extended time for payment is taken into consideration, it will be clear that even at this lesser rate of interest, the terms are almost nominal. The squatters, who are in all respects equally worthy of support, and more especially so when considered as colonists and large employers of labour and capital, are virtually prohibited from purchasing land even to protect their improvements, although they ask the privilege of being allowed to pay at least £1 per acre cash for it, and as much more as public competition may force them to give.

The manifest injustice towards the squatting interest is too palpable to require comment.

AGENDA

end

, .1. , .2. ,


 ! The text has been retyped from a microfiche copy of the original.

We have taken care to reproduce this document but areas of the original text may been damaged.

We also apologise for any typographical errors.