Kevtew of tieviews, l/(ijU6, 



LAND MONOPOLY IN TASMANIA, 



By Percy R. Meggy. 



The first part oi this iateresting article appeared 



The principal landowning company in Tasmania 

 is the V.D.L. already referred to, the origin of which 

 dates back to the very year (1825) in which Van 

 J)iemens Land, as it was then called, was pro- 

 claimed an independent colony, separate from New 

 South Wales. Large returns were then being realised 

 by sheepowners from the sale of wool, so the pro- 

 moters of the company resolved to start wool grow- 

 ing on a large scale with the view of supplying the 

 English manufacturers, who then obtained much of 

 their raw material from abroad. After numerous 

 negotiations the company received grants of several 

 blocks of land in the north-western district, amount- 

 ing ostensibly to 366,500 acres, but which is said to 

 really amount to 422,000. The lands were selected 

 in 1827 by a sur\ey party under Mr. Henry Hellyer, 

 who named the Emu River from the number of 

 emus he saw in the vicinity, Surry and Hampshire 

 Hills from their resemblance to the English downs, 

 the Arthur River after the Governor, who had just 

 commenced his twelve years' reign, and the Hellyer 

 stream after himself. As Circular Head and Cape 

 Grim, thost- two remarkable spots on the northern 

 coast, were already in the possession of tlie com- 

 pany, the Goverimient was urged by Mr. Wedge, who 

 ofRciallv reported on the countr)- prior to the com- 

 pany's grant, to reserve Emu Bay for a township, as 

 it was the only place left which was capable of 

 affording shelter to vessels, but, unfortunately, the 

 advice was not followed, and the natural outlet of a 

 great mineral-producing territorv is owned by the 

 company. The entire area amoimting to over 

 400,000 acres, comprising some of the finest land 

 H) that part of the island, was handed over to the 

 company for a quit rent of ;£468 r6s. a year, re- 

 deemable at 20 years' purchase, a remission being 

 allowed for e\"erj' free servant introduced. The 

 company expended a lot of money at the start in 

 making improvements, and in introducing stock, 

 much of which it lost, but the land still remains, 

 and people are unable to get hold of it except at 

 most imreasonable rates. The manager of the com- 

 panv in 1828 was Mr. James Bischofif, who gave his 

 name to the famous mountain, where, in 1871, James 

 Smith discovered the first trace of tin. The natural 

 outlet of Mount Bischoff is Emu Bay, distant 45 

 miles, the roadway between the hvo points running 

 right through the V.D.L. 's land. As an instance of 

 public enterprise on the part of the company, which 

 deserves mention, it should be stated that it erected 

 a substantial tramway from Emu Bay to the mount at 

 a heavy cost, which proved very berveficial to the 



in the last issue ol *' The Review of Revie'ws." 



muiers, and very remunerative to the company it- 

 se.f. It has since constructed a railway, which, says 

 the ■■ Crown Lands Guide,"' is about to be trans- 

 ferred to the lecently-formed railway company named 

 after Emu Bay. 1 was told by the Minister for 

 Lands that, in accordance with a rule wliich pro- 

 vides that a certain proportion of mone) accruing 

 from Crown Land holdings should be spent in pro- 

 viding railways, ;^iooo had been recently spent 

 by the Crown in making a road through a block 

 held by the company to enable settlers to obtain 

 access to the port at Emu Bay. This expenditure 

 had considerably enhanced the value of the com- 

 pany's property, for which nothing was obtained in 

 return. The Minister added that the company had 

 sold a small proportion of their land but generally 

 in such a way that the improvements on the por- 

 tion sold enhanced the value of the portion which 

 the company retained. 



These are the m.ain facts with regard to land 

 monopoly in the island State. They are well known 

 to local politicians who have every now and then 

 attempted to grapple with the question in a spas- 

 modic sort of way. As long ago as 1886 a few en- 

 thusiasts met together in Hobart for the purpose of 

 forming an organisation to deal with the question. 

 Among those present were Messrs. A. J. (now Jus- 

 tice) Clark, Leo. Sussman, A. J. Ogilvie, W. B. 

 Propsting, an earnest exponent of the principle 

 named I\y, and F. \V. Piesse, generally acknow- 

 ledged to have been the ablest and most ardent of 

 all the Tasmanian politicians who have advocated 

 the taxation of land values apart from improvements. 

 As a result of the meeting several pamphlets on the 

 subject were published, but ultimately the proposed 

 organisation fell through. Another prominent ad- 

 vocate of land value t.ixation about that time was 

 Mr. John Henry, who was looked upon as the prac- 

 tical apostle of the new principle. He was treasurer 

 in the Dobson Ministry, which lasted from 1892-4, 

 and inspired much of the enthusiasm which was 

 evidenced bv that Ministry. The Premier — Mr. 

 (now Senator) Henri,- Dobson — told the people that 

 our whole system of indirect taxation was grossly 

 unjust, as the brunt of the burden fell on the 

 masses, while the wealthy landowners escaped com- 

 paratively free. He advocated a graduated land 

 tax, apparently with the idea of getting at the owners 

 of the big estates. Then followed the Braddon 

 Ministry, which lasted from 1894-9. Sir Edward 

 Braddon continually dangled land value taxation be- 

 fore the electors, and during his teiro of office he 



