FOOD OR MEN ?

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16263, 13 July 1918, Page 6

FOOD OR MEN ?

AX ELLESMERE DISCUSSION

The Elle.smere County Committee of Advice had before it on Thursday, for reports, tho cases of three farmer reservista, two belonging to Clitss C of tho Second Division and the other a Division man who had two brothers serving, one of whom was recently killed. Tho two Second Division men are farmers who do practically all their own work, while the First Division man is farming in partnership with a brother, a C 2 man, besides which he does a considerable amount of team work for his • father. . Some discussion took place as whether the stage had not been reached 1 when it would be impossible to spai;e men from the farms if production was to be maintained and the ccnntry's food supply assured. It was pointed out that a statement bearing upon this matter was recently made by _ the Acting Prime Minister, hut the view held by members of tho committee was that tho statement was not sufficiently clepr to serve as a guide to Adviscry Committees in reporting upon cases referred to them.

The chairman, Mr J. Boag, jun., saitl it itppearerl to him that the committeo was called uyon to consider an important question of policy, for many cases similar to the three before the committee that day would have to be dealt with in the future., The Government should make a clear _ statement which could be taken as a guide to committees.

After a gocd deal of discussion, the folkwing resolution was carried, on tho motion of Mr J. Cunningham, seconded by Mr V. T. Fulton'"That the three cases now before the committee are typical of many such cases which must be considered, i.e., farmers occupying good agricultural land, upon which the farmer does as much as possible of his own work. If the first consideration is that men must be obtained, then men in these circumstances must go, but if production must be kept up, then these men should remain on their farms, on the understanding that they grow as much as they possibly can of such, crops as are necessary for food." It was decided to forward a copy of the resolution to the Commissioner for the Canterbury Military District, and to hold over the three cases in the meantime.

Several members expressed tie viewthat the committee would not be justified in recommending that exemption should be granted to men who proposed to grow barley in any great quantity, as barley could not be considered to be essential for food purposes. In several cases where sine die adjournments had been granted to farmer reservists who had given an undertaking to put a certain acreage in crops, chiefly wheat, the committee was asked to report to the Commissioner whether the undertakings given were being earned out.