WHEAT POSITION

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2963, 29 December 1916, Page 6

WHEAT POSITION

Sir,—After reading H. S. Bowen's letter in your issue of December 26, 1916, I felt induced to reply as man to man, but when the directory revealed that the letter was addressed from the New Zealand _ Loan and Mercantile Office in Christchurch, I felt assured that this was an inspired letter, and the' firm behind it was a worthy opponent sufficiently rich to command some topliotchers to defend its position who would not be soared by the statements of a crippled old soldier. It is this spirit within me, always itching for a fight against a worthy .opponent, which impels mo to write this letter, and I trust that the N.Z. Loan and Mercantile Association will not consider me too insignificant to notice. Tho first portion of the letter, dealing with the action of Messrs. Isitt • and M'Combs, could bo explained by those gentlemen better than by me. The one point to remember is that there is a limit to the outraging of human nature. /Where that is exceeded, tlio most conservative of us may leayo the conventional course. That portion of H. S. Bowen's letter which reveals a sense of equity in Mr. Massey in refusing to adopt the suggestion of H.S.ll's method of saving the Government £150,000, 'and costing the people probably'£soo,ooo, is amusing, and serious comment would • l)e superfluous, but when lie aspires to economics one is induced to invoke the Church of England Litany. Yet there is one .statement in that economics paragraph beyond dispute, viz., "I think ; few people understand." Hence his whole letter. The public-that does not understand will eagerly swallow any dope that comes along, and ho proceeds to give them something to swallow.

I'have before me articles written by an up-to-date, consequently prosperous, present-day farmer, which aYc much more reliable. Before going any further, ono is inclined to think the object of this letter may have had a side-issue, viz., the discouragement' of returned soldiers talcing. up land; My advicc

to the returned soldier is "get in now" when the. prosperity is real, that is if he has the,strength.' Brain'power appears to 1» a negligible quantity as

far as farming goesl Strong statements, please read on! To the most patriotic of us who know anything of Government institutions, encouraging

men who could not by private enterprise beat pi Government institution on .a similar lino seems absurd. Hero let mo quote from the same articles a statement by Dr. I l '. N. Hilgendorf, of Lincoln College: "Wheat is a favourite crop'with farmers, as it gives an immediate return, and can be made to grow under very rough conditions of cultivation, such as are suitable for cheap

land with only primitive implements of tillage." •

My- prosperous farmer' friend. gives details of preparing an acre of land for wheat-growing, including every detail, to tlio thrashing, making in all £3 4s. 3d. As 10 per cent, may now bo added since these articles were written, it may reasonably, stand at £3 Id's. 9d. 11.5.8.'s calculation of interest is distinctly typical of a certain class of institution. Having visions of a futuro letter on. the subject, I reserve further comment. My prosperous farmer friend calculates interest at £2 per acre, making tlio total'espenses £5 10s. 9d. When the Government appeal to the farmers to grow wheat was made in August, 1914, that appeal was practic-. ally a command to the Experimental State Farm at Moumahaki. The conditions ivere the same for that farm as- for tho other, patriotic farmers who so loyally responded.. But what of tho results? It must be remembered that the Government experimental farms are on second-class land. They wouljd not -fulfil their, functions on other than second-class land. The return per acre by the patriotic farmer from first and second-class land averaged 30 bushels per'acre, and H.S.B. asserts that 90 per cent, of these patriotic farmers lost •money by the venture. Now, what about the Moumahaki State' Farm, a

purely Stato institution, shackled by all tho red taps conventions that other State institutions are subject to? Seventy-one bushels of wheat per acre! Cost of production, one shilling per

bushel, plus interest. Is it not time this God'a Own C9UII- - of ours got rid of, the patriotic farmer, and instituted State farms em-, ploying returned soldiers under the direction of our Experimental Farm Superintendents? At least they could not. make a worse- bungle of _ farming than H.S.B. accuses our patriotic farmers of doing. Finally, as to tie method of our Ministers (seditious not implied ,or suggested) in determining the price of wheat. They ignore a reliable State institution, and appeal to the unsuccessful persons holding land for the price they want for their commodity. If they are insufficiently strong to

govern, then lvliy not attempt to ciii'Cj the method to a. conclusion? Ask th® plumber, carpenter, painter, etc., thi wages he mil be satisfied witli for hu particular trade,-"the wharfie, dustmaii, etc., for his vocation, and 'even go to the moneylender and get his demand for interest. The Government would ' then he assured of permanent employ-,* ment, as useful as a dog chasing his tail.—l am, etc., J.MILLER. 3 Hutchison Boad,' Wellington. December 28, 1916. ■ , . p.S.—"Will the Editors who publish Mr. H. S. Bowen's letter please, in fairness, copy this?—J.M.