REPATRIATION, LAND AND GRATUITIES

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 14, 11 October 1919, Page 8

REPATRIATION, LAND AND GRATUITIES

Sir.—These three matters aro consistently before the public eye at the present time, and a great diversity of opinion appears to exist in connection with the "Diggers'" views thereon. As these subjects vitally interest the returned soldier, anu him more than any other member jif the community, 'perhaps you will permit me to put the returned man's view before you in resume. 1 am. and have been, n "Digger" for more years than I care to. thinK, and I have had unique opportunities of learning the "Diggers'" viewpoint on various ' matters.

1. Repatriation.—There aro published periodically certain figures which convey an entirely erroneous idea to the reading public as to the state of re-employment of returned soldiers. Statistics can be mado to prove almost anything, and on tlio face of the Repatriation Department's figures one might be excused for thinking that tho aforesaid Department has this-problem well in hand. The Department concerned is certainly tackling tho problem in a whole-hearted way, but the success attending its eft'or.s is a long way short of the desired result. 1' have nothing to say against the personnel of tho_ Repatriation Department, but thero. is something radically wrong with the methods adopted. I have been in' touch with scores of exservice men on the hunt for jobs, and I

can assure you that in very many oases their opinions are not complimentary to the Repatriation Department's methods, or lack of them. From my own limited observations I am inclined" to the opinion that there is too much play with red' tape and too little application of tho personal equation. However, the greatest portion of the blame lies not so much with the Repatriation Department or the soldier himself, but with the "employer." It is an appalling fact, and one of which everyone whom the cap fits should be thoroughly ashamed, that a percentage ol employers stand brazenly aloof in unsympathetic silence, and watch this repatriation struggle going on—men who could, ■ with very little trouble, fit jobs to some of the chaps who did their fighting for them. One is astonished at the difference of attitude adopted to this problem by the "lanks." I saw a "Yank" division disembark some time ago, and the men were literally showered with offers of jobs. Can' anyone who has' seen the nag-wagging, or heard - the deafening cheering, _ that, spid us on ,0m- outward journey, imagine large groups of prosperous employers awaiting tho arrival at the wharf of returning transports ready with offers (if billets to returned men? If the statement re returned. Railway eniployees is true, 'the persons responsible should be publicly disgraced. I cannot believe the Government guilty of such an outrage. 'It is to 'the Government one naturally looks for a lead in a matter such as this. Now, Sir, as a returned "Digger," let me appeal' 'on behalf of my comrades for a better un-, 1 derstanding on this vexed question. To employers who save a- few pounds 'per" by employing someone else, remember that these returned men were willing, ono and all, to make any sacrifice to secure'the liberty of this, your native land, and incidentally your comfort; and now, when they come to you seeking yours aid, do hot pass them'by-1 Give him a job if you' reasonably can. It is you, and not any Government De- j partment of Repatriation, who hold' the key to the repatriation problem. 2. land Settlement by Soldiers-There are many abstruse issues involved in this question which the returned man has not the ability or inclination to thoroughly appreciate. He is satisfied to Observe the obvious, nnd bases his opinions on such observation. The result is not very complimentary to the present party in power. From my own observations the average "Digger" is concerned only with the fact that a sum of about J21i.000.000 is to be expended on the purohase of land for, soldier-settlement that fe worth, perhaps, not half that amount. He wants fco know why the Government cannot take sufficient areas of good land at pre-war prices—in t!"> case of land still held by the pre-war owner; and at reasonable compensation ill cases: where it has changed hands' during. the, war period. The fact that!tho Government does not appear to be willing to agree with this idea inclines the "Digger" to the belief that the Government is at the mercy, of the large landowner. They all know that land exploitation has now reached a stage where only drastic action can check it, and do not hesitate to express disgust that the present system. his permitted of many of . their comrades being made the ''boobs" in such exploitation. I cannot agree with you, Sir, in your poor attempt to camouflage the purport of "Small Farm Owner's" letter. How can any sano person approve of the expenditure of ,£14,000,006 of public money on tho purchase of land that is perhaps worth not half that sum?. Nor can disagreement with such a sugi gestion by any known logic be contorted into meaning' that the Government should not provide land for returned soldiers. It is purely a question of a good or bad business deal, and I cannot persuade myself that it is good business to spend ,£14,000,000 on about '.£8.000,000 worth of pre-war land, if the difference between these two amounts is to go into the pockets of those who have not earned it, and by no stretch of imagination can be said fo deserve it- Furthermore, s'ories of the quality of the land fo far purchased by the Government are in wide circulation, and the prospective "Digger" farmer no little conoern. More will certainly be heard on this point before many, moons, so I will not mention it furtlier here. It is superfluous to reiterate that it is generally thought 'that the Land Purchase Department should take steps to be sure that land selected for settlement is suitable. and that, tho Government should tnke such blocks at pre-war or compensation prices, independent of present inflated' values. Gratuities.—Tn spite of the attitude of some few hotheads, it must lie admitted that the "Diggers" have accepted this settlement in a very sporting snir.it. Being a gift; of course, it is impolite to argue about; it. This notwithstanding, iind / in spite of the votes of appreciation from various R..S.A. meetings, it cannot be denied that, generally speaking, the returned men are disappointed. Out of ninety-five men I have snoken to recently only seven gave it as their candid opinion lhat thev were quite satisfied. I think, too, that the officer mpv 'bo excused if he grieves in silence. If an officer at Hie South African picnic was worth .£IOO per annum, what has t.lio present officer done to deserve his valuation being reduced to .£27 per annum for the much more severe ju=l I ended? Of course, our four M.P. qflinnrs know as well as I do that their remarks about the adequacy of the grnH. itv are srf* much balderdash, especially die flat-rate business. With this con-'-Mion let us close the chapter.—! am. etc.. , MACHINE-GUNS./