SOCIALISM.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2258, 1 August 1908, Page 1

SOCIALISM.

HOW THE NEW ZEALAND FARMERS VIEW THE MOVEMENT. In his presidential at the annual conference of tho N.Z. I* aimers’ Union on Tuesday, Mr J. G. Wilson spoke ns follows : Tho Union of farmers -is moro than ovor desirable, since tho Socialists have captured the Trades and Labor Councils; -whether tlioy -liavo captured tlio working class, 1 doubt, i firmly boliovo that by far tlio -best moans to make a man, wliothor a worker or not, a happy, contented and prosperous colonist is to enable him to im-uko liis homo his own. That, however, would not satisfy tho 'Socialist propagandist. -liis aim is to “Nationalise the means of production, distribution and exchange,” and as wo do not bo-1-iovo in that aim, it is our duty to combat olio attack by every moans in our power. They base their arguments upon tho Marxian statement that “all wealth'.is the result of labor, therefore, to the 1 ; oror, all wealth should -belong.” lu -.s when you come to define that, bins statement breaks down. There is labor of tlio brain, -as well as the hand, labor o-f tho inventor, organiser, distributor, and that of many others, which has to bo iakeu intc : considoUjr tion. It. i 6 truh that such -insti'd)tions as tihe Post Office have -been conducted in -a most oxcellont manner by tiio Government for tho people, but it is purely administrative, and the work mostly clerical. Tlio railways are also run by tlio Government, but it is doubtful, after seeing the way that tlie Wollington-Manawutu line (has 'been worked, whether tlio railways aro such a success. They aro certainly uioro costly, both -as to construction and maintenance, and where a company would pay out of'revenue, itoms are frequently charged to borrowed money. Again, much of the work is administrative, -and not much of 'it is manual labor. .When wo como to manufacture, it is soinowliat different. Wo have seen -many attempts and as many fuilures when nationalised. (Let us take one, begun under the best auspices -possible. In France, in 1848, Louis Blanc, a convinced iSoci.ili&t and perfectly honest man, was allowed to organise tho tailors in a debtor’6 gaol, which was converted into a national tailoi'6’ shop. The Government -furnished the capital without intorest and gave an order for twenty-five thousand uniforms for the National Guard. Eleven francs had been the contractor’s price. This had been sufficient to give a profit to. the master bailor, pay remuneration for his workshop, and cost of tools, interest on liis capital and wages for the workmen. The Government gave the associated -tailors tho same price. The workers were so enthusiastic that they worked twolvo and thirteen hours a day, and somo even on Sundays. Tho Government found, when tlio ordor was completed, they had paid sixteen francs, and, whereas the master tailor had made a j refit , paid ihis rent, the interest of lis capital, it had cost the country half >as much again, without taking into account any of 'these considerations. The .correspondent who supplied these facts, and who made enquiry .personally on the spot at tho time, says “Louis Blanc is not a match for tho master tailors of Paris.” Curiously enough, the Socialist has novor been a-ble to give us an instance when it did pay tho State, and we have an instance in our midst with which we can draw a comparison. Tho Anglo-Saxon race, which has peopled this country, started from scratch, just as the Maori did. Tlio northorn race has developed without Socialism to its present state, a manifestly higher o-ne than it was even a hundred years ago, and has developed this country since its advent into wh.it it is now. Tho Maori, judging by his history and habits, have been purely Socialistic, and no matter how much wo may -admire the race, their development has been at a stand still. Under their regime they often had soircely enough food to livo on. and had to turn to the food provided by nature, viz., fern root. Whilst under onr system of Government, we exlortod £20,000,000 worth of produce ast year. Whilst giving every credit to those -who advocate . Socialism as to their honesty of belief, any attempt t 0 live itlie life they suggest would bo retrogressive, and any people who carry it out would sink into insignificance, if not -into servitude. Municipalisation has this to be said for it: that the people are more directly pledging their own credit, and can more easily stop the experiment if not successful, and can only damage their own town, .and there would be quick reaction. Whereas Socialism drags the whole people into -the oxperimont, -and before the country could say nay, irreparable harm may be done. Till is is not the time or place to discuss -this question, and I refrain from doing so only mentioning it because I think if calls -for ns to combat, what Mr Sprott called tho new religion of the -people. Materialistic Socialisation. (Equally so must we beware of the stopping stones —single tax. and 'nationalisation of tho land. The first is the easiest of accomplishment and a firm believer (and I think a conscientious believer) in the system has crept ‘into the .inner counsel of tho nation. It is easiest of accofnplisliment, because the machinery is already provided. Every addition to tlie land tax is a stop in the direction of tho singlo tax. That means that tho greatest democratic principle will Ibo violated—i.e., that the -people who ipay vaxation should spend it, too, and the Land Bill, of last session -gave it another hoist. How we are to combat these tendencies, and hinder tlieir -growth, even if at tlie moment, we cannot defeat them, is a matter -for your consideration. It is certain that a complete combination of landowners forms the surest method of doing so, and our Union offors this possibility.