Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 30 December 1932, Page 4

In their report on. “the unemployed boy” problem, ?.Ios r .r,r A'.iscl! unci Smith give proof of tv commendable’ on mast effort to e.icit llie tacts mid devise remedies. They have evidently 3-'nl:secl the s. o/e raid ti e urgency of the problem. and rightly, while viewing other possible avenues of relief, have centred their hopes on agricultural and pastoral occrnations. Tn connect ion with "'ose, tVy have devoted much attention to of employing youths i;i> dealing with land “in the rough,” preferably waste Crown land; . as a bais's for a scheme of farm s< tt!eme"'t by there young workers, after subsequent training in

an agricultural 1 college or farm of instruction, This suggestion calls for close examination by those having experience- in the work of bringing virgin ou' lapsed- areas im.e pi hat-able occupancv. Its value at- the picsont juncture is problematical. It may not be best for the lands mentioned; probably the .employment of thorn more mature in physique and mentality would achieve better results. As for the hoys, this work might engender a distaste instead of a liking for rural employ men t. In any event, it would he a matter of years before such a scheme could produce appreciable resets in either the land or the boys. Afore hope attaches to a- continuance of the placing of town hoys with farmers, providing- due selection he made of the hoys and the farmers, while an essential of sircess -is the intimate touch tli at ought- to he kept by paternal local orgarisat ons with the hoys so placed. This plan has already had some success; it .should have more. A oractjcal discussion of l oth schemes is do-irahle, in order to decide how far and how quickly the present hardships of growing youths can be overcome by each of them and to concentrate effort B,>xl means on the se’ eme promising earlier results, On the information collated hv these two investigator s such a discussion could and should proceed without delay.