FARMERS’ UNION.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4439, 12 July 1922, Page 4

FARMERS’ UNION.

BRANCH RESUSCITATED. There was a good response to theadvertisement inviting all those interested in Farmers’ Union matters to attend a meeting at the Coronation Chambers on Saturday night Mr. E. E. Cassrels, chairman ofl the Rotokohu Ratepayers’ Association, was voted to the .chair and explained that at the last meeting of the association it was thought that it would be a good idea to try and resuscitate the branch of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union. In response to an invitation Mr. Forbes Eadie, district organiser, and L. H. McAlpine, member of the Provincial Council, were present to address them on union matters. Mr. Forbes Eadie, in opening his remarks, said that the farmers- ofthe Dominion were right up against it at the present time. The primary -cause y was, of course, the aftermath of the great war, and, secondly, they were not organised and therefore lost many Speaking of the 33 remits that had been sent on to Parliament, he said that they had only partial redress with three. This was chiefly because those at the head of affairs knew the farmers were not united in a body. He dealt at length with the various matters .that had been brought up in Parliament, from time to time and showed from Hansard how little notice had been given to their remits. To-day was a day of organisation. Every trade or profession was fully organised, so that they could speak with one voice, and why not the farmers ? The farmer, allowed matters to drift, but if they wished to get on their feet they must be active and, like other organisations, speak with one voice. That was the one- thing essential. Prices were controlled by one firm, arid the farmer paid: sometimes he kicked, but what was the use—they were not organis-. ed. The Jaw society met and decided to raise their fees and also to decrease the term of mortgages from five to three years. This meant that a procuration fee was paid every three years in very many cases, and «lso fresh mortgages had to be ar--/ranged. They were organised and had the matter in their own hands. The doctors had increased their fees. They were also organised- under the British Medical Association. The in- ■ dustrial unions were Organised and spoke with one voice. Every part of our societies were organised. The sport-; committee were organised, ’ and so were the firemen of the shipping. The Pure Seeds Bill, which had been before- Parliament for the ’ past seven years, and was a remit from Morrinsville, whs put aside siinply beacuse the fjarmers of the country could hot speak with one voice and financial- institutions got in ahead, and the seed merchants of the Dominion had said “-no” and the farmers 'had to suffer. The agitation for agricultural banks, which, had - revolutionised farming in every country where they had been established, ■ would not prevail if’the farmers did not co-operate. They were not asking for anything new, or something that would cost the country anything, but simply asked Parliament to give its ( permission. The matter had been un- ' der consideration for five years, but thev could depend upon it that they , wo.ild not get it Until they were or- , ganised. The vested interest was so organised in its ramifications that it will keep on saying "no” until it finds ( the farmers of the Dominion speaking with one voice. He dealt exhaustive- . ly with the butter market, and showed how it was possible to alter the | present state of affairs. He pointed | out that in organising the Te Papapa , manures had dropped 25 per cent, in | price. The embargo on the export of potatoes was a matter of great con- ( corn to the Southern people, but what , . affected one class of farmer affected the whole of them. Everything we

I grew or made was prohibited from go- ] ing into Australia, but Australian produce can come into New Zealand. This state of affairs should be altered. Tn speaking of the management of. the railways he said that a remit had gone from Elstow Farmers’ Union two years ago pointing out to the Minister of Railways the losses that were being made and the anomalies that existed in the tariff, and asked if he would have inquiry made. A reply was received that if they would furnish particulars of the alleged losses, which were denied, he would have set up a Royal Commission to inquire into them. The Farmers’ Union did not, believe in Royal Commissions, which were worthless. He thought that everybody in the . Dominion was aware of the losses, yet the Minister in charge of the Department apparently did not. The Farmers’ Union wanted three or four of the best commercial men in the Dominion, and he felt sure that- they would save 70 per cent, of the losses which the farmer had to pay. He thought nothing was more important than that we should have good roads. (Hear, hear!) This was oi vital importance to farmers, and could only be obtained by absolute cooperation. Mr. Eadie contended that no man represented his constituents in Parliament at the present time, fon when the "whip cracked in the House he ! had to do what he was told by his Party. It was not a square deal to the farmer, but a square deal to party. The Farmers’ Union wanted to put men into Parliament who would give the farmers a square deal and rectify their grievances. It was a New Zealand Party, not a Farmers’ Party. A small party in the English Parliament got all they wanted by making themselves a nuisance, but such tactics he deprecated very strongly. The New Zealand Party had picked put, eight seats which they intended to contest. Mr. Colbeck for Ohinemuri and Mr. Ross for Thames were two, and these gentlemen would speak for themselves. The farmers had got to do one or two things. They have got to get together and speak with one voice; if they don’t they may as well close up shop. He had been asked what they did with the membership fee of 30s. He considered this was an exceedingly small fieri. The membership fee for the waitresses union was 52s ■ a year, paid in weekly instalments of Xs. The farmers’ was the cheapest union in Ausj tralar.ia. He had the pleasure of do-, j ing this work for nothing, but his I heart was in his work to do spine■ ■ thing for his brother farmer, | Mr. McAlpine said that the Farm- ’ ers’ Union’s attitude in endeavouring j to get a Farmers’ Bank was not new. j It had been tried in other countries ■ and had proved most successful. If 1 ! farmers would only realise the tax that was placed on them in having to J renew their mortgages every three years they would, begin to think serii ously of what it really meant. The main object of the bank was to pro-

vide money or credit t for the fanners. The capital of the bank was’provided by the sale of bonds, and be knew of many farmers who were looking forward to the day when the banks would be established to purchase these bonds. They could only get such a bank by the solid co-operat- ! tion of the farmers, and he said it ' would be a very fine thing for the ! farmers and the country when they did. Any adverse criticism would come from the cities, who were to a [ great measure bound up with the I banks, especially the moneylenders. I Mr. Vuglar : Tell me one agricul--1 tural bank that has paid interest on j capital. b Mr. McAlpine : In the Slates they have been paying from five to six per ' cent. The banks would be mapaged ' by farmers for farmers and would be compelled to lend money to farmers who, of course, had the security.

Bonds were recognised by the great Continental banks, and money would be lent at the .lowest possible rates. The lank would not aim at making any profits out of the farmers. One advantage would be that bonds would be negotiable just the same ,as pound notes, but the mortgage was not, and this was what appealed to many who were desirous of putting money into an Agricultural Bank. "Give us your packing and the Union is going to back you,” said, the speaker. Speaking of men who had fought for the farmer he said that, Mr. Powdroll had been the only man in the House who dared "kick over the traces.” Because ofl the party system the farmers had no say in the Gov-, ernment. The city people had the most erroneous ideas about the farmers. The city folk thought the country people had made fortunes. There was one way of enlightening the city friends. The farmers wanted a Party in the House unfettered by any other Party and .absolutely independent. Mr. Massey would take the credit of the Meat Pool. That was the Farmers’ Union. Mr. Polson had long ago advocated the meat pool. Unless it was made compulsory it was useless. Armours would pick t'he best and the meat pool would get the rest. Mr. W. D. Keys : Where. will they sh ; r> it to ? Mr. McAlpine : Armour and Co. wf f l do what, they like until it is- made compulsory. It was only by compulsion that they could control it. The speaker 'had been the first to bring about the dairy pool. Selling through one channel was the only satisfactory way of? dealing with the dairy produce. It would come. They would, pool the North Island stuff and. the South Island would only be too glad to .fall into line. If the Farmers’ Union, said the pool must tome about it would come. The heads of the Farmers’ Union. Had been working for the farmer for the last 22 years. He, urged al] farmers to give the Union all the backing they could. If it was decided to form a branch they would enroll the members and meet' the local men agaip.

The chairman said that the speakers would be pleased to answer questions. Tn answer to a question, "What stand does the Country Party take on Prohibition ?" Mr. Eadie replied ‘. The Country Party, like other political' organisations, strongly protests against the liquor question becoming a political question. Neither the Farmers’ - Union nor the Country Party asks its members to vote for or against liquor. . This question is a matter for the individual to decide how he or she thinks fit. The Farmers’ Union appreciates that the present legislation —that is the Referendum—is sufficiently democratic to settle the question. Speaking as an individual, however, and not as the Farmers’ Union representative, I am of the opinion that every person should give this vexed question more than due consideiation before voting at the polls next December. Fbr the life qf me I cannot see where we are going to find the £2.500 000 by extra taxation which will he lost to the revenue of the Dominion in the event of no license being carried. We show a huge deficit on the national balance-sheet to-day, and if the same losses on our railways. on our income tax, and our customs duties continue till the end of the year and no license should happen en top of all that, then I do not know where we shall be. Study the question closely and vote on the prohibition Question in the best interest of yourselves and your country. I voted no license at last poll. I shall vote continuance at the next poll, because by doing so I think I shall be keeping my country out of its financial difficulties. Mr. Vuglar: Does it mean that by joining the Farmers' Union you must support the Farmers’ Party ? Mr. Eadie : Certainly not. Mr. Vuglar: We have a man representing us who is a. farmer and a real good man. He would not feel justified in joining if he had to vote for the Farmers’ Party. Mr. McAlpine: By joining tne

Farmers’ Union it would not commit any member to vote for the Farmers’ Party. The Union was not opposed to Massey, or any Party, but, they wanted unfettered men in the House who could speak in the farmers’ interests. Was it right that the farmer ■should be the only section of the com-i munity to be penalised ? They penalise 84,000 farmers for 72,000 others. They had put butter, down and put wages up. He cculd not conceive any time when they would vote against Massey in .a no confidence motion, The farmers should be independent, and until they were they would have no kick.. i Mr. Davis asked if the farmer did not want protection against himselfMr. Eadie said that since he had joined the Union he had a scheme whereby a farmer holding a farm up to ter. years and selling before that tin e should give a portion to the Government. He thought that at last the farmer was waking up.’ Mr. W. D. Keys said many had debated the question of forming a Farmers’ Union here, and he was pleased that Messrs Eadie and McAlpine had given an outline of the Union’s workings. He was of; the opinion that the farmers should have a party of their own. While most of them were willing to join up with the Union most of the Association members would, he thought, link up with the stronger, body. It would be good policy to get in touch with the Union and its policy. Some of the difficulties of expansion would rest mostly on how the Farmers’ Political Party would >e formed. He thought it would be formed dead, as he did not think any of the party would get. into Parliament against the other competitors. Until they got members into the House they had no political party—only political talkers. Mr. Eadie said the Farmers.’ Party would never vote th© Red. Feds. in. Forming the branch had nothing to do with the political party. W. D. Keys: Unless there was some common adherence to some platform the force of the Union was lost. Most of them were not interested in the ordinary platform of the Farmers’ Union. He asked how were they going to get their party in. Mr. McAlpine had isaid that on a no confidence motion they would not vote against Mr, Massey. He would like that put down as a pledge. Mr. Vuglar: How can you class Denmark butter against New Zealand ?

Mr. Eadie said it was proposed to erect cold storage in all the large centres and hold the produce in them until there was the demand for it. The New Zealand butter was better than Denmark’s, but Denmark was getting 3d per lb more than New Zealand. The middleman was getting the profits, as he had the cold stores. The cause of the rise of butter to-day was owing to the drought in Europe. In normal times the Farmers’ Union said it was out to establish cold stores. With all the farmers behind them they would get it. It was required

of the of the factories to advocate their companies to have that system instituted. The farmers eyes would be opened ifl they read a book, “Co-operation in Denmark.” Mr. Vuglar: Were we not on a very good wicket ’ The New Zealand price was higher than Denmark’s Mr. Eadie: That’s on account c£ the drought in Denmark. Mr. Goodfellow had said the farmer was getting only %t'h of the enhanced price of butter. The chairman thought the Farmers’ Union proposition should be taken up by them strongly. The most deadly thing they had to combat was the apathy of the farmers. The Union was an advocate of true co-opera-tion of not only the farmers round Paeroa, but of alt the farmers in New Zealand. Cooperation' in the ■selling side was essential. He thought they could not do better than join the Farmers’ Union. He moved that they form ,a branch, to be called the Paeroa-RotokOhu branch. Mr. J. T. Brown : The Paerpa Farm-’ ers’ Union is still in existence and has a credit, balance at the bank. Voices : Hear, hear! you’re lucky. The chairman said in that case they should revive the Paeroa branchMr. Brown : If! you are going to repivri the Farmers’ Union revive it and keep it going and put all your weight into it. Mr. Keys doubted if the Farmer’s Union was going to keep alive unless it had political objective as a driving force. Mr. Eadie said that, was scarcely logic. He advised that they should get the branch going and if’ the brancn did not like political action they could leave it alone. Mr. Vuglar seconded the motion. Mr. Keys moved that the branch should be called the Paerpa Rotpkphu Farmers’ Union. The chairman said that the name could be discussed at the next meeting. A number of those present decided to join the Paeroa branch .and were enrolled. Mr- Cassrels was elected vice-presi-dent of the branch. A vote of thanks to Messrs Eadie and McAlpine and the chair was carried by acclamation.