POLITICAL.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 438, 22 September 1908, Page 2

POLITICAL.

Mr. Gardner at Foxton. A Regrettable Incident. Mr. O. Gardner, Independent candidate for the Manawatu, spoke at the Masonic Hall last night. There was a very fair attendance, flaxmill employees predominating.

The Mayor briefly introduced the candidate and stated that he was not a stranger amongst them. Mr. Gardner was accorded a round of applause on rising to speak, and his remarks, as he proceeded, were punctuated with applause. He said that if he thought the result of his polling at last election was an indication of the feeling of the electors he would not appear before them again. At that time he was practically unknown and was opposed by two old and tried representatives. Private affairs prevented him from taking the platform till about a fortnight before the election. He saw that it would be impossible to win the seat but he intended to come out as an advertisement. Perhaps they would not find in him an ideal or perfect candidate. He had made a hobby of politics since his school days. He was a farmer and a flaxmiller of twenty years standing, and was in touch with the requirements of the district. His address would be more particularly to the flaxmill employees, and he would deal more especially with the Labour Question. The great problem was, the more even distribution of wealth. The State exists for the benefit of the people and it was the duty of the State to undertake anything which will be for the benefit of the people as a whole, wherever it is better fitted to carry that out than the private individual. To carry out this undertaking the two great parties in this country are divided. The terms Conservative and Liberal were simply different degrees of the thing. He said one man n. be an out and out Conservative to another, and that other may be an out and out Conserva 1. third ; and if they are pu.-_ •’ each one is trying to persda public that the other is at the ■' -< treme limit in his particul ‘ - tion. The term Conservatr/ used to indicate those people tend to restrict the State; the term Liberal t 0 t who try to extend these He believed that in this country the State should pc - - , vigorous development polk at the same time endeavour ' | guard against the evils of wealth on the one hand ar ' m cessive poverty on the though he was a Liberal proved of the custom thsoi||§H grown up in this country of. Mem* bers of Parliament going in to support not certain p°li|JSraßH certain individuals. The jBbBBH dual who promises to vote ilj|PHj ever direction he was toldnpV.qvH other individuals in Parliamenffl lowered the dignity of his posited® Parliament should be an asserdH blage of those thinking men of thfl country on political questions, meffl who are there to study, discuss criticise every suggestion brJwagMß before Parliament. He walcPaß posed to the party system oi vernment because it tended roads and bridges membe&jaHß neglected greater questioqsaßHH the excuse “ Oh, the Gove|||rai|9 is looking after that. I ing after my own referred to the Ministry of a nHH Government which, if it proujlffl a law which the House did ncjHH prove, the member had to.eoHHj vote for it or turn the wholejwjH istry out. He also refeneoHH other defects of Party GovmSH ment. An elective executive wdnEH prevent any one from votflßj against his convictions. He worWj not pledge himself to low the Government, but he, not support the Opposition b J it had’nt a policy. He then J with the Labour Question anu * itwas the wish of every fair-minded person to see the standard of living of the workers raised. It was thf duty of the State to interfere. He did not think that because the Arbitration Act did not stop all strikes that it was a failure. The first object of that Act was to secure a fair wage. Better, he said, to have a fair wage and strikes than an unfair wage and no strikes. He then dealt with the question of wages, interest on capital, and rent, competition, etc. If the price of land was kept down and produce kept up, high wages could be maintained, but keeping up the price of produce alone would not do it. Helillustrated his point by stating that a few years ago hemp was £ 14per ton ; allowing 10s. of this for the support of the employer, £l3 10s. was left for wages, and other expenses. If, therefore hemp increased to ,£2O per ton and the employer was allowed an increase of 100 per cent., it would allow an increase of 40 per cent, in wages and other expenses. But if through the competition of employers with one another, an extra £4. per ton is given by way of rent (or what is the same thing, interest on money which employers promise to pay for land) wages can only obtain an advance of 11 per cent. If, on the other hand, wages can be forced up more than 11 per cent, the difference must eventually \ come off the rent for land, but in the process you may ruin the employers. The question was: Should the State assist in squeezing the employer for the sake of labour, unless it can give some relief to the employer. There is some room for the State to inter- . fere when there is a good margin of profit, but if it does so, it must do so before that margin of profit has been swallowed up by-the in-

crease in the price of the land. He said: If the State is to interfere who is to bring the matter before the court?—lt must be the Unions; therefore we. 'must support Unionism. If we support Unionism we must give preference to Unionists. If we give preference to Unionists we must give some protection to the employers against an unfair demand on the part of Unions and therefore against strikes. There was a limit to State interference in another direction than that of the margin of profit to the employer, for as long as an owner of land has the right to decide in what way he will use his land, he may use it to give the greatest or least amount of employment, and then the danger may be that you may have a few men employed at a high wage with a large army of unemployed. He instanced a farmer with an area of land that will either grow potatoes or graze sheep. He may employ twenty men at a low wage producing potatoes and may make a better profit than if he grazed sheep. Suppose that he got a gross return of £7 per acre from potatoes, and £2 per acre from sheep, while his wages growing potatoes cost £3 per acre, and his wages from sheep cost 3s per acre, he would get a profit from potatoes ot £4. per acre and from sheep of £1 17s per acre. But, suppose that wages were doubled and that it cost £6 per acre to produce the potatoes and 6s per acre to look after the sheep) there would then be a profit of only £1 per acre from potatoes while there would be a profit of £ 1 14s from sheep. Besides that there would be the extra risk from potatoes. He was in favour of a scheme of arbitration in order to stop, as far as possible, the introduction of sweating into this country, and to raise the standard of living for the worker, and also tend to stop strikes. There is a limit to State interference in another direction than that of the margin of profit to the employer, for as long as an owner of laud has the right to decide in what way he will use his land, he may use it in a way which may give the greatest or the least amount of employment. The candidate had just commenced to speak on the land question, when he placed his hand to his forehead, and was overcome with a fainting seizure. After coming round he essayed another attempt amidst applause, but had to abandon his speech. He explained that owing to family 1 sickness he had lost much rest and 1 felt fagged out. On the motion of Mr L- E. - Reade, seconded by Mr P. T. ; Robinson, a hearty vote of thanks : was accorded the speaker, which was carried amidst applause. A similar compliment to the chair terminated the meeting. 1