CORRESPONDENCE

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2428, 13 May 1922, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE

To The Editor,

Sir, —In your issue of Thursday, I notice a letter over the signature of “Fair Play,” in which he takes me to task for something I was reported to have said at the Council meeting during the discussion on the reduction of (lie wages of the casual labourers. He is very careful to try to pin me to the last few months. Well I am not going to he caught so sinply. During the period 1915-1920, the cost of living rose from 80 to 90 per cept. During the same period wages rose only 58i per cent., leaving wages the worse by 30 per cent. Now, will “Fair Play,” whose references to my vouchers discloses his hand, take into consideration the issue on which I was speaking generally 4 at the Council meeting. Will he reduce his selling prices to meet the curtailed spending power of the men? Did those men receive the bonuses awarded by the Arbitration Court? No, Sir, they did not. Does he know that those men did not receive the award wages, even until the matter was brought up in Council some months ago. Because some of our business men are selling a little cheaper during the last twelve months, it is not a bouquet to “Fair Play.” These men have been underpaid is no argument that there purchasing power should be further reduced by 5s per week because “Fair Play” happens to hump up against a more practical business man who has forced his prices down. Here’s one instance, one ‘‘Fair Play” is selling a certain commodity at five pounds weight for one shilling, yet where I deal, I get seven pounds for a. shilling. But I am drifting fro*m the subject. Why squeeze the toiler? , Why not stop the land gamble, which has forced up the prices of our staple commodilies, excessive freights, and above all the exploiter of the produce as well as the consumer? -Is it not a fact that the merchants fix the selling prices of certain foodstuffs? Hides were unsaleable recently hut what did we pay for boots? Bread came down one halfpenny the loaf but butter jumped up, so did tea. Sheep and cattle were a glut, did meat fall? Now, Sir, I think I can see through the disguise of “Fair Play” nfnd it will give me great pleasure to lead the men who are to receive five shillings per week less, and get him to agree to snpp’y them at a. price that will ensure them getting some reduction in proportion in the commodities which lie sells.' While lam opposed to a reduction in the wages of these men, for they work broken time, and as weather permits, T cannot understand why those who are drawing seven or eight pounds per week, full time, were not brought into line, not that I would vote for it, but why start on the smallest paid first? Mr “Fair Play” if you stocked heavily on the peek of prices it shoved bad judgement. To-day we have iho report that wool has risen, wl "sc going to pay for the rise in the future when it is put on the market as woollen goods? Come out into the open “Fair Play" and I’ll produce my latest voucher and besides, look what an “advi.” it would be for you and until vou do T cannot deal with you. Don’t'hide behind the nail of a few musty shelf-worn articles that have fallen into decay as well as price to get rid of, moreso as wages have fallen five hob. Yours etc.

E. G. MARTIN