“SIDEY’S TIME.”
NOT WANTED BY DAIRY FARMERS.
“Mr. Sidey is very much astray if he imagines that the operation of summertime has not been attended with a good deal of discomfort and annoyance in rural districts, particularly amongst dairy farmers,” stated Mr. A. J. Heighway, managing editor of the “Dairy Produce Exporter,” to a press representative at Wellington, this week.
“In order to ascertain the real feelings of the dairy farmers on the question after a practical trial,” he went on to explain, “the ‘Exporter,’ which reaches all dairy-farmers in the Dominion, inserted a voting paper in its January issue, giving the issues ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ on the question of the permanent retention of summertime. The response has been so great,” said Mr. Heighway, “as to show that farmers have welcomed the opportunity of proving their antipathy to the measure. This postal vote will not close till March 6, but progress figures show that of approximately 16,000 people so far covered by the votes recorded, 67 per cent, are opposed to summertime.
“Many of the voting papers are accompanied by strong letters of protest against the measure. The chief grounds of complaint are that the children suffer through loss N 6f sleep, as it is impossible .in practice for them to get sleep in daylight. Early rising is essential in the country, and some mothers have written that they have had to drag their children out on to the fioor in order to wake them. The net results has been •perpetual tiredness and irritability. Adults, too, have suffered from lack of sleep. In farm practice it has been impossible to milk cows ,in the heat of the afternoon with the fly nuisance at its height, as would be necessary by observing ‘Sidey-time.’ The consequence has been that the farmer has had to vvoi-k just as late as before in actual tinie, while rising an hour earlier,, in order to conform to the rest of the community. Also the period during which farmers have had to rise in the dark has been extended, and altogether there is strong resentment in rural circles against the measure.”
“The country people in their correspondence have made it clear,”* said Mr. Heighway, “that they, have no objection to the townspeople saving their daylight as much as they like, but they object to -being compelled to work longer hours and endure rising for a longer period in the darkness, in order to give townsfolk an extra hour of pleasure. Their argument is that the townsfolk can run their business to suit themselves and work any hours they like without ‘messing round’ with the clock and imposing discomfort and disturbance upon them. Mr. Bidey is wholly in error if he thinks that farmers will accept a further period of disturbance by permanent summertime. If townsfolk want it, they will have to arrange to have it independently of the country.”
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19280223.2.35
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3758, 23 February 1928, Page 3
Word count
Tapeke kupu
482“SIDEY’S TIME.” Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3758, 23 February 1928, Page 3
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Manawatu Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.