Rangitikei Advocate. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 14, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXII, Issue 8894, 14 August 1907, Page 2

Rangitikei Advocate. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 14, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES

j WE trust the attendance) at the j meetings of the various branches of the Farmers' Union, to consider the j demands- of the Agricultural | Labourers' Union, will ho both : large and representative. The subject is one of great importance, as it brings the farmers, for the firsttime, in direct conflict with their employees, and attempts to apply regular rules and conditions to an industry which lias to bo carried on in varying seasons and often under peculiar circumstances. It is, of course, absolutely impossible to restrict labour to certaiu hours in an industry in which the state of the vrcathor may at one time prevent anything being done, and at another may compel to industry from claybreak to sunset. Many of tiie other demands are also unworkable. As a matter of fact, the legislation intended to regulate factory labour was never intended to be applied to the natural industries, but unless Parliament restricts the operation of tiie Act there is nothing to prevent the employees taking advantage of its provisions, and agitators have succeeded in starling a movement which is fraught with danger, even to the agricultural- workers themselves. For it is certain that even if one-half the demands woro granted there would be less than half tho em-j ployment available. The city agi- i tator who roams the country districts stirring up strife,, of course, does not pay any attention to that phase of *thc subject. The chief object of the representative of those who cause the cost of supplies to be increased is to persuade the agricultural worker that the factory hands and he have interests in common, whereas the very reverse is the case. But the recent slaughtermen's strike, which failed, showed the agitators that in order to secure complete success they must get the co-operati m of the workers on the land, and the result is the prosent movement, which is only a prelude to a severe struggle on the part of all the wageearners. As we pointed out in a previous article, the agricultural labourers themselves aro not entirely to blame for the movoment. The advance in the cost of supplies, owing to tho operations of tiie Labour Trust, lias reduced the purchasing power of tho money earned by - th*o"Tabourei , l and"tTic agitators have persuaded him to use a remedy which will not only make the evil worso, but will lessen his chances of obtaining employment. It seems to us that in the emergency that has arisen tho farmers should not only tako stops to prevent their industry being hampered with injurious conditions, but also to] induce Parliament to at once amend tho Arbitration Act to prevent its application to (no natural industries in the country districts, the products of which have to compete not in local markets, but in the open markets of tho world. The country party ought to be strong enough to bring sufficient prossuro to bear to secure tho necessary alteration.

THE farmers should also carefully note that the Hinglo-tasers, as well an tho other varieties of socialists, are anxious to place greater burdens

on their shoulders. They desire that c! those, who use the laud shall pay « •ill the taxes, while the majority, who' r do not use the laud, shall dccido how the revenue shall he v spout. At a meeting attended hy a -bout 300, hold in Wellington on > Monday evouiug, Mr P. J. O’Regan, ouo of the apostles of single-tax, * after moving a resolution to the v effect that the laud proposals of the j r Government are inadequate and, j Uiat all remissions of Customs taxa- ! i tiou should he compensated by an i increase of the laud tax, made a J speech, in which he advocated the ap- r plication of higher taxation of laud. Mr Fisher, M.H.R., who was , present, expressed his determination < to aid in getting the Laud Bill i through with a £40,000 limitation, 1 which appears to ho enough to satisfy the socialists this session, though wo may soon hear of a much lower limit. Mr Fisher iu referring to the tariff, said that if they took the duty off wool “they would have to compete with Europeansweated industries, and they could not do it. Tire flour industry was unquestionably in tiro hands of a combine, and the only way to break it down was cither to lot flour in free or nationalise the industry. Whichever of those movements the Government made ho would support. Some of the increases proposed were on account of the largo amount of shoddy that was coming into iho

country. It was proposed to tax this class of article out, and pass an Act preventing the manufacture 01 sale in the colony of anything hut the genuine article.” It did not seem to strike Mr Fisher that it would ho better not to attempt to compote with European industries if the doing of it involves heavy cost or loss, and that the addition of 4s in the £1 to the cost of every woollen article used by the people is rather too heavy a price to pay to provide factory work for about 15C0 poop.o, more than half of whom arc females, and all of whom could he much more profitably employed at other work. Nor did ho seem to realise that it ■would bo much easier to prohibit the import of shoddy than to tax it out. The mooting concluded by passing a resolution to the effect that‘‘no laud proposals of the Government are satisfactory that allow another acre of public estates to bo made private property.” During the mcooing, when it was stated that a certain duty was being put on for the purpose of raising revenue, a voice ejaculated ‘‘Tax the laud 1” ‘‘Tax the country settlor!” is the yell from the cities, and it is time the country party sot to work to defend themselves from further aggression and spoliation.

IT is becoming very clear that the leaders of the Farmers' Union acted wisely in making it a plank in their platform that Customs duties should bo levied for revenue purposes only. We have frequently pointed out the importancre of this, and its bearing on the natural industries, and the farmers should note that the restrictive duties are alone responsible for the flourishing of labour unionism. But for those the factory hands could not rule, and could not artificially force up their wages, shorten their hours, and limit their output. They enablo those hands, and those who exploit them, to cut off all competitioij, but the farmer cannot bo "protected," .and cannot "pass on" any added cost oi production, because ho lias to compete in markets open to all the world. Moreover, the enforcement of tho demand that the Customs duties shall be made revenue -producing, not restrictive, will be the be.it guarantee against the application of single-tax, because if tho Customs are thus made to produce greater revenue, even an extravagant Treasurer would not require to levy taxation on the land.