Rangitikei Advocate. FRIDAY, JUNE 4, 1909. EDITORIAL NOTES.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9463, 4 June 1909, Page 4

Rangitikei Advocate. FRIDAY, JUNE 4,1909. EDITORIAL NOTES.

AT the Auckland Conference of the Farmers’ Union Captain Coibeok in the course of his speech on the motion that Customs duties should be levied for revenue purposes only, said : “They had so artificially raised the coat of living that s*mau was no better off under a high wage than he had been under a low one; and it they could reduce the cost of living by one-third he thought they Would get men to take upland in the back blocks. It would be possible, if a change in taxation were effected, to save £5,620,000 per annum, most of which would go into the pockets of the farmers in the shape of decreased cost of production. He referred to the * ' boot trade, and said boots whiqh were landed in New Zealand for 10s 6d cost the consumer 19s 6d, and yet in the boot industry, which was protected to the extent of 25 per cent., wages were very low. The country was at present paying far more for the protection of a limited number of industries than such proteotion|was worth, and a system of bonuses would be preferable. The proportiou of town dwellers was far greater than the proportion of country dwellers.” |Mrßell remarked : “If any industry could not live on aTduty of 15 per cent., they would be better without it altogether. The, boot industry had no right to be protected to the extent of 40 per cent, as it only employed, 4000 people; they should let the other fellow make the hoots and we could buy them from him.” Captain Oolbcek said they did not complain about the revenue raised through the Customs; but what they did object to was that a large amount of money did not go in the reduction of taxation but was devoted to the manufacturers of New Zealand. By imposition of. protective duties they lessened their revenue and as they raiaed*the coat of living so they raised the standard of wages. The farmer paid the whole of the taxation; They wanted to get every farmer to vote as one man and the thing was done; if the farmers voted solid the farmers would he the Government. (Applanse.) Were they aware of the fact that the Government had placed machinery on the free list, and the next day said it must not he sold at> lower price than it could be produced for in the colony. r He did hot know whether Mr MoNab’s Land Bill had been brought down on purpose so that the Government might alter the tariff and remove |£400,000 from revenue to protective tariff while the attention of farmers was diverted elsewhere.

AT the same Conference Captain Colbeok advocated the formation of a Farmers Party. He said it would be difficult to estimate the power of such a party as it would be composed of all primary producers, professional men and clerks, whose interests were identical. The difficulty In organising farmers was that they had no common objective; their objective should be reduction in the cost of living—farmers should be unanimous on this point. The protective boot was the one that was pinching and it was the cause of the whole trouble. Major Lusk said the whole thing resolved itself into this: that they could not get anything unless they had a majority in the House. If properly united the farmers were now strong enough to rule the country and if they could get sufficient men to stand up for the farmers and landed interests Sir Joseph Ward would very quickly join their ranks. Mr Boddie referred to the efforts put forth by the Socialistic party, and said the day was not far distant when the farmers would have to follow their example—df they could not take the initiative themselvse— and form a party on clear and distinct lines and go for their platform for all they were worth.

CORRESPONDENCE has been published in which Lient.-Col Gorton congratulates Sir Joseph Ward on the offer of a Dreadnought to Britain, and regrets tiiat Mr Massey did not also congratulate him and agree to sink party differences. Dealing with the financial aspect the writer thinks the £3,500,000 required could be borrowed at per cent., and ha would provide for the interest charge of £87,500 per annum by a tax on all incomes ranging from Is on incomes of less than £IOO a year, 2s 6d on incomes of £IOO to £l5O, 8s 6d from £l5O to £BOO, 5s from £3OO to £4OO, 7s 6d from £4OO to £SOO, 10s from £SOO to £IOOO, 15s from £IOOO to £2OOO, and 20s from £3OOO and over. He estimates that this would yield

£113,850, or £36,850 more than required for interest which latter could be placed to a reserve fund. He would make the loan for twenty years, and each year as population and incomes increased, a larger revenue would accrue. He suggests that the tax should be collected through the agency of postmasters and police, defaulters to be summoned and fined twice the amount cf the tax, and be deprived of electoral ! privileges for three years. Those giving falsehetnrus to be fined treble tax, and imprisonment to follow a second offence.

IT would be noticed from the pnblished correspondence laid before the Australian Parliament, relating to the Imperial Conference, that Sir' Joseph Ward and his Ministers have been misleading the people. An effort has been made to create the impression that really the British Government cannot settle defence matters without the aid of our Premier, and that the safety of the Empire demands that he shall at once gird up his loins, and hurry away to London, even if this country could not dispense with - his services. It now appears that there was no urgent request for Sir Joseph’s attendance—indeed Mr Asquith rather pointedly indicated that he and the other Premiers conld be dispensed with, when be said that he presumed the Governments would be represented by their Ministers for Defence, or failing them, by some other member' of the Government, assisted by an expert. It is evident that Sir Joseph desires to go to London, but that does not justify an attempt to fool the people, by making them believe that he is urgently required there by the Imperial Government.