Citizens Say —

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 989, 4 June 1930, Page 10

Citizens Say

SOCIAL MENACES Sir,— I was interested to observe in your second leader of May 30 that you had the courage to suggest that a return to the use of the lash as a deterrent to sexual offences might be beneficial. But, my dear sir, it is apparent that you are fully aware that any serious advocacy of this form of punishment would be a waste of breath or Ink —the soft tone of your article shows that, all too clearly. Is it not a remarkable thing that a judge who has it in his power to mete out the lash should fail to mete it o.it to the destroyer of somebody else’s child? There is another question I should like to ask while I am on the subject, and that is this: What would a Jury do to a man who came before it charged with murdering the man he found molesting his child? This country is suffering fFom a form of sickly hysteria, which refuses to recognise evil things for what thev really are. If a judge sentenced a ca’prit to the lash he would arouse a storm of protest from a crowd of mealy-mouthed, hypocritical, selfstyled humanitarians: but if he cannot find' anybody with the nerve to administer the lash, he can apply to you for my name and address—but I shall require three weeks’ notice —to go into training. FIELD PUNISHMENT, No. 1. BURDENS ON FARMERS Sir,— The report of the National Dairy Association is a striking if somewhat hackneyed example of the eloquence of the farmer on his pet subject, i.e., the burden imposed, on agricultural industry. In the interests of the general public I feel It is time someone took the trouble to contradict the impression made by these reports, and point out the fallacy of the arguments and the weakness and one-sidedness of their logic.

In. the first place I would refer to the dairy farmers’ complaint that "the industry suffers considerably through unnecessarily high tariffs on dairy machinery.” Milking machines are imported free from British possessions, so also are tractors. There is a duty of 10 per cent, on certain classes of cultivators, drills, harrows and ploughs from. British possessions; so that if the farmer Insists on buying them from Canada instead of supporting the local industry, he will be saddled with an extra capital charge, the annual Interest on which might buy him a box of cigars at Christmas. Even this is doubtful, as some of the implements in question are cheaper in Australia under a high tariff than in New Zealand under a low’ one.

The dairy farmer's complaint in regard to the duty on cereals Is merely another way of saying that as his activities are limited to the production of butter-fat, he is supremely indifferent to his brothers who grow grain in the South, and would like to see them starve as quickly as possible. This canibalistic attitude of dog eating dog is hardly worthy of further comment. The farmers’ chief complaint at the present time is,, of course, the high cost of labour. This is the result of the standard of living we have set up for New Zealand. I do not propose to waste breath in discussing the workers' right to some of the amenities of life, but I am confident that the workers themselves are able to express their

(To the Editor.)

opinions on the subject in no uncertain terms, If the farmer wants to hear them. I would, however, draw attention to three important points:

1. The farm worker does not receive as high a wage as the industrialist. 2. The farmer himself expects a full share of the aforesaid amenities, and his shrieks would resound throughout the length and breadth of the land if it were suggested that he return to the raupo whare of his fathers. 3. It is extremely doubtful whether, under improved, mechanical conditions, the labour cost of production of but-ter-fat is greater a lb at the present time than under the earlier hand - milking conditions that prevailed in the days of cheap labour. In clamouring about the necessity for reduced costs to enable him to compete in the world's markets, the farmer ignores the fact that half his produce is consumed in this country, at rates commensurate with the standard of wages. In, conclusion, I would say that agricultural Industry has for many years been in receipt of enormous assistance not accorded to any other class. The Agricultural Department spends huge sums in making experiments for the farmer's benefit. The railways carry his manures and other requirement!? at rates that show a heavy loss and have to be made up by excessive charges on other goods. He is exempt from Income tax on the profits from freehold land. He is given preferential treatment in the matter of Government loans. In dozens of other ways the farmer is spoon fed by a too generous and sympathetic Government, to the detriment of other classes of the community. In spite of all this It would be a gross exaggeration to say that one farm in ten in tHe vicinity of Auckland was even decently cultivated. His land is full of weeds and his sheep full of biddy-biddies, and his squeals are heard unceasingly from the North Cape to the Bluff. G. MILLS-PALMBR-Auckland. TAKAPUNA BY-ELECTION Sir,— In justice to the electors of Milford and reverting to your report on the result of the recent poll, I beg. as a ratepayer, to point out that the reason for the heavy polling at Milford in. favour of the local candidate was due to the fact that Milford had no representative on the borough council. On the other hand, Bavswater, a much smaller area in the borough, although it already had two residents on the council, nominated a third—an action which threatened to place Milford in the unenviable position of enduring the hardship of bearing taxation without having representation on the council. Each area supported its awn candidate, probably Irrespective of the merits of the candidates, but the vote at Takapuna Central can be taken as expressing the unbiased opinion of the electors as a whole. There Mr. Gibson (Milford) polled 211, Mr. Blampied 60 and Mr. Davis 82. giving Mr. Gibson a majority of 69 over the total polled by both his opponents. This was probably due to the fact that Mr. Gibson is a permanent resident of *he borough and that he is a practical man so far as road construction and general business ability are concerned. The voters appear to realise that councillors who are engaged in the City during the day cannot do full justice to the borough. Their absence throws an undue strain on the few councillors whose work keeps them in the borough. Hitherto Mil-

ford has relied on the fairness of its neighbours to pive it equal representation. It was forced to organise arn*. having done so, now knows its strength. RATEPAYER