The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1914. THE FARMERS’ UNION.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume 7, Issue 77, 30 November 1914, Page 4

The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE.

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1914. THE FARMERS’ UNION.

(With which is incorporated The Taihapo Post caa Waimarino News.)

What has the appearance of being a very successful meeting of Taijiape district farmers was held here last Wednesday forenoon. The prime object of the meeting was to resurrest, reorganise and revitalise tiie local branch of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union. In these days where monopolies, combines, syndicates, unduly aggressive trades unions and socialism are rampant it would be matter for surprise if our farming community did not coalesce in some sort of an alliance with a view to stemming the agrgessiveness of financial and mercantile monopolies on the one hand, and from labour unionism and the “ Red Fed ” brand of modern socialism on the other. Mr. H. J. Richards, the visiting organiser of the Farmers’ Union, is to bo congratulated upon the success of the meeting he did so much to achieve, and also complimented on the lucid and broadminded manner in which he placed the various questions before the meeting. He very clearly epitomised the whole aims of the organisation when he said, “ The main object was to unite farmers into one big, powerful organisation, to foster generally the interests of every one on the land in Ndw. The Farmers’ Union, during (he eleven years of its existence, has very largely benefited the farming community, and has also rendered very valuable service to the Dominion as a whole. Among its members are seme of the most capable business men in New Zealand, and some of the cleverest statesmen inAustralasia, and it is by the united efforts of the union that farmers have been enabled to secure fair representation in Parliament. Whether members of the union or not all farmers have been placed on a better footing in many ways, a s Mr. Richards at the meeting showed. The industry has been saved from harassing, unnecessary, and unjustifiable taxation. To its efforts may be attributed the establishment of a Board of Agriculture, and if this had been its scle achievement it would have fully justified its claim to the support of every farmer in the country.

RATING NATIVE LANDS. Most thinking people will be in full sympathy with farmers on the rating of native lands question, dealt with by Mr. Richards. It cannot be denied that, under present conditions, they are unfairly burdened, and, while not unmindful of the difficulties that intervene, we still think that if the Government is unable to evolve equitable methods of adju:tment, ihe amount that native lauds ought to be liable for should come cut of the public exchequer rather than cut o f the pockets of those unfortunate farmers whose holdings happen to be in the game rating area. Farmers are pay:? 1 for roads and bridges (as well as f-

the cost of their subsequent un’ through and on huge native estate', and as the public ultimately geis the

benefit of such expenditure, per medium of the increase in hind values caused thereby, the bure.n should be

removed from those unjustly saddled and carried by the Government, that is if if is not possible to evolve any other satisfactory arrangement. No honest man wishes to tax the native owner out of existence neither does he desire to unrighteously handicap the unfortunate pioneer who chances to be his neighbour. The ethical aspect of this question demands some rectification: a Government that professedly takes paternal interest in the back block settlers’ well-being is herewith given an ■opportunity) t.o make good the earnestness of its professions. We do not under-estimate the difficulties of making adjustments satisfactory to all parties, but if no better methods are offering the Government should shoulder responsibility for the amount of rates and seek relief therefrom by having the lands settled at the earliest possible mome.nt, K native owners will neither sell or cause their land to ho occupied, then it seems right that they shouhl be made to take the consequences, on the presumption that it is being held purely for speculation purposes—unearned increment

RAILWAY FREIGHTS. During his address Mr. Richards mentioned a case in which railway freight presed somewhat unfairly on county councils and road boards, who. of course, are the, authorised extenders of money collected from farmers in the shape of rates. He contended that hard woods required for bridge and culvert building in the country should not he subject to a freight charge of rate-and-a-half by the railway authorities. It seems a reasonable contention that material required in the construction of any public road, whether it be railroad, county road, or road into the far away hack blocks should be carried on the railways a s cheaply as possible. The State delegates some of its road-mak-ing powers to local institutions elected for the purpose, then directly proceeds to specially tax them by levying extortionate railway freights on the material required for the work they have been delegated to perform, that is really what the rate-and-a.-half charge on imported hard woods required in bridge construction amounts to-. Whether imported or not, all timber necessary for the construction of public works directly by the Government, municipality, or other local governing body, should be liable to cue rate only, and to discriminate seems like, and undoubtedly is an imposition on the settlers who have to pay the piper ”. This journal is not opposed to the Government, but, as it represents one cf the largest pastoral and agricultural communities in the Bcminion, in a territory in which bridge and culvert building will be an engrossing subject for many years to come, it is naturally solicitous that our local bodies representing those out-back on the land should get a “ square deal.” Prior to the advent of Hie new railway commissioner. Mr. Hiley, there was some hope of an equitable adjustment being made, but matters are now less hopeful. The Executive of the Farmers’ Union should categorise questions of this and i similar character, and arrangements should be made through local branches to have them submitted in public meetings to every candidate for a seat in Parliament. We would, however, in the meantime, remind Mr. Richards and members of the union that when

a deputation of fanners, who were rle puted for the purpose, interviewed Mr. Hiley on ibis subject of railway freights, they were told that there was no likelihood of their requests being granted, but he did inform them that “there would be a levelling up and not a levelling down of railway freight charges.” If the Government holdg the views on this question as expressed by the Railway Commissioner

or if the commission carries into force his opinions whether they have the concurrence of Ministers or not, .he farmers are entitled to know ,before election day what additional freight burden s they are to be called upon to bear. The Farmers’ Union, in the interests of every settler, should ask for a definite pronouncement from the Government on this question at the earliest possible moment.

CLOSER ORGANISATION,

It was pretty definitely demonstrated some time ago, chiefly—at least, most noticeably by Wairarapa branches, that groups of branches were capable of doing most effective work. Mr. J. C. Fowler, another organiser at one of his meetings strongly advocated what may be termed county, or, perhaps, electoral district branches, consisting of as many delegates as decided upon from each local branch to form a county or district executive or board. He contended that the most useful work was being done where seme such arrangements already obtained, and he instanced a case in which order would replace chaos by the adoption of his proposal He p'anted cut that branches might b. v. or king against each other; they ■ 1 Jit, as things were, for instance, be

■ and supporting; different candidates cr a seat in Parliament and so nullifying their usefulness as a voting newer. He was sure that, farmers vculd realise how, similarly, unsatisfactory conditions might result in other respects and on other questions of vital importance to the farming-

community generally. It is good that

farmers should meet and have some straight out talk on such matters; a system was wanted that would ensure a maintenance of the keenest concern, and until ihe executive took more than an approving interest in establishing such district executives on a sound, useful basis there would be a wanting coherency and unanimity to seriously impair 'its power for the general good. Farmers will realise that such a group, or district, meeting would in addition carry much more weight and create much more interest than the isolated branch could possibly do. With some such collectivity as here outlined the trend of legislation affecting the farmer could be mere effectively watched; the adoption c£ beneficial measures before Parliament could be more forcefully urged, and the inroads of socialism, monopoly and combine could be more effectually checked.