The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE. SATURDAY, JANUARY 23, 1915. WHEAT PRICES.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume 7, Issue 121, 23 January 1915, Page 4

The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE.

SATURDAY, JANUARY 23, 1915. WHEAT PRICES.

(With which is incorporated Tho Tar hape Post ').a3 Waimarino News.)

Mr. John Talbot, chairman of the South Canterbury Farmers' nion, is .delightful; he seems to be out on a quest for notoriety of an unenviable character. His address to a meeting of his Union on the price of wheat question characterises him as a logician of a new school; his rhetoric is so profound that to the ordinary person it seems entirely minus of the convincing element while his premises have so much of the abstract about them that, one wouldn't be surprised to see the price of the ordinary two pound loaf of bread rapidly rise to five shillings. Mr. Talbot doesn't want much, he only asks the Government to stand aside and let the Wheat Trust charge what it likes, or at the very least, he wants the •price of wheat in New Zealand to be determined by what it costs the Government to import. At present that is six shillings and ninepence a bush e l, but, note, when the cost to the Government goes below five shillings it is quite another matter; he then wants a duly to be levied on the imported article. What matters whether the wives, mothers, children and other dependents of those who have volunteered to fight the Empire's battles in Europe barely exist or succumb to starvation so Jong as the trust can grow rich by putting their daily bread up to famine prices. If Mr. Talbot could have his way a revision of the old petition would be needed, as it would have to read, "Give us this week our weekly loaf," for there are very many in this "God's Oirn Country" who could not get a loaf much more often. We have to feel thankful that the Farmers' Union is not wholly composed ot men like Mr Talbot. Asking the State for unrestricted traffic in wheat is tantamount to asking for unrestricted power to exploit the masses, who not only pay the cost of the war by increased fiscal burdens, but ihey have to pay unjustifiable prices for the minimum that will keep body and soul together; in other words they are made to starve or die by the hand of the common enemy so that these wheat trusts may make indecent profits —get rich on Hie misfortunes and death, of' their fellows. Mr. Talbot's alternative to unrestricted traffic in foodstuffs is indeed a magnanimious one. While wheat prices rise to the abnormal the trust will be happy, but when they go below ( five shillings per bushel the State must step in and assist the exploiters by putting a duty on a?? that is imported. Whichever way it is the wheat-holders make highly abnormal profits; it's "heads

avc win and tails you lose" all the time. The uniqueness of Mr Talbot's logic is really entertaining; he said to the farmers at Timarn that the country as a result of importations from Australia, was "getting wheat at a cheap price at the expense of the general laxpayer." The country i.s getting cheap wheat at the expense of the taxpayer? Are not "country" and "taxpayer" in this case synonymous, or interchangeable terms'? If not, what does Mr. Talbot mean? Does he mean that the people are getting allegedly cheap wheat at the expense of the wheat-holders? Who is getting .')<• wheat —never mind about the "cheap"—and who is paying for it? Of course it is the country, or the State, or, if preferable, the general taxpayer is both getting it and paying for it. There is, indeed, an argument famine among wheat-holclers when it becomes -ecessary to introduce such jargon as this; but.talk tends to discovery, and the public are now better able to comprehend how a man may become Ills own enemy. Nothing previously uttered so completely lays bare flu- ease of those who clamour for unrestricted traffic, the insincerity of contentions of this extreme nature can now be estimated at their rca't value. In all probability this exhibition of the avarice of human nature will bring about a readjustment of our corn laws which, it seems, are to give as much trouble as tire famous rf Corn Laws" of the early part of last century, and which many of us can yet remember our fathers talk so much about. The British Government haa found it imperative to step in to see that the nation is not subjected to a process of starvation at the hands of those who would, if allowed, do more national injury than the Kaiser's guns, bombs and bayonets. Whatever else we may do we must have a strong, sturdy people and this can only be attained by an assurance that the food which produce;, bone and muscle, the staff of our national existence, can be procured in plenty by everybody.

Some journals writing on this mbject have, deliberately or otherwise, mis-stated facts in connection with the "Corn Laws" and their repeal. The first corn laws were'enacted against the exportation of Avheat. When food became plentiful this restriction was removed and later exportation was allowed when the price was not below six shillings and eightpence per quarter. As early as 1463 matters were reversed and we find the first law passed prohibiting importation so long as the price Avas below the price named. Next, exportation was prohibited except by license unler the Great Seal. Then there Avas another reversion to the previous arrangement allowing exportation when the price reached a certain point. Subsequent legislation merely changed the price at which exportation might begin, generally enlarging it. We can realise the danger of allowing manipulation of wheat values Intrusts, combines and rings when Ave see the trouble, hardship and actual starvation that follow in its wake. Aftev years of legislative attempts at adjustment the Corn Laws were repealed in 1846. This was brought about only by the formation of one of the largest and most influential bodies of humane, large-hearted men ever known, "The Anti-Corn Law League," at the head of which were such men as John Bright and Richard Cobden. This repeal xrm such glorious news to the people of England that they immediately set on foot proposals for national recognition, and in a short time no less than £BO,OOO were collected and publicly presented to Mr. Richard Cobden, who, in conjunction Avith John Bright, they looked upon as the saviours of the nation. We have no fear of exploitation by the King, as was the case in Henry the Eighth's time, but avc have those with inhuman propensities that will stand at nothing, not even at the starvation of the dependents of those who are risking their lives in defence of the land that supports, or should support, both. We have, perhaps, spoken strongly on this national food supply question, but it is because we realise that any nation that is to escape decadency must see that its people are adequately fed so as to ensure the nation of the future being no less strong, hardy and virile than ours is to to-day. We feel sure, however, that any extreme avaricious attempts, actuated by greed, whether aided by the Government or not, will speedily bring their own retribution. Capital, .can only succeed against Socialis.nt when its cause is so just that it commands the people's support.