SIR ROBERT STOUT AGRICULTURAL SITUATION. (From the " New Zealand Farmer.")

Te Aroha News, Volume V, Issue 241, 11 February 1888, Page 7 (Supplement)

SIR ROBERT STOUT AGRICULTURAL SITUATION. (From the " New Zealand Farmer.")

We havo great pleasure in giving insertion to the following communication from the lato Premier. The subjects opened up in Sir Robert Stout's letter aro of great interest and practical importance, in view of the agricultural and industrial crisis through which all civilized nations are passiner. Our observations in connection Avith the subject matter of our corves pondent's remarks must, however, be reBerved for a future occasion. Sir Robert Stout writes :— To the Editou. Some kind Auckland friend has forwarded me the January number of your journal. Let me heartily congratulate you on the ability and enterprise it displays. It must be a great boon to all our farmers, fruitgrowers, and bee and poultry -keepers. So far as I can judge — not being an expert — it i 3 unequalled as a settlers' journal anywhere. You will pardon me making one or two suggestions. I notice that the question is raised as to the form our future farming is to take, and an extract is given from an Amez'ican agriculturist, who states that wo must look forward to an cntiro alteration in the mode of producing foods. It is stated that large farms must be the future form of agricultural industry, and small holdings cease. Large factories having abolished the hand-loom weavers, will the same capitalist form of production not be applied to agriculture ? The question is a grave one, demanding instant consideration. No one conversant with the state of agriculture in Europe, America, and Australasia cap be blind to the fact that there is an agricultural crisis, and that ogriculturo ie a depressed industry. How ia ifc to be met ?If prices have fallen, and are not likely to riseIndian and South American competition staring us - what is to be done? Theremedy proposed is cheapening production. We must, it is urged, have large farms, machinery, a force of labour, and with these three elements we will have cheap production, and capital will be rewarded by receiving interest. Now, Ido not say that production may not be cheapened by those means. I believe, however, that true political economy must look at something besides merely producing cheap food or cheap clothing. Of course, that rnnat be kept in view, or the people perish, but this also must be looked at — the effect on the workers. The large factory system has given us cheap clothing, cheap machinery, and many other things cheap, but haa it improved our men and women ? Have they not been stunted and rendered less physically perfect ? And so with large farms. What will be the effect on our agriculturists if we are to see a few big farms and gangs of labourers ; the home life injured and the morale of the people lowered ? Here are evils to be faced— Cheap food only at the expense of physical and moral deterioration of the people. Is that the goal? I hope not. I would suggest that efforts should be made to bring about cooperation in farming. Were several small farmers to unite there would be less fencing, lesa purchase of machinery, more self-reli-ance and a cheapening of production. Is not such a scheme worthy of consideration, so that we get rid of capital and labour disunited as our manufacturing system shows? Then another suggestion is that to en courage the smaller agricultural products. Government might give a bonus to the producer who> for a series of years, produces fit for export, and exports, the best kinds of, say, honey, canned fruits, preserved milk, etc. Where most of our farmers fail is in the producing of an article fit for export, and reliably fit for export — not one month good and another bad, as ia frequently the case. If agriculture is to pay in New Zealand, it will not have to depend on wool, wheat, and oats. It will have to rely on cheese, butter, milk, honey, fruit, vegetable oile, tobacco, etc , and few of our farmers have the requisite scientific knowledge and training to make such productions in forms fit for export. My last reference will be to your leader on the new Land Bill. I need not say I was particularly gratified by your leader. It is now about eighteen years since I began to advocate State leasing versus State selling of our land. Little headway has been made, and last session the policy of the Parliament has been Tory and reactionary to a degree that haa deeply saddened me. I quite agree with all you say, that in the enc l-- S o long as the tenure is secure -it is better for the farmer to lease at 4 per cent, his land than buy and borrow at 7 . or 8 or 10 per cent. You have made that so clear that no words of mino are required to enforce your position. In advocating State-leasing, however, I had another object in view besides the one you mention, that of giving the farmers a direct advantage by practically lending money to them at 4 per cent. That is what the perpetual leasing system does. My other object was to keep the taxation of this colony at a low rate. In 1869 and 1870, when the public works policy was inaugurated, I objected to it as too extravagant for our means ; and I beganto urge immediately State-leasing of the lands. Had the system of perpetual lease then been adopted, the revenue that would have now been accruing to us from our lands would have enabled local taxation to be half of what it is at present. I would propose, and would urge, that all the rents from perpetual leases, should be localised as far as possible, or if that is impossible, should be given as subsidies to local bodies in some general" scheme. Our pmall settlers aro feoling.the j burden of local taxation, and they will feel j it more heavily every ye r ir as our borrowing , ceases and aid to bridges and roads decline Had we adopted, or were we yet to adopt, j a State leasing system, we would have a permanent fund to relieve the burden of local taxation. From this point of view tho State leasing system inmost benoficent. But alas 1 in Mr Ballance's absence at Wanganui, how few fought for the system. Mr John McKenzie stood almost alone ; Mr Withy, it is true, perhaps the only one amongst Ministeralists, helped him. The rest followed their leader, voting at their party's call. If the small settlers were wise, they would, as one-man, denounce the policy of selling land to make up cvi rent revenue. -Bub ther,|,- 1 am in politics again in a purely agricultural paper, and besides, why should not I and some others w^ho have fought in vain for what w<s believed to be right, follow the advice of the Chinaman, whom Abb 6 Htic met, on his travels ? When the wortby'priesi began to talk ,of i politics, tho Oftina'man' said' to' him—l quote from memory, '\t is years since 1 read Hue's towels— ' 'What are * politics 'to us ? L<?ave thatft'o th> Manditotis T'—Robert Stojjt. Bankte^r?, JDunediri, 7t}i January; 1888/ , '

< Really,'" 'confided Angelica to s her dearest friend,' '^'amgetftingwtfmed about > John: ; Before we wer& niarried,;a year ago, he t used to pick me up in. his arms as if I weighed ten pounds instead of 136, and now he says it tries him to hold.the baby."