ADDRESS TO FARMERS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 215, 1 April 1913, Page 6

ADDRESS TO FARMERS.

some j:\tkkeistl\c; questions. C'hristchurch. March 28. In his address at tlic fifteenth annual meeting of the Canterbury A. mid P. Association hist night, .Mr. J. D. Hall the retiring president, compared the objects cf thi! Association, according to the Agricultural and Pastoral Societies Act, with the objects of the ltoyal Agricultural Socicf. of England, inaugurated in 1838, and said that one clause in the latter might well be included in the former, the clause being -'to promote the comfort and welfare of laborers and encourage the improved management of their cottages and gardens." Referring to the annual show, Mr. Hall remarked that the point-blank refusal by the implemeuMuakcrs to join with the farmers in their ell'orts to make the annual show a success, no matter what concessions were made to them, did not augur well for the future, nor was it quite consistent w.ith the imple-ment-makers in endeavoring to obtain f-unds to enable them to fight their own battles against another section of the community whom they were pleased to | denounce as striving* for syndicalism, Socialism and anarch v.

After comparing the yields of produce in other countries, the comparisons being in favor of fiermany, Mr. Hall said that ' as a result of a comparison of this kind American agriculturalists had been making enquiries as no the reasons for the larger yields from German lands, and ■ey had come to the conclusion that they were due to (1) the active and effective work that the German Government had done to develop agriculture; (2) the excellent system of agricultural education that had been developed and the extensive system of scientific research through agricultural stations that had>been maintained in Germany; (3) the rapid development of efficient business organisations that the farmers had perfected along co-operative lines, particularly in regard to credit. German farmers to-day. through their land mortgage associations, were carrying £200,000,000 in farm loans, and they did not pay over 4 per cent, interest for any of it, and in many cases not over 3 per cent. A moment's thought would convince anyone that the work of the New Zealand Government in the past, so far as developing agriculture was concerned, had been neither active nor effective, and it was good news to hear that the present Minister proposed to effect some changes by creating a Board ol Agriculture which might possibly have the effect | of convincing him that it was just as desirable at the present time to develop methods which would result in materially increasing the yields from their farms in Canterbury, as it was to settle the backbloclvs. With regard to the third reason given for the increased yields of Germany, viz: 'The development of busi■ness organisations along co-operative lines, especially with regard to agricultural credits," he need hardly say that I at the present time every farmer in the I community would welcome any organisa- [ tion which would provide him with money at 3 per cent., or even 4 per cent., and if there were a possibility of making provisions of this kind. It was extremely desirable that farmers should endeavor to ascertain what: it was that governed and controlled • the supply of money available for mortgage loans to farmers. Different people who theorised on the subject assigned different reasons responsible for the variation in the ' supply of money, such as (1) the financial operations of the Government in borrowing large sums for various public purposes; (2) the methods of banks which carried on business in Australia as well as New Zealand, and divert New Zealand moneys for use in the Commonwealth; (3) the increase or decrease of our exports as compared with our imports; (4) the subdivision, of large estjitcs, and the subsequent'withdrawal of the proceeds of the sale's consequent thereon from New Zealand. Whatever the reasons might he, it must be admitted that the farmers, who were the borrowers, were the people who had to pay, and there could he little doubt that there were some financiers who had considerably more information on the point than the farmer, and that when it was a case of financier v. farmer, the odds would generally be on the financier.