THE FARMERS' PARLIAMENT.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 3198, 26 May 1909, Page 5

THE FARMERS' PARLIAMENT.

CONFERENCE OF FARMERS' UNION AT EKETAHUNA.

A BIG AGENDA PAPER

DISCUSSION ON IMPORTANT QUESTIONS.

(Special Reporter)'

The annual Conference of the Wellington Provincial Branch of the New Zealand Farmers' Union opened at Eketahuna yesterday, when about forty delegates were present. The President, Mr J. G. Wilson, was in the chair. The President in his address stated inter alia:—

"Necessarily our power lies in expressing the views of the farmeis on social and political subjects. Public opinion is our greatest political force, for by it Parliament is directed to do certain things. Members of Parliament are • only paid agents through whom the people carry out their wishes, and we must, if we wish to gain our ends, carry public opinion with us. Farmers as a body seldom express their opinions, though newspapers frequently tell them that they ought to think, and so unless there is some means taken such as our Union takes of stating farmers' views, the clas3 is often ingored. If we can only get a sufficient number of men to vote with us when we put forward our platform we then will have representatives who will carry out our wishes. Let us take the freehold question as an example. The Union made the granting of freehold to Crown tenants a real live political question ; and there was a majority of the House prepared to carry it. When the late Mr Seddon fuund this the case, and wishing the matter deferred, he appointed a Commission as a means of getting his clamerous followers out of a difficult position. This Commission, composed mostly of opponents of the freehold, though one or two supported it and others with pliant minds who were easily convinced and have since been rewarded, kept up the farce for a while and cost the country a lot of money. This sufficed tor that Parliament. The next came in .still with an apparent majority in favour of the freehold, but they were noodwinked and secured a convenient though useless provision to grant the right cf conversion to Crown tenants. That sufficed for another Parhament-meanwhile we kept pegging away at the point and at last-election we believe that there was a majority in favour of it again. It remains yet to be seen how these supporters of our great plank treat the question when it comes up, as come up it will. Commercial men tell me that Taranaki is the moat prosperous district in New Zealand J jst now owing to the high prices of dairy produce. But the Bush district 'must be almost equally so, judging by the various paragraphs of the amount of money paid out each month by Buch factories as the Ballance and others. I suppose, therefore, that the dairy folk have not been affected by the stringency

in the money market which has been felt all over the Dominion, but more especially, I think, in the Wellington Province. This has been caused by the over importation by merchants in anticipation of the requirements of the North Island (having been much greater than in the South), and bankers have had to find money to meet engagements. But it is somewhat aggravated by the fact that the average price of wool in the South must be several pence higher than that of the North Island. Strange to say the amount procurable on mortgages is much curtailed, and the rates on gilt edged securities have increased I considerably. The Advances to Settlers Office has lent over £4,000,000 and the money this replaced has either gone out of the Dominion or into other channels of investment so that recently it was found that those who had to renew their loans had to pay a high rate. The banks having had mora money than they could sifely invest in trade securities had financed a great many land transactions and tlnse falling off the market at the same time accentuated the demand. Iha companies which usually lend money restricted the business in some eases and in others altogether refused business. Ho that for a time there was an unsatisfied demand for money on legitimate mortgage. The land transactions which had been

taking place by the exchange of paper naturally fell off. But these speculative dealings only interfere with bona fide transactions. It cannot be said that land has fallen to any extent, but the fictitious values which enabled valuation of land for taxation purposes to be raised have ceased to be quoted. There is, however, some unrest amongst dairy people as to the rival benefits of cheese as against butter and there is likely to be an increase in cheese factories during the winter to be ready lor next season. There certainly does seem to be less likelihood of competition increasing in cheese thain in butter and although whey is not so valuable as skim milk there is less work connected with it. Even taking this into account the price paid out for milk has been higher in the case of cheese Uian butter. But there seems very 1 itele advance made however in a much more important matter. This is the proper culling of cows by the weighing and testing of milk. In a few isolated instances this is being done, and everyone who has adopted this method has shown that the returns may be much increased. Since thu last Conference there has been an election for the. House of Representatives and "it is well'to not? that a greater number of members wlr, agree to our platform have been elected on both sides of the House, and it will bs the duty of the Executive to closely watch the legislation and report how members who have subscribed to'our views carry out their pledge. Compulsory military training was the subject of much discussion at our last Dominion conference, and a resolution was passed asking Parliament to make some provision for the training of our youth after they leave school. There has been no greater argument in favour of the necessity of this than occurred at a meeting held in Wellington the other night to promulgate these views. The leaders amount those who are opposed to this movement had so little oontrol over their followers that they could not restrain them from trying to defeat the object of the meeting

by undisciplined noise. It is understood that the Premier proposes to bring forward some proposal this coming session on the subject." LAND LEGISLATION.

The first matter taken was discussion of a remit from Makuri and Feilding Branches, as follows: —

"That the Government ce urged to amend the Land Act so as to give Crown Tenants the option of purchasing the free hold of their lands at the original value, and the payment of the difference between the 4 per cent, now charged on the lease in perpetuity and the 5 per cent, charged to tenants with the right of purchase, and the sale of all future lands shall carry the right of purchase with limitation of area."

Mr Moore (Makuri), who moved the motion, said he took the placing of the motion first on the order paper as a recognition of the importance of the matter to farmers. The speaker said it was absurd for the Government to be claiming the right to the praire value of lands from which they had parted long ago. He thought this was now the view of the people of New Zealand. The defeat of the Minister of Lands at Mataura just after he had introduced the Land Bill of last session was undoubtedly an indication of this fact.

Mr Birch (Marton) seconded the motion. He said that although the general value of both freehold and leasehold lands had increased a good deal it was not right to contend that the increase on leaseholds was the property of the Government. It was the due of the leaseholder whose energies had to the greatest degree earned it. The Government only had a right to levy an annual charge on lands a charge which did not increase, but remained the same from year to year and for 999 years —and this alone made it clear that the Government had not legitimate claim to the increased value.

Mr A. R. Mayo (Feilding) sup- 1 ported the proposal. 1 Mr J. C. Cooper (Tane) suggested « that the motion be altered to allow r everyone holding Crown lands the 1 right to secure the freehold of their \ land on equitable terms. At present t he to ik the motion tu apply only to t leases in perpetuity. \ The Conference was-favourable to 1 this course, and the motion was ( therefore altered by the addition of c the words importing that all future c dealings with Crown lands should a carry the right to purchase with c limitations of area, so as to give all t Crown tenants the right of purchase with limitations of area, so as to I give all Crown tenants that option. i Mr Moore (Makuri) supported the c motion regarding its effect on limita- t tion, saying that it was only by do- 1 ing so that schools and othsr neces- \ sary institutions could be set up and 1 maintained. If this could not be done, t people would drift away to the 1 towns. He had known of that oc- I curring. To send a boy to the city and have him educated and main- \ tained would cost about £2OO. 1 The motion was carried unanimously. Bearing further on land valuation ] the Wanganui Branch sent the following remit:— "That seeing the Department takes no notice of the returns sent in by owners under the Land Tax valuation, but always takes the Valuator's value, the Government be requested to disconM tinue requiring owners to fur ; nish returns, as they appear to be quite valueless. ' Mr A. Robinson moved the motion, and in doing so contended that it was absurd to require farmers'to furnish returns when they were taken absolutely no notice of. The discussion which ensued went to the question of what part of the return the Government actualiv used, some contending that the Govtrn nent merely desired to know particulars of mortgages, others that the owners' own valuation was what the Government desired. Mr W. L. Falconer (Kaituna) considered the returns were necessary, and it would be unwise to abolish them. The motion w>is declared carried. Pahiatua Central, Mqkuri _ and Shannon, sent the following remit: "That the present system of valuation of iand for taxation purposes should be abolished, arid that valuations should be ba&ed on the earning capacity of land extending over a term of years." Mr J. C. Cooper (Tane) moved the motion, and in doing so said the true value could only be ascertained by taking an average of the earnings of a term of years. Mr Ewan Campbell said the Government was correct in trying to arrive at the true value by using the selling value. The eternal difficulty was between the improved and unimproved values. Then there was a difference in capability between farmer and farmer. Mr A. Howie (Waverley>, contended that previous arguments were all in the direction of favouring an income tax —which meant a tax on a farmer's earnings. Mr Benge (Shannon), in support i of the motion, said that the system could only be made applicable ! if it were retrospective. He did not believe that a sheep-farmer : should be taxed on a higher basis i than, a dairy farmer, as the exi penses were proportionately higher : to the relative value of the products. ; Mr Robinson (Shannon) said he i would vote against the minute, as > such a system would increase the i cost of taxation. The system advocated practically made for a taxs ation equal to income tax. The best J valuation to put on land undoubtedly ) was the amount it would bring in the f open market. ] Mr Morison (Halcombe) opposed ' the motion, as he did not 7 consider the present sys'tem perfect. i it was inadvisable to abolish it un--3 til a provedly better system were r substituted. Mr Russell (Palmerston North) i disagreed with the motion on t grounds similar to those advanced - by previous speakers. t Mr T. Whitta (Jioroeka) considered - the suggested system a tax on good i farming. r Messrs Mocre (Makuri), W. L. V Falconer (Kaituna), Birch (Marton), y Moss (Eketahuna) were also opposed t to the motion, the general tone ot e their remarks being in the direction - of favouring a system which made e for taxation of incomes from land y uses, of whatever nature, g Mr Cooper, in reply, said that he pr had taken charge of the motion in

the absence of the Pahiatua Central delegate. His own view of the matter was not in accord with the speaker's idea, which was that the valuation should be based on the "sailing" value, not earning value. (Delegates: Oh!) The motion was lost on the voices.

Another remit on the same question was sent by Waverley Branch as follows: — "That the attention of the Provincial Conference be drawn to the enormous apd unjustifiable increase in land valuations (especially in the face of the falling market) and the grossly unjust manner in which the Valuators cut down the improvements."

Captain Hewitt (Waverlev) moved the motion, which was discussed at considerable length strongly in favour of the remit.

Mr Birch (Marton) moved an amendment that in lieu of the Provincial Conference's attention being drawn to the matter, the Conference affirm the desirability of returning to the oJd system of valuing on the capital value of land Mr Balsillie (Palmerston North) seconded the amendment.

The amendment was carried on the voices.

TAXATION OF LAND. Pahiatua Central sent the following remitlF?

"That this Conterer.r.r 'supports the United Chambers of Commerce in condemning the

present Graduated Land Tax." Mr Cooper formally moved the motion, in the absence of the Pahiatua Central delegate. He considered it a most important matter —one of the most important on the paper. Other Conferences had condemned the graduated tax, and arguments had then been used against the tax, which had been found sound in practice. It.was found that the effect of the tax reacted on the business of the country, and capital had been kept away which was very badly needed in a country like New Zealand. The tax applied whether the land was mortgaged up to its fullest extent. The object of the tax was. no doubt, to prevent aggregation of large estates, but the tendency would be to apply it as time went on to smaller and smaller areas. When a law affects the security over a property it was only natural that a lender would take the earliest oppor tunity to withdraw from lending upon such security. The ulterior effect of the tax was to unpopularise settlement, and it was against the development interests of the country to continue such a tax. Mr D. McGregor (Masterton) said Mr Cooper had covered the ground pretty fully,, although he had omitted to mention the effect of the tax on a partnership, which was to lump partnership properties together for the purposes of assessment. He thought this monstrously unfair, and quoted instances to show how such had reacted against investments in his district.

There was no farther discussion, the motion being carried on the voices* several "Noes" being heard. LAND BOARDS. The Feilding Branch sent the following remit: — "That all Land Boards consist of five "members, two to be elected by the Crown Tenants, the Government to appoint two, and the Commissioner of Crown Lands in each Pistrict to be

Chairman." • Mr Mayo (Feilding), who moved the motion, thought the request embodied in the remit was a fair one, and the constitution proposed wa3 a very equitable one from all points of view. Farmers were surely entitled to a vuice in their own local government* Practical examples were quoted of how hardships had occurred through want of a reasonably constituted board, where transfers had been refused in most necessary and deserving cases. Mr W. Li. Falconer (Kaituna) seconded the motion, considering that the present basis of representation was far from sufficient. Messrs J. C. Cooper, J. G. Wilson, H. D. Guthrie (Feilding), Moore (Makuri), also strongly supported the motion.

On being put the motion was carried unanimously. CROWN LAND BALLOTS. Palmerston North Branch sent a remit as follows: — "That the present system of balloting for Crown Lands be done away with, and that all sections whether for cash or lease should be submitted to public auction subject to the limitation clause under the Lands for Settlement Act." Mr J. Balsillie moved the remit. In doing so he emphasised how frequently it happened that persons successful at the ballot were most unfitted to go on the land. He recognised that +he auction system had drawbacks, but some better system than the ballot might be devised. Mr Devonshire (Levin) seconded th 6 motion, endorsing the view of the mover, arid contending that no better system had been in use than the deferred payment system. (Hear! Hear!) A man mi'ht go on balloting to the end of h s days under the present system —it was a gamble pure and simple. Mr Birch supported the motion. Mr D. Howie (Pohangina) opposed the motion, as it would prevent a poor man from having any chance of getting on the land. He thought | that if the remit was passed it I wouid be one of the worst things the I Conference did. (Hear! Hear!)

Mr W. L. Falconer (Kaituna) opposed the motion on similar grounds. Mr Whitta (Horoeka) said he strongly opposed the motion. Poor settlers had gone on the land through the ballot system who had ( been excellent settlers. Mr H. A. Nivens (Tenui) defended the ballot system. He was a successful ballotist himself, and though unsuitable persons were occasionally successful, the auction system would have a worse eit'ect in making land available only to the man who had tlve money to pay what would often be a fictitious price. Mr E. Campbell (Wanganui) said he would support the motion if the system of tendering for land were advocated. He thought that would meet the difficulty to a great extent Mr Devonshire replied to the criticisms of the opponents of the motion, pointing out that the poor man would be- in just as good a position as a rich man if the Government; chose to meet the case. If a poor man was in a position to pay interest on the purchase money

the Government could assist him by advances, as it does in other cases. The fictitious value assertion was a bogey, as if a man went to an auction sale and paid woat he knew to be more than the value of the land that was his lookout. The speaker himself was a poor man, living cn a farm for which he paid £3O- an acre, and yet he was doing well on it. The perfecting of the auction system was a matter of adjustment. . There were a large number of other speakers, whose remarks were to the same point as those of previous delegates. An amendment to the motion to substitute "tender" for "auction" was agreed to by the mover, and on being put was lost on division. MORTGAGE TAX. The Pahiatua Central sent a remit on this subject as follows: — "That this Conference endorses the resolution passed by the Conference of the United Chambers of Commerce to the

effect that the mortgage tax be * abolished, and that taxation on mortgages be in the form of an income tax." A remit by Waverley Branch on the same question was withdrawn. Mr A. Howie (Waverley) move d the latter remit prior to its withdrawal, Mr J. C. Cooper (Tane) moving the substituted one. Mr Cooper said the mortgage tax was simply part of the system of land taxation. The evil of the tax was that it was levied on the funds often of widows and orphansamounts lent out for a very deserving object. In addition a feeling of insecurity had been roused among lenders in England and elsewhere Were the tax levied injthe incomes of the mortgages it would be found that there would be a majority who would entirely escape taxation while in other cases there would be those who would be taxed to a much lighter extent.

Mr Nivens (Tenui) said he could not see where the farmers were going to benefit if the motion was carried. If .the mortgage tax were taken off, the tax would be levied by the land tax, as the Government would still require to raise the same amount of money. Mr Guthrie (Feilding) agreed with Mr Cooper that a feeling of insecurity had been raised by the tax among lenders of money. It was admitted that the tax must be p<»d somehow, but the mortgage tax was certainly the least admissable method. The motion was declared carried on the voices, no proper division being taken. There was not margin between the two sides, RATES OF INTEREST.- ZZZ The Makuri Branch's remit on this question was as follows: "That the attention of the .Government be called to the

scarcity of money, and the high rates of interest charged, which hampers farming operations, and to repeal legislation which has caused the withdrawal of outside capital." Mr Moore (Makuri) moved the motion. He covered a lot of ground trnne over when previous motions ware discussed. Mr Nevins (Tenui) supported the motion.

Mr W. L. Falconer (Kaituna) strongly opposed the motion. _ I Mr Moore protested that it was ' not against the Advances to Settlers Office that the motion was directed. The motion waj carried on the | voice?, only a few opposing voices being raised. DEFENCE—Tf-IE DREADNOUGHT OFFER. The Provincial Executive submitted the following to the Conference:— "That this Conference endorses the action of the Government in offering to provide a first-class battleship to the Home Government." Captain Hewitt (Palmerston North) moved this important motion. He said that events subsequent to the passing of the resolution by the Provincial Exective had shown how justified the offer by the New Zealand government was. The offer was moveover justified from any standpoint from which it was viewed, and the farmers of the Dominion should be glad to recognise how ready they were to spport the Mother Country in time of need. He favoured farmers sending their sons to receive a thoroughly efficient training in naval and military matters. He also strongly favoured compulsory training, and understood that the motion would be altered to include reference to that question.

Mr Booth (Feilding) seconded the motion.

Mr Escott (Woodville) endorsed the motion.

Mr F. W. Venn (Shannon) wished the motion to have added to it "but regrets that the offer was not made in a more constitutional manner." (No! No!) Mr Moore (Makuri) caused hearty amusement when he said he was willing to pay his share of interest of ten Dreadnoughts and boss his own farm rather than toil under the supervision of a German inspector. He would rather have his meals under the Ward Government than eat sauer kraut under the Germans and Tommy Taylor. Mr T Moss (Eketahuna) made an impassioned speech in favour of the motion, his remarks being loudly applauded. Mr F. Maule (Palmerston North) said he was a Britisher by birth though not by nationality. His father and forefathers were Germans, but he was ready with his fellow colonists to defend the flag under whose benign influence he had been born and had since lived. (Loud applause). The motion was carried. INDIVIDUALISING MAORI LANDS. A long discussion took place on the question of individualising Maori titles, which was the most important matter before the evening sitting. Mr J. Birch (Marton) moved the following remit from the Marton Branch "That the time has arrived when all Maori land should be individualised, and Maoris placed in the same position as regards the sale or lease of their lands as Europeans, and equally liable for rat;s." A very long discussion ensued on the motion, which was eventually carried by 29 votes to 8. An amendment was added "that sufficient lands should be set aside for each Maori whose land is individualised.