FARMERS AND COMBINATION.

Waikato Argus, Volume VII, Issue 514, 16 November 1899, Page 4

FARMERS AND COMBINATION.

Till-: following paper was read by Mr J. D. P. Monron at the meeting of the Fanners' Club held on Mon.lay, the 13th : It is now nearly two years since I first read a paper before this Club on the necessity of combination on the part of farmers. As a r::sult of that paper an 1 subsequent articles kindly published by the chief newspapers in the colony, I have received dozens ot letters from all parts, promising support if I would only go further in the irnt'cr. This seems to show that the time is now ripe for making a move in the direction rf o'ganl-ing farmers into one combination or trust with the object of using our pjwer, poliand otherwise, to br ak down the iniquitous monopolies under wh ch wc suffer. In whatever action we take, we must r.ot however forcet the divine max' in of Plato, "never to u*e violence to our country no u.orc than to our parents." lam well aware, also, that there are many prejudices ot the old-r farmers which must be cverc me by reasoning and persuasion rather than by force. Theie are hundreds of these worthy men who glory in their indipcndence, and to whom the very name of unionism, applied to them savours of a kiud of sla\ery. In most cases, prolably these old farmers came to the colonies imbued with the traditions of 70 years ago, when agricultuiists made money and were a power in the land. They came here filled with the ambition and piide of vouth, determined to make homes for themselves which they could call their own, and where they cntl'd finish their lives t,s free men, proud in the f*ct that they were the possessors of fair estates which would compare favourably with the "old squiie's place at home." Many of them, no doubt in their secret hearts, wished to be founders of families whose descendants in the years to come, would look back with pride to the old pioneers who created smiling homes out of the wilderne s. FABMIKO AS IT IS. Instead of those fond expectations being realized we find nothing but disappointment. Alter long 1 ves of toil and economy it would be impossib'e to find, but a very small percentage of legitimate farmers, who can honestly say they are better eff now than they wcie 20 vears ago. On every haud we are dictated to, and no one ever thinks of consulting us as to what would be a fair price for"anything we widi to buy or sell. If «e take or send our produce to market it is the merchant who fixes the price by the rules of supply and demand, and as the d. mand seldom equals the supply, it follows th. tin nine cas-s out rf ten, we receive much less for our produce than the actu'l cost of production. I need not enlarge on this phase of the question as it is only too well understood by all farmer.'.

THE CAUSE OF OVER VKODUCTION. I shall now endeavour to explain the came of the ovir prodcct'on of farm comnoHtiea and the corresponding decline of price?. To do so I must take you back into ancient history about 600 years, where we shall find the first species of labour unionism introduced to England. In those days it was the custom for the inhabitants of the town' to obtain a charter cr licence from the Kiog, whereby they obtained the sole right of manufacturing certain articles. There corporations, inpayment of certain f.es to the crown, obtained the privilege of enacting any by-laws they thought fit, and as the governing councillors were all mechanics and merchants, it was to their interests to keep the market from being ovcrsupplied with their good?. To do this effectual'y they had bye-laws limiting the number of apprentices in about the same manner that our wise legislators are doing in this country. Having a monopoly for the manufacture of certain articles the townspeople were enabled to demand a greatei sum for the labour of manufacturing their goods tlnn the country people got for the labour of producing the raw material. As all towns obtain the whole of the raw material which they use in their manufactures, and also the whole of their food from the country, it follows that they could not exi»t without the country. Towns generally pay the country people for their raw. material and food by returning to them manufactured goods and also a certain proportion of articles imported from other places. Thu», by raising the price of town commodities artificially, the farmers were compelled to supply to the towns a greater quantity of produce for certain articles which they required than before, which goes to show that whatever tends to increase the wages _ and mcrchauts' profits in towns by obtaining airenhanced price for their goods sold in the country to what they would otherwise ect if there were no monopo'y, must enable the towns to purchase with a smaller quantity of labour the produce of a greater quantity of the labour of the country. This is just what happened 600 years ago. 'I hrough being compelled to exchange an increasing quantity of produce for manufactured t;oods, farm produce fell so low that for 100 years the price of wheat averaged less thin Is 6d per bushel, and in one year it sold for so little as threepence per bushel. These prices, mark you. are equivalent to the money value of the present day. What they really received was sixpence and one penny per bushel, respectively, in the mor.cy of those times. The farmers were reduced to a state of practical slavery, and the landholders became so impoverished that they were unable to pay taxes. JTHESKNT LAIJOUK UNIONISM AND LEGISLATION'. The present laronr unionism and legis lation is almost exactly the sane as those old-time corporation laws which nearly ruined Kngland ; and it remains to be teen whether the present-day farmers will remain ii active and guilty of the criminal negligence of allowing the future of their children to be sacrificed to the unprincipled rapacity of a few po itieims and their unorant following. It is not as though the colony, a< a whole, was benefiting at the farmer's expense, for it is the reverse, as I shall show by an illus tration. To make it clear to Everyone, I must explain that the value of money ii oidy in its convenience as a medium of exchange. If a fanner possessed two cows which he wished to exchange for a horse that a neighbour was willing to dispose of, be would most likely be unable to do so, as the neighbour probably wanted some sheep instead of cows in exchange I r bis hone. The farmer wou'd then fore fiud someone who wanted cows with whr m he would exchange Ihcm for their value in money. He would then exchange the nrney for the horse, and the owner of the horse in his turn would pay the money away again for sheep. Hence the value of money is only in its convenience. A man with a supply o' money which be is unable to exchange for fo d is in a much worse position than one with a supply < f food which he c;.iH.ot exchange for money. Now, for my illustration, say a farmer wanted five sc's of p'ongh harness made out of leather prepared from the hides of bullosks previously sold by him to a butcher The Slaughtcrmens' Union bavin", however, artificially raised their wages 10 per cent to recoup himself for this, the butcher either fives the farmer a proportionate amount le>s for the hides on the bullocks, or he increases the price of the bides 10 per cent, to the fellrrtnnger. The carriers having formed a ut.io i and also raised their wages 10 per cent., the hides are increa ed in eo.st another 10 per cent., and tie Fellmong is' Union once more'-' nil up the cost 10 per cen f . to the hatn !■« n'-ikiTß, who again through then in ii'.'i •" fiddly raise the cost of maki ... tin-lmness another 10 per ant. or 40 t" i '■•'<■ in all, which the farmer jscompciltd o pay ui addition to what

he should, to get his hides back aua'ii ' made into harness. Jt is the fame with everything manufactured in the c<;lo y T" e f>irivers have 'o sell the raw material unil the food for the mairifac'nriiu aititan's subsistence, at trom 20 to 90 per cent, less lh-in the price? ruling in Knglaml, at -1 yet the Knglish manufaeture s a-e nlili: to p*y Hie freight ami other charges there and hick, and the duty in addition, and sti I they can uud.rso'l ilia local manufacturer* in iheir own marker. Artificially rarer! wanes have the effect of lai.sing prices all n nnd on the fanners, For instance, if the hutches. linkeie and harness-makers each ni c t: the price of their Bonds' 40 per cent., it is true that the butchers wou'd have to give that amount more for Iheir bread, an 1 th° bakers would give 10 per c-nt. more for their meat nnd harness than before. From this it would appear at fist glance that no one is any worse off, as the cost of living is ine easrd to a corresponding degree, and this is true in one tense so f r as these tradespeople are concerned. Bat the farmers have no eombinat on, and as the price of our produce is generally ruled by the London market, which has a birrtcr of from 20 to 40 per cent. freight and charges on the v.hie of o:r piodne landed there, we are practically in the hands of the trade combinations of the towns. Everything »ve buyis artificially raised in pri e about 40 per cen*., ami as a result the overproduction of firm commodities Ins taken place. In my illustration of the farmer and the five sets of harness, it was shewn that the price was ra : sed by trade combinations to the extent of 40 per cent, against him. He hid therefore to give the value cf that quantity more p oducc for the harness tlnn he should have had to do if there were no trade combinations'. Thus if those slaugburnen, leath-r dressers and harness-makers received the s-ime rate of pay as the firmer, he w.iul'l probably have to give the value of CO bushels of wheat for the five sets of harm «-', but through the tradesmen raising the p ice, he has to pay the vi'lue of about 85 bushels. By th-se in ans the purchasing power c-f the farmer is reduced for other articles, and as all manufacturer] goods are similarly inflated in (rice the farmer is unable to buy a fourth part of the goods wlrcli he could otherwise, and consequently there is only a th'rd of the mechanics en.ployed that there would be if there were no other trade monopolies. The price of manufactured goods should be regulated by the cost of the subsistence of manufacturing tradesmen. A country where food was clear could not compete as a manufacturing country against one where food was cheap, provided, of course, thit other things were equal. In this country we see the phenomenon of agriculturists getting a lower price for their produce than isru'ing in any other pirt of the Knglish speaking would for equal quality, and yet the cist of living is greater iu New Zi-alnnil than in any other country ! Siatis.ios show the average cost of living to be £35 C> Id per head of the population of this country. Now, how many farmers spend the half of this on their families ? Every penny which the f irmers have spent less than £35 6s Id per head has been spent by those living in towns, which will bring their expenditure up to about £SO per head. Is it any wonder that the trades unionists want shorter working hours so as to obta'n more time for enjoyment? It is a question of a short time only before the old order of affairs will be reverted for the trades unionists to " One diy shalt thou labour, wh'le on the other six thou shalt rest." In the country, however - , what with cowspanking aud other like inventions to make both ends meet, it is becoming more difficult every year to distinguish the old-time seventh day. I f is not as though the wealth c f the country was increasing by the lavish living expenditure of townspeople. If the money that is robbed from the farmers was put to some good purpose it would not be so bad, but it is ■imply wasted as it were. If a tradesman averaged £IOO per year in wages, and saved half of it, he would be increasing the wealth of the state. Wo matter whether he invested the amount in land or in the Savings Bank, the coun'ry would be increasing in wealth £SO each year through the frugality of that tradesman. Some nay argue that the more food is wasted the better for the producer, as there is a greater local consumption ; but if these people will take the troub'e to think, they will see that if it was exported instead so much extra money would be brought into the country to help bear our too heavy taxation. I shall just point out that tinder trades union monopoly New Zetland can never become a manufacturing country, no matter how high the customs duties may be placed, for these reasons:—lst. The high cost of food and clothing, in spite of the much lower prices pail to the farmer than in successful manufacturirg countries. This is caused by the excessive cost of hindling between the producer and consumer through artificially raised wages. 2nd. The high cost of mechanics wages, which artificially increase the cost of manufactures, step by step as articles go through eaJi process. 3rd. As raw materials can be sent fiom here to England at a cost of about 30 p r cent, on their value for the first freight and charges, then bear the fre'ght back again, together with the usual 20 per ceut. duty, and st 11 undersell the local manufactures, it is impossible that we can ever manufacture for export unler our present regime, as it is evident we are at least 50 per cent, above tie world's markets. It really secuu as though our manufacturing tiadc at present is a u cless nnd expensive encumbrance to the development of the cnuntry, yet it is generally acknowledged that New Zealand is adapted to mike one ot the mo-t successful manufacturing countries in the world. We have a temperate climate which should enable trade to be carried on at all seasons without cessation We have some of the finest eoal fields, tim her, and all kinds of workable minerals, in addition to an unequalled supply of water. Food can be grown as cheap or cheaper than in any other English-speak-ing country, and it stands to reason that with free trade in labour and everything else, New Zealand should be able to compete against the. arorM in manufactured articles. And instead of sending raw wool, hides, skins and other articles to England to be manufactured, and also grain, meat ami butter to feed the woikmen there, we should export the made-up article, and thereby retain the profit of manufacturing in the country. I have clone my best to make it clear to everyone that farmers must choose one of two alternatives combination or ruination. Ilitory repeats itself, and without some preventive meisurrs another ?0 years will probably see wheat down to 3d p~r bushel once more. Less trnn 200 years ago in South America a buyer could take the pick out of a mob of several hundred fat bullocks for otic shilling and teupence, so there is a margin in cattle yet. Trades unions are only just beginning to feel their strength, aud it is only natural that in a short time they will increase their demands. They have the law on their side now, and the general taxpayer has to pay for all disputes. (To he continued)