FARM LABOURERS' DISPUTE.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 13098, 24 April 1908, Page 2

FARM LABOURERS' DISPUTE.

OOXOIUATION BOARD PBOOEEDLNGS.

The Conciliation Board resumed the hearing of tho farm labourers' dispute at the Provincial Council Chambers yesterday. All tlie membere of the Board -were present, Mr W. Minson presiding. For the farmers' case, Mr Jones called further evidence as follows:— William Bailey, farmer, Templeton, stated that be farmed 1300 acres, and had been over 40 years in the Dominion. Ho started farm work when 10 years of age, and for two years got 4s per week, and tho third year he got ss. After having owned threshing plant for about 33 years he had got out of the business, as he saw a great deal of labour trouble coming. Threshing by th* hour was not a de&irak-le chango, and he was certain that the men would not be able to earn so much by the hour as by the thousand. Threshing charges had been as follows:—1881 to ISS3T 12s Od per 1000 bushels; 1883 to lcScw, 13s: ISBS to 1887. 12s Od; 1887 to 1888, 12s; 1888 to 1803, lis: sinco thuit vcu.r, 10b. T3_. higher rates wero for threshing by plains worked by. portable engines, the daily capacity of which was under WOO bushels; present day plants could thresh 1800 bushels. The abolition of the contract system would bo in the interests of neither the man nor the master. To Mr Thorn : He had not made all his money out of farming; he had made some out of speculations in stock, wheat, and potatoes. Ho sold his threshing plant about 18 months ago. Prior to 1881 men engaged at threshing were paid Is per hour and found themselves; at tho same period harvest •wages were at the same rate. Farmers were now getting their threshing done for 2Jd per bushel cheaper than in 1881. .Mr Kennedy also cross-examined. Mr Evans called and examined Lklmund George Staveley, manager of the New Zealand Loan and _Uer-cuii-Kilo Agency Company, OhrLslchurch, wlio stated t-hti-t ho ddd not think that tho time was <>p<i>ortiino for altering the «md-itions under which agricultural operations are being conducted at present.

Oa.n you give the Board nny roa_son for that opinion?—l should say that th;~ small faj-raor is not daing so well as lw> has been doing during a seri-evs oi" years, owing to hho lower values of &w_:e of tJie .p-rjncipal protluots. A\'ool Ls considerably lower thus season than for some years past; sheep are lower in price; fat lambs, which are a considerable source of revenue to tho small farmer, are very much down from what thev were.

The Chaiirmcwi: "What about tho prospective outJook regarding t-heso particular items—l don't a&k you to prophesy ? Witness: It is verv difficult to say. I certainly do not am-tid'-pate an*r serious dieter io<ra tkm in the value of our staple products, though it frequently happens, Continuing, in reply to Mr Evans, witness stated that there had been a very decided a.nd serious flail in- the value of some cksses of -vre>ol, wihich was as much as 3d to 4d per lb. The Oharrmai-': At present prioes for. products, can farminig be conducted profitably ? Witness: That depends on tihe oonditrions. If expanse-9 such as reint, interest or wages were increased, then th<*ire wou3d be so mt-dh less profit to the farmer.

Is thiere any possriibd.lity in amre intt.e«o three items? —1 don't know in rep-i-rd to rent and vrages, but as fiar as in-ter-e-st ia concerned tihare is every prospect of that.

Am increase in tho price of money?— Ye*.

"Wrfc-nrss. oon.t.in-n.-ng in nsrAy to Mr Ev.?<ms, stated that conditions that wcirld inc-ense the expanse on farms would bo undoubtedly detrimental to the small farmer. He that a jrocd many small formers were ben<rir.<T a.s nrnoh as tJuw could at preewn-t.. His compa.ny would not adv~*»noo to farmers so freely if the conditions wore made more adverse than tJvw. nt p-csont oTi^-fcijiKr. To Mr TVrn : Tho price- of woo] last year wrts nH-mt tho nversiior-.; fi TO OT s j x venrs n/»o tho ..-ivor-PW t-t-Tco -was nlwut <V1 o- !>}.<{■; fiho nrice this tort in the DirvniniVn -n-a-s 7d ho <Vl. bntfc the price Tv>/! _)ti +;!.<. T-.-v.don nwfcet. Tkkinc all tlhrjigret into con«Td**rat.i\>n, k +].er.ry*e of wool exce-ptiromiatlly low; or w> it. i'tiftt about an flVP'»w?e rr>f/> ot prr-«v*-r!*t ?—lt is not- oxrciptionta-TIT Tow. Owtirwnine. he .st-nt-d th.-rt the nro*\iit price of fat lambs -was fairly hith: pn'eo-*-. "tind falle-n from t.ionally high fiin.rea to a good price. His company did' not lend money on town proTy-rty: h*> that tho effect of an award wom'd* he tbo same, as regard* the oueßtW. of adva-ncinjr money, whether it annliod to industrial or ««tricultural pursuits. Why do you_ say there i«. a po**jsibTlitv of the prioe of monev eoine-im? —I can fleareejy jrivo the Chi-***, b-nt th«ro is a strinjreney existing which, aooordin-cc to in financial circks, is liVelr to continue for rome time. Ooutinninc, witness stated that in adranein-cr money to farmers, he took into consideration all the ciroi*Tn.-stn*-><v-!s o f the farmer, and did not sp-vi-iHy tak« into account whether or not he naidi his sor>f- waeos: hut if fannera had to par th-r-ir wtis it would not imnrove +heir pos'tio-i financially. "Mr K*»nr«fH-: Su-rnx-Mnr: a farmer had a family of son*;, would vr.u hdvanoe mor" rer7.lv to him than to one wlv**-. family consistr-.l only of girV? (Lnurrhter.) Wit new-: T am ?>orry to say that, j from a fir.*.pen 1 neint of view, a family of boy*, is a b-tßrror f> a farmer than a f-amilv of <rirV. "We lenrl on Mv» <>-**d nr-vliio----. b'rt we do net sebrd~"le bis fnmilv. fl/n-t'ebter.) To Mr Evnrs : His comoanv had pursued a ooworrafcive tv>.lev during the Tvwrb year or so en account of "diis- . urbane".*- in tl*c a'r.'' To Mr T-lvorn ; The American financial eri.<*i<* had had a far effael on th.o noHov of .bo company than the farm labryri.rer-' dispute. This concluded the evifV-nc. availcWc vefiV-irda.v. Mr' AeV.'-l asked the Be.-»rd n.** to the proe.~di_rc in oonnor-tioVwith the summine: up. He suTecfitrd that Mr Ttiorn should first adxlrrs-. the Board, riven that the rf tV> f-*r-inerrs a.nd shee-tv-cwtiers pbou'd follow and that Mr..Thorn she"ld reply. Tiie Chairman Mid h.is own opinion was that the rcvrese.ifativt'-s of emoloyeTS should er>en the s'.immin-cr up and be foTV>werl by tho representatives of the TTru'on. which would dav. tlie eaKe. He would, however, submit tho matter to the Tkvard. and uould give its deepen th~- mnrnin-r. TTm' Ror.r.l then adjourned till 10 a.m. to-day. when the final witness wifl bo taken.