A TIMELY WARNING.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 55, 28 November 1907, Page 4

A TIMELY WARNING.

Well worthy of careful study is the summary, published in our issue of yesterday, of the evidence given by" Professor Lowrie before the Conciliation Board which is hearing the case brought against Canterbury farmers by the Agricultural Labourers' Union. The expert opinions of the director of Lincoln College have an interest for a far wider audience, than the farming community and the body of organised labour. Professor Lowrie is " as-: tounded " that there should be dissatisfaction amongst farm labourers, and is entirely against any attempt to apply to farm labour a hard-and-fast uniformity in the matter of wages. In a factory an inferior worker merely does less work than a good worker ; on a farm an inferior worker is hot only fractionally less than a good worker, but is actually a destructive employee. A bad stacker is an agent of ruin, and so also is a bad driller, or a bad driver. In addition to this fundamental difference between the' conditions of workon a farm and in a factory, Professor Lowrie declares that " it would work out very badly for. the Dominion if farmers were to work their hands under set rules." We do not wish to discuss the general claim of the agricultural workers of Canterbury, for it is sub judice, and we have noted Professor Lowrie's points only to show that the, farmer has some very serious difficulties to contend with. ' • The farmer, if recent legislation is' taken as a criterion, is regarded by the Government and the city Socialists as something very like a parasite, to whom wealth comes by a hundred avenues, and always in generous measure. Therefore, let him be penalised; let as many of his privileges as possible be swept away; let the occupation of the soil be burdened with every condition that will check the ballooning purse of' the man on the land. " Many people," says Professor Lowrie, "hopelessly over-estimated the Results which a farmer got from his property." .Owing to the price of land, the cost-of labour, and the amount of labour required, ninety bushels of oats or sixty ; bushels of wheat rarely mean more than 6_ per cent. on capital. From one cause and another a man working £6000 worth of land in Australia receives more from' sales than the man who works a £27,000 holding in New Zealand. From the-facts and figures which the Professor quoted to prove the absurdity of the supposition that the farmer's lot is easy and luxurious, we need quote ho further, but we must add his timely warning that " the producing wealth of the land was limited, because the farmers would not face the position (the requirements of perfect farming) through the'difficulty of getting satisfactory labour." • As the director of a large agricultural college, Professor Lowrie does not hold, and is incapable of holding, a brief for any political faction.... His plea for the. protection of. the farming community from "artificial and arbitary restrictions" is obviously not put forward even in the interests of the farmer. His concern is for the maintenance of agricultural efficiency, and the demand for agricultural efficiency has its origin in the needs of .the whole community. His evidence was a telling condemnation of the present political'tendency to treat the farmer as the legitimate prey of the needy and discontented Socialists.. The Socialists, convinced—quite erroneously, as Professor Lowrie showed—that the farmer is " doing too well," think that they can distribute amongst the city workers whatever they can • deduct from the farmer's income. They forget that, whenever they penalise the _ farmer and limit his earnings, they limit his productiveness, and thus lessen the' wealth of the State. They are, indeed, going the right way about killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. The Attorney-General more , than once hinted during the past session at " another turn of the screw," and further anti-farmer legislation. _ He will do well to give some attention to Professor Lowrie's very timely warning of the . national folly of strangling the farmer.