The Dominion. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1908. FARMERS AND POLITICS.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 308, 22 September 1908, Page 6

The Dominion. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1908. FARMERS AND POLITICS.

Theee is no want of definitencss in the policy framed by the Farmers' Union in pursuance of its resolve to take a moro active part in politics. What that policy is was set out in the questions—the text of which we published yesterday—that have been furnished to the . various branches of the union as test questions for tho candidates at the forthcoming elections. The first of these will enable the farmers to ascertain the views of candidates on five main features of the union's policy:' tho freehold, the right of selectors of land to have option of tenure, a revenue tariff, a ratepayers' suffrage in local government matters, in rural districts, and opposition to the nationalisation movement. Three questions aro loft "to be put to candidates at tho discretion of the branches." These affirm, in interrogative form, the necessity for repealing the Arbitration Act and discontinuing the " co-operative " system on public works, and for resisting any proposal to introduce the The point to bo noted in the union's programme is its completely agrarian character. Whatever may be said of the proposals that it embodies, it at least cannot be said that the union has taken sides with any political party. On both sides of the House there are members who will agreo with somo of tho union's demands and disagree with others. That is one of the merits of the union's-policy., For example, it is very natural that the farmer should oppose a purely protective tariff. But a simple revenue tariff would bo distasteful to a great number of those who seo eye to eye with tho farmers in the other matters dealt with in the questions under notice. There is not a farmer who cannot subscribe to the whole of the union's creed, in whatever direction his political sympathies may generally lie. If, by demanding the freehold, and opposing Socialism, the union is in conflict with the present Government, that by no means gives the union . a party 6tamp. It would bo the height of absurdity on the part of the farmer if, in order to sccure himself against misrepresentation by the friends of the Government, he were to abstain from opposing bhs influences which aro tho moat ruinouu to hia interests.

There is no occasion to go in any detail into the fighting programme of the union. In some quarters there has been a tendency to speak of the land tenure question as finally disposed of, but it is still a burning question, and will continue to bo so long as men occupy the soil. The union, at any rate, is as determined as ever on the subject, and it will be. matter for surprise if the country members in the new Parliament do not command a majority in favour of the freehold. One thing we would impress upon the various branches of the union: to keep the question of land tenure prominent in the olection campaign, and to secure from candidates a perfectly plain and clear expression of opinion on the matter. It must not be forgotten that thero are. in the present House men who | forgot their freehold pledges in their anxiety to serve' the leasehold Government. The farmer has double cause foi desiring the repeal of the Arbitration Act. ■ In the first place, he cannot but suffer from any injury that the Act inflicts on the development of the country's industries. Moreover, ho has reason to dread the subjection of agriculture to the crushing restrictions of a rigid award and the conversion of the whole countryside into a hotbed of soreness, agitation, and ill-feeling between masters and men. It is ill enough that the noxious principle of compulsory arbitration should be disturbing the 'branches and limbs of the industrial tree: it will be ruinous if the axe is applied to the root of the nation's prosperity. Taken together, the implications of the questions to be submitted to candidates amount to a gospel of hostility to the anti-farmer influences in the country. That' so much legislation opposed to the interests of the farmer has been placed upon the Statute Book, and that the Government has drifted so far towards Socialism, are facts due in great measure to the inaction of the men upon the land. The political activity now being exhibited by organised agriculture should have begun years ago. Now that it is upon the right track, the farmers must push ahead energetically in defence of their threatened interests.