HODGE'S REASONINGS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1116, 2 May 1911, Page 6

HODGE'S REASONINGS.

[To the Editor.] Sir,—Being a humble worker, whose opportunities in tlio matter ot education wera somewhat limited, consequently in penning my tnoughts oil current events, which 1 consider etiocts tlie worker, 11 my grammar is not on all fours with modern teachings, 1 may consequently he pardoned tile lack ot advantages alnidiil to, has to a certain extent matlo 1110 rely on my reasonings rattier than accepting the theories of others ot 111012 pretentious intellects. Without further parley or excuses 1 will endeavour to lay my reasonings as it worker before my fellow man, ns clearly and concise!* as my limited powers will allow. The task I've set myself is 110 easy one, inasmuch I am relying 011 my own conclusions. Here in this Dominion, a land of great promis?, and one of resources second to none in the wide world, Labour undoubtedly plays a great part, but whether the present trend is to the advantages of that body is open to grave doubt. I venture to submit that we'arc entirely wrong in many ways effecting our future, and I would advise that great body to pause ere it is too late. "What I consider to be one of the greatest mistakes we are making is to make an enemy of capital, and it's a great pity that this mistake is not more generally recognised. One is dependent on the other, and a moro friendly understanding is desirable. Fault exists 011 both sides, but what makes the position more acute is the fact that Labour is taught to at all times look upon capitalists with suspicion and mistrust, in spite of sincere overtures. Now, for Labour to be at all independent, it is necessary that there should be a demand for him, but if that demand is curtailed by mistaken legislation the worker suffers. The 111010 capital invested in industries the mors demand (here is for workers, consequently it placet Labour ill a more independent position. Now, take for an exnmplo in the matter of railways. From north to south there is a great cry for railway facilities. Now, if it was possible that this enlightened country would allow private enterprise to construct these lines, it would afford work to thousands; it would mean millions of pounds spent in labour, it would open up vast areas of productive land, townships would follow, industries would spring up, ;aid in many ways this would be a great benefit .to Labour. I do not propose at the present time to deal with State-owned railway?, but will do so at some future date, but will content myself by stating that workers of this particular kind would be in a much more independent position than they are now under the present autocratic conditions. Of this I will deal more fully later 011. The same remarks may at least, apply to the development of our water-powers. Hero again the door is shut in tlip face of Capital, and consequently—it's, a bar to Labour. How can 0110 say such ways are to the advantage of Labour? AVo hear much from leaders of Labour, the cry of the nationalisation of land. It's an order contrary to hmnaii nature. The ambition of the man who tills his land is to own it, and the hope of such is conducive to reap the best results. lam sometimes amused at those whose whole cry is nationalisation of the land. Yet those very advocates own the dwellings they reside in, and quite right. I am glad they do. but to bo consistent, to say tlio least, the attitude is one that may be termed humorous. This is a subject I hope to treat more fully as time goes on. Now, one problem which seems to be a .puzzler for all our public men is the one of a living wage. Now, 1 am not vain enough ta think I con solve that great question, .vet I have given the. matter much thought, and have arrived at this point: that I think it's almost impossible to say what is a living wage 111 determining such, you are. surrounded with so many difficulties that to attempt to enumerate them would I>3 a difficult and long task, but I may say what would be a living wage to 0110 would be almost starvation to another, and it greatly depends upon the worker and his wives how far they can make a shilling go. Take an award, say. where Bs. per day is the fixture. Now, I contend to a single man under present, conditions it is a good wage, and should surround him with every degree of comfort necessary for his station ill life, and he should save money. Possibly a man and his wife and say two or throe children may do moderately well on it, yet I will admit that a man with say five and more children have a bitter struggle, and the position is one of great hardship and requires great, self-sacrifico lo get. along on. Yet you cannot say to the employer of that man lie must be paid more than his follow worker doing equally the same work, and this is where I think Hie State should show its benevolence under such conditions, or at least I should say in such cases I think the State, hv way of encouraging the birthrate, might profitably assUt large families by allowing them assistance where (he family exceeds a certain number. Would not this be far and away a belter method to pursue than assisting immigrants lo this country whose stay is short and Australia their goal? I have listened to the screeching of our public men lamenting the birthrate, and yet so far as the State is concerned they have at all times shown 110 practical sympathy towards these who have large families—rather, I might say, theirs is a callous indifference. 1 admire I lip work of the Conciliation Boards, but the Arbitration Court could be greatly improved on; however, it cannot be denied that it has done a great, deal of good, and to those who are dissatisfied with it T should say: What are you going to replace it with? Now, in conclusion, to my fellowworker I say reason for yourself; by all means return our own representatives to Parliament, and make councillors from amongst, us, and take our proper place in the destiny of the councils of our country. But we must not run away with tli'e idea wo are the only pebble on the beach. With many apologies for the length I liavo trespassed upon your space, I've left much out that I should like to have written about, and if allowed to do so I will avail myself tlio opportunity at some future time.—l am, etc., HOUGH. ■Wellington, April 13, 1911.