UNEMPLOYMENT AND THE LAND.

Evening Star, Issue 20022, 13 November 1928, Page 11

UNEMPLOYMENT AND THE LAND.

io xm: EDITOR.

Sir,—l havo been absent from Dunedin for some time, and have missed the articles by “ Touchstone ” which 1 understand have appeared at intervals in several of your issues. 1 did see, however, “ Former’s ” letter, in which he criticised “ Touchstone ” as being not quite correct. 1 have been told by -friends that “Touchstone’s” articles dealt, among other matters, with the land for soldier settlement. 1 nersom ally happen to know of several cases of severe hardship, and would ask you to give me space to insert the follow-

1 know of 10,000 acres of grazing .and which has been taken over by the .state Forestry Department. This land was abandoned by the settlers because of tho exorbitant rents placed on the farms bv the Lands Department. Would it' not have been better policy to have kept these settlers (soldiers) on the land by reducing their rentals sufficiently, enabling them to make a living and farm these holdings economically?. Even with the revaluation

boards set up some time ago these men could not male a living. It will be said that “this type of men could not make a living anyhow," 1 know that all of these men were- hard-working, two out of the four being married. They were not in any sense “ wasters.” It is questionable whether these forestation schemes are going to be the gold mines some would like to make out. The Government is risking public money on which the general taxpayer lias to pay interest at a time when taxation is severe enough. AVhy not have leased it to private syndicates instead, if the ground was only suitable for forostation purposes, ns they would have to pay county rates tho same as other settlers, whereas the Government is exempt from rates ? The roads were being cut up by heavy motor lorries of the camps, and the poor settlers (remaining) have to foot the bill in increase in county rates, I have had personal cases related to me of the conditions of work and pay, etc,, ruling at one particular camp. The pay, as you know, is 9s per day for a nve-and-a-half-day week. The cheapest rate last year at which men could be catered for with a camp cook was 19s 10d per week. This year a different scheme was on foot by which every three rnen were allotted a tent and hod to do all their own cooking and buy i heir food and cooking utensils. This Theme costs the men more, as cooking or two or three is more costly than cooking for a large number. Men nine and went all the time with practically nothing in their pockets to show 'or months of hard labour. They rose -it 5.30 a.m. and had to start, for then-three-quarters of an hour to an hour’s walk at 7 so as to start their working day at 8. They wore climbing hills all day long for ten hours, as it was another hour’s walk back to camp. Going out they were heavily laden- with tools and th'eir loads of trees on their backs. What condition were they in at the end of such a day to cook food

for themselves? The pay is only tor tine days—wet days no pay. How can a man provide for a wife and family in town under these conditions? Train tare is allowed to the nearest station, and 2s &1 is charged for conveying the men to camp by Government lorry, these charges being deducted from the first pay. You can see it takes some making up to pay for food as well and save anything. It was pitiful to see these disheartened men, as I did, tramping back to the station, swag on back, and the stones they tell arc of hardships endured, with nothing in their pockets —sometimes not even the fare back but asking food and shelter from farmhouses and footing it all the way back to thoir homes. One man with not a penny in his pocket intended to try to work his passage back Home, where lie came from eighteen months ago. Ho was very thin and white, and the lady of the houso where he rested gave him scones, meat, and jam to carry him . on a little further after stopping one 1 night in the men’s hut. They are most grateful, but very bitter and disillusioned.; Four days out. of every week saw men. stopping and being given food and shelter, too. along this country road, .. If rain Tell for three or font days a week it left them only one and a-hnlf or two and a-half days’ pay to cover their food hill One member dr our household was accosted one day by a man who asked him how many more, miles he had to walk to the nearest: station. This man 'was |ill. and said ho felt •“■very crook,” but he was; told to; “get out;” as unfits were not wanted.. He looked frightfully ill.’and said eon- ; (iitions at the ramp were ‘hard. r|e had only been tliore three weeks, and borrowed his fare hack; but, ill as he was. lie had to foot it eleven miles. I, think it perfectly- scandalous that the men shouldbo ‘charged* 2s ■ 6d lot. conveyance by’the Government’s own lorry,' and it is only when a large num--1 her of men are expected that the lorry

meets them When arriving in odd numbers they have to tramp these eleven miles with swag on back, but are always told at the office from where they come that a bus will meet them, and after waiting about and making inquiries find they have to foot it. The Government policy boils down to this: That the Government has encouraged emigration to help swell the ranks of ■ the unemployed and so cut wages down when the cost of living is as high as ever. I was talking to an Englishman a little time ago, and he told mo that a married man drawing the “dole” in England receives 25s per week for self and wife; a further amount of 3s 9d a week for each child under fourteen is allowed by the relief fund. Compare this with a man at a forestry camp. If he has two wet days a week he is left with 31s 6d for the week, out of which £1 for fond has to ho taken. This leaves him with 11s 6d for one week’s work. It makes one think quite a lot. Why bring men to New Zealand practically to starve when they arc far better off, in England? A married man there with four children receives £2 a .week and does nothing, whereas the man on Now Zealand forestry work slaves his soul and body out all the week, and after a wet .week is actually in debt to tbe-Government tor his food. Is it any wonder that-we arc faced' with larger of unemployed each winter and that tnen refuse to go to these forestry camps who have been there before? . ,

A ' wave of 'intense Wttoimess is in each, man’s;soul over tin's bar*h treatment and it. is nn wonder that- tbe views of some of t’ ir, rn a vo - doily seething with a cf innwtme, and hardness that’ i s behae metod out to them, furnimr them all into real Bolsbovists, - Tb^ : bord‘diin is also on the man who in the first place had to walk off liis holding, dropping his little capital of £6OO or £7OO.- T He... For Humamtt. November 12.