CORRESPONDENCE.

Grey River Argus, 27 May 1922, Page 4

CORRESPONDENCE.

A HUMBUGGING NOTICE. (To the Editor)'. Sir, —At the entrances to the various workings at tin State Coal Alines, a notice conveying the following intimation is posted up: ‘‘Miners found guilty of tilling dirty coal shall be instantly disinissed.” What cant and humbug from any mine manager when after many vears of operation, the coal seams here are now cleaner than heretofore, and at a time when the bulk of mining operations are of the nature of pillar extraction! As a rule, I am a very serious individual, but. out of tragedy betimes I sei* comedy, more especially wheji it is a question of this nature, which I am very familiar with. Any wav the coal miners 'lid not put the dirt there; and this just reminds me how crude it is to depend solely upon the miners to separate dirt from co: 1 —miners who work where the sun never shines and who have to penetrate darkness with tiie aid of an artificial light which dues not exceed one candle power, to mine co: I under difficultics, defend themselves aguinst numerous possible and probable dangers, t<* eke out a living . t. low contract rates. Then theii' minds divcrt(‘«l from these dan- ■ gers with humbug, eL-., under threat or dismissal! Where it is at all possible for 'he miners to keep their coal clean, by all means let it be so doin', but. oh, how ridic 11 lo'isly crude to depend, solely upon the miners! Would it be impertinent for the miners to put up a no tice (Oiiveying this intimation: “Any manager in receipt of £8(19 per year who *s unable to cope with the separation of dirt amongst co::l, other than depending upon the impossibility of the miner to do so, is no longer required hei(‘. ” Personally, 1 think it much more b-usi ness!;e. Howexer, in flu meantime, I suppose the poor miner xvho has eyes to se'* but yet can t sec, and xvhose mind concentration is required to defeii'l himself against e\er prexailent dangers, must suffer all this humbug. These are some of the daily blessings bestoxved upon the miners! Oh, God, xvhen, our lives are 'lone, lei them remain so for ever ami ever! Tiiis is supposed to be living under cixilisation, but methings it is hell.— 1 am, etc., J. E. PATTI NSO.X, Miners’ President. Ku u align. CO OPERATIVE OR PROPRIETARY DAIRYING. (To the Editor.) Sir, — A good deal of attention is now being given Io the introduction of another co-operative dairy factory on the I West Const. As Io the advantage or otherxvise of such a xenture, personally I mu in favour of ro-operation, not only in the manufacture of butter, bu’ in the nceessaiy commodities for the whole of the people in this Dominion and elsexvhcre. As Io the advantage of having another butter factory, xvith the same clumsy methods as have been adopted in other co-opeiativc factories, it is open to discussion; also the advisability of adopting the proper means of (ditaining the best results for the dairy farmers. There is the question of butter or cheese, and personally J am inclined to take the viexx r that cheese is our best exportable article. That opens up another very interesting topic for discussion. Then it woubl be very interesting to haxe a discussion xvith many of our farmer friends to see if they really understand the scientific truth of co-operation. If they do. then only one xvay lies open to them in the political field, and that is to support our comrades in the Labour moxenient, xvho arc really the only able exponents of the principle of cooperation as against capitalism. Having stated the case as I noxx see it regarding the principle of cooperation, I \x imld like to dxvell and make a few remarks upon a circular xvhich has iiueii issued by one of our proprietary factories. 11 says that anonymous writers to the Press have levelled unfair criticism at. them because they have net |a’d better prices. r i'hen they slat*' a big majoiity of their suppliers quite i’!<ler:.i and the position. If that is so, it is a remarkable coincidence that they have offered their factory to the nexx co-operative company! Then they stale, they paid 2/- in September, 2/- in October, 1/7 in November, and up Io the (nd of Alardi they hud aver age<l 13' per lb of butter fat. Ji looks xvell on paper, but what is the ac Inal position? Hoxx - mueli cream xvas forv.arded in Sept ember? Practically nil. In 0.-iob -r. I should say they would receive about 1 '8 of the. butter fat as compared xvith December and Ja-auary. November price of 1/7 for butter fat, xvas a very nasty knock; i bill when one considers that a good deal of those three months \'.e:>- n up xvit h local requirements, tm- loss would not seem so heaxy as the cii'ciiLar suggests. Also, in March, April, and Ma l . - , Liking into emmiderat ion the Lon don markfi returns, along xvilh the local market prices for these months, they must have iecoup«'d the loss of 1 November tenfold. They state they paid out in March I • Well, probably, the butter xvhich xx;is manufacture’! m that month returned over 180/- per c'vt. 3'heir output for February must Imxe reached about 150/- to 170/-, ami for this month they paid out 9d por lb for butter fat. These are facts! They are now paying 1/3, and the wholesale price locallv is now 1/7. Previous to the xvar the factories paid out for b’tier fat. the price paid for butter xvhoiesale, xvhich should be noxx- the amount j received by the dairy farmers. Person- 1 ally, I am of the opinion that out of j

tho chaotic conditions of the market, they have reaped-a richer harvest, than during the best years of the xvar. Well, xve shall see the result by the farmers themselves supplying these factories during lhe past season xvhich xvill give them ; ’i ::d\::ntage, by being able probably to (did Id per lb more forzbutter fat- Another factor which xvould be of immense advantage to farmers, is (•• ox'ernnient supervision of tests. I knoxx- farmers xvho have been supplying txvo factories, one factory giving six p(»ints higher in lhe test than tho other factory, xvhich proves conclusively to me the advantage of having official tests, and these xvould be one of ihe soundest investments, from the «lairying point of viexv. Aly intention in xvriting this note is not to be led axvay by these' very plausible remarks, but to ask them io publish to each supplier, a balance-sheet of their season’s working, showing the results. We can tfidi understand how they xvurk out at 1/1?. ]»cr lb. xx hat they have received per lb for but lei fat season.—» 1 am, etc., DAIRY FARMER.