SHEARING.

Nelson Evening Mail, 21 July 1916, Page 3

SHEARING.

(To the Editor.) Sir.. —Before the establishment of the Nelson Freezing "Works it was gener-allv estimated that a- nett return' of £IOO 'rom sales of -wool and stock was made c rom 300 (three hundred} sheep. After 'he works were established and winter feed generally prown, the nett return -ose to About £l4O from the same lumber of sheep. Since the war tbi» lett return is estimated at about 40 per -ent more, i.e., about £2OO from that lumber. Now a farm of 400 acres of most sheep country that is found in this •irovinee will not maintain more than me sheep to the acre on ■grass, and would be valued, all cleared, fenced. ;nd "with necessarv buildings, at about PA per acre, i.e.. £I6OO. If fully stocked with sheeo their value now at, sav. 15s each, would be £3OO. The returns •iow would come to about £270 annually. If from this return interest at the rale of 6 per cent on the capital value of the land and stock, viz.. £ll4, -was deductsd, the balance, £156, would represent the wages of the farmer for managing -ind working the farm, that is. a wage )f £.3 per week for his support and to nay for everything needed to keep land, fences, and stock in good order. But this wage would be the result of about 30 years of hard labour, privation, and -elf-denial. His wages -would be welldeserved, yet not amounting to the reremuneration of the fairly skilled hand shearer. How then, can your corrcspon-

dent "Shearer" think he is entitled to vn increased price far shearing _ because -.vool and sheep have increased in value? VU classes have their "ups" and "downs." may not the farmer have Ins •up" without'other classes envying him md seeking to prey upon him as is being done at present. There is also a proposal to levy a war rate on the farmer of about 40 per cent on the value of his wool and mutton—this is iniquitous. The farmer's 'down' represents, at pre-war rates, a, weekly -wage of nearly £2, i.e.. 6s 8d per day. The interest on the value of his land and stock he ?s justly entitled to. for that represents the interest on his savings just as much as "Shearer" is entitled to his wages irrespective, of the interest on his savings. Under the best conditions the farmer deserves all he has and all he gets. If others think him prosperous in the* past, the present and the future, whv haven't they and why do they not follow his example and settle the country? The remuneration, for shearing (£1 per 100) enables a fair shearer to earn 15s per day. I f this is too small a wage for "Shearer" when the price, of food and material has risen, then alas ! for the farmer whose wage under war conditions is but 10s per dav, for he also has to buy dearer food, and materials. Further, "formers -will tell you, and they knuw. for they are shearers too. that shearing is not hard- work, and that shearers are provided with meals. With the machine thev may make over £1 per dav. I must close with the statement that while farmers sympathise with all who get insufficient wages, they think it most unjust for others to extort from them higher wages than they or their sons earn for the same work. It is to be hoped farmers or their sons will not prey on their own class. I am, etc., SHEEP FARMER.