A FARMER'S BOY IN REPLY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 11907, 7 March 1902, Page 7

A FARMER'S BOY IN REPLY.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —I feel rather diffident attempting to reply to your correspondents, although I will only be reiterating what I have stated in previous letters. Mr. Arkle asks why the high rate of wages obtained by the unions is detrimental to the farmers' interest. Had Mr. Arkle only read all my letters, which have appeared in the Herald since April 16, 1901, ho would hardly have asked the question, but I will answer him as shortly as possible. The country settlers of this colony, including our gold miners, instead of importing all their own boots, clothing, etc., supported factories here to make them, and to prevent foreign goods coining in, and in order that people engaged in those factories should make fair wages, the country settlers were actually consenting parties to heavy protective duties being put on a lot of tilings to encourage the establishment of industries amongst us. Then these factory operatives waxed fat, and when they saw that the country settlers weresuch a soft lot they formed unions, and these unions became powerful political organisations, so that although numbering; only 14,000 they dictated successfully to the Ministry, and an the Right Hon. 11. J. Hoddon ia Minister for Labour, they get pretty well all they want.

The pure absurdity of this is seen when, according to Mr. Upton, the total quantity of manufactured goods exported in 1901 did not amount to £150,000, whilst the exports of raw products amounted to £127500.000. This clearly shows that the trades unionists aro only working to supply those who are really adding to the wealth of the country by proparing the aforesaid £12,500,000 worth for export ; and who would be much better off if everything they required was imported fiee of duty.

I must now reply to Mr. Sam. A. Browne, who hits me very hard, as be says my ideas are " injudicious, if not actually pernicious," and again, "Farmer's Boy" should change his pseudonym, because I do not think his writings aro to the interests of farmers." I can excuse Mr. Arkle writing as he docs, because he only gets the Weekly News, which does not publish my letters; but Mr. Browne has seen them all, and he must know that if any man in the province is the farmer's friend, lam that man. But because, forsooth, 1 advocate the formation of a larger union, with which the Farmers' Union could affiliate, then, according to Mr. Browne, I am an enemy. I may inform Mr. Browne that I have spoken to some of the most intelligent members of tho Farmers' Union in the province, and they agree with my New Zealand Settlers' Union scheme.

Then, as to Mr. Glass. A gentleman introduced Mr. Glis3 to me on April 19 last, when he asked my permission to allow him to use letters of mine, which appeared in the HRItALD on the 16th ami 17th of the same month, as he was preparing a circular for his West Coast campaign. Needless to say, I was only too pleased to do so. lie further asked me to continue writing, as it would assist him. I did so, and my letters appeared at intervals in your columns up to September 25, when I was laid aside for a time. Hut the letters helped the work, end free trade Was introduced into the Farmers' Union platform, as the result of my advocacy, and it is generally admitted that this is the strongest plank in the platform, and has made Mr. Glass' mission more successful than it would otherwise have been.

In Juno last I got my letters printed in pamphlet form, and sunt them over the colony, so I think I assisted Mr. Glass as no member of the Farmers' Union did— not even Mr. Sam. A. Browne. Here is another quotation from his letter: '"Farmer's Boy' seems to be trying to stir up strife between the Farmers' Union and the labour unions. Now, wo do not want strife; we want amicable adjustment. If the labour unions have done Well for themselves, let us farmers try and lift ourselves up to their success, not'pull them down to our level of so far non-success." I liavo never hod the pleasure of seeing Mr. Browne, but I should, from the above extract, imagine him to be a. timid, retiring sort of individual, who, if he was bitten by a dog, would pat him, and say, "Here doggy, I will give you this bi?| lump of beefsteak if you will only take your teeth out of my leg." Perhaps Mr. Browne will be able to explain to the Farmers Union what he means by " amicable adjustment," and "lift ourselves up to their success." Mr. Sam. A. Browne's letter is inexcusable when it is remembered that he had the privilege of reading all my letters in your columns, which were meant to educate men b'ke Mr. Sam. A. Browne, but, unfortunately for him, he does not yet understand the first principles of political economy. As I stated in your issue of August 19, these labour unions have formed the biggest trusts or rings, in the colony, and have got them made legal." And these are the people with Whom Mr. Sain. A. Browne wants amicable adjustment." And what does the trades unionist say to Mr. Browne's amicable adjustment, and is ho prepared to do hit share to avoid strife? Let us see. In your issue of the 26th tilt, we find the subjects that arc to be submitted by the Canterbury delegates to the annual conference of tlui Trades and Labour Council. Among them the following stand prominent, as more immediately affecting the farmer, viz., Eight Hours Bill, amendments to Conciliation and Arbitration Act, Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act, etc. The one which most concerns the country settlers is the abolition of the duties on those necessaries of life which cannot be produced in the colony, and (mark this farmers) an increase in the land and income tax." These are the gentle modest creatures that Mr. Sam. A. Browne "wants anr'cable adjustment" with, "and lift ourselves up to their success," whatever that may mean. Cannot Mr. Sam. A. Browne and his friends see that wo do not want any so-called amicable adjustment with the trades and labour unions, unless they are amicable enoutrh to agree with our intended abolition of all protective duties; then we will start fair, and the price of their labour will be fixed, not by tho Conciliation Board or Arbitration Court, but as ours is by competition with the world. If they survive, they will have to work harder and for less wages than they do now. They will, however, have the satisfaction of knowing that they will be earning honest wages, and not as at tho present time, getting high wages at the expense of the country settlers. Let tho members of the Farmers* Union study Mr. Sam A. Browne's letter carefully, arid then lonsider whether in their opinion Mr. Browne has sufficient grasp of the to be re-elected an officer of the I armors Union. I expect great iliings from the Farmers' Union, and 1 hope Mr. Glass will go on organising until every district in tho colony has a branch of tho union established in. it. and then all to be affiliated with the Settlers' Union. What chance would the trades and labour unions have with it? I really do not think there is another man in the colony besides Mr. Glass who would have had the energy and pluck to stump the colony forming branches of the Farmers' Union, and I am also pleased that the free trade plank I added to'the platform made the main rallying point for the farmers on both islands, although no one but Mr. Kirkbride seems to have given me any credit for what I have done.—l am, etc., A FaumEH's Boy. Auckland, March 1, 1902.