WELLINGTON FARMERS IN CONFERENCE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 5603, 1 June 1905, Page 4

WELLINGTON FARMERS IN CONFERENCE.

The conference of the Wellington provincial branch of the Farmers’ Union has closed, after a brief and businesslike session, and the resolutions passed by it are now matters of record. On the whole, the delegates are to bo commended for tho strong sens© they displayed in dealing with the various subjects brought before them. Leaving to cno sido the many detail questions that wore considered—and in general were decided in a satisfactory manner—it must to conceded that on most of tho largo problems of general interest the attitude of tho conference was eminently reasonable. Tho subject of laud tenure was the first to bo tackled; and a motion by Mr Buck, of Featherston, was unanimously carried, pronouncing in favour of-Crown tenants being given tho option of acquiring the freehold of their laud ah tho original value. Tho ■claim is a sound one, though it was supported by tho unsound reasoning on the part of tho president that tho delegates did not admit there was any unearned increment in land. Tho true reason why tho tenants of the State should have tho right to purchase tho freehold at tho price originally fixed is that they aro entitled to bo placed on an equal footing with those settlers who acquired freeholds at tho start. It is futilo to deny the existence of a value in land that has not boon given it by the owner or occupier. Every road, railway, and bridge that is constructed adds to tho value of land; so also does the growth or movement of population; but, as freeholders get the benefit of this increment, it is only just that leaseholders should have tho opportunity, if they so desire, of participating in tho advantage. The safeguard of tho State lies in the principle that there is no such thing as an absolute freehold. Tho Government reserves the power of increasing tho land- tax, and has also tho right to resume possession of any land whatever, if tho public interest requires this to be done. Tho State in these ways can exercise its right to appropriate the "unearned increment”—unearned, that is to say, by tho individual owner, or occupier, but earned by public expenditure or growth of population. . Emboldened, perhaps, by tho acceptance of his resolution on tho optional freehold, Mr Buck submitted a motion declaring that “tho uncertainty of tho laud tenure and tho agi tation-to increase the land tax is causing a very fast falling off in tho productiveness of tho farming industry, and thereby causing a decline in the exports from tiro colony.” This declaration is so contrary to fact that tho conference promptly negatived, the motion. Sound sense was also shown by the conference in rejecting tho motion by Mr Moore, asking that delegates to meetings of tho Farmers’ Union should, have tho same railway concessions as aro made to religious bodies and friendly societies. Tho contention of Mr Cooper was much sounder —that it would bo better to object to further concessions being made to any class of people. Resolutions were adopted calling for equal burdens being placed upon all land-owners, including the Crown, in the matters of fencing -and dealing with noxious weeds; and there is certainly a great deal to ho said in favour of this oourso being followed. The resolution that was passed with reference to tho action of tho Farmers’ Union in the political arena need not b© cavilled at. Having a definite political platform, the farmers are quite right in seeking to use every legitimate means to secure its realisation. Hence it is right that they should urge all the branches of the union to see that all eligible as electors are placed on the roll, and that they should ask the national conference to devise a plan of concerted action at the forthcoming general election. The motion as originally framed hy Mr Guthrie went too far In declaring that committees should ho set up in tho different electorates to select .candidates fop parliament.

By adopting such tactics, the likelihood is that division would have been created. The wiser plan assuredly is lor the Farmers’ Union to give its support to the candidate in the whether Government or Opposition—who might ho prepared to endorse its platform. Anything that would tend to create a new political party is to ho deprecated; and wo aro sure that the farming as well as the labour interest will bo best served by the force of tho respective organisations being brought to bear- on existing parties. This view of tho matter will, wo trust, bo borne iu mind by tho general conference of the Farmers’ Union, to which tho task of political organisation lias boon referred. Tho provincial conference has done good work by clearing the ground and preparing matters for the consideration of the more important body.