FARMERS’ UNION AND THE LABOR QUESTION.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 8190, 3 August 1912, Page 8

FARMERS’ UNION AND THE LABOR QUESTION.

“Captain Colbeck fAuckland) moved—‘That we. as primary producers, view [with alarm the tendency of tho present laitTicinlly high wages in the cities to A. ithdraw tabor from agricultural puriits. ami also recognise that tho faring big industry ran not pay the necessary high wage to compete with other industries, ami we fear so long as this state of things exists the rural population candiot. materially increase.’

“Major Rusk, in seconding the motion, said the price of labor, being so high in the towns, the primary producers weio '-on-,»dlid to pay higher'wages than they could allord in order to get assistance. The artificially high wages were caused bv excessive protection, without doing at;v good to tho workers. “Mr -I. MeQueen 'Southland) thought the remit should be withdrawn. It would do no good and would give a

grievance to tho Labor Party. “Messrs W. J. Birch (Marton) and H. O. Vava-our (Marlborough) also urged tho withdrawal of the remit. “Tho remit was withdrawn."

And hero are the wise men giving direction to one-half of the working ntopls of N’ow Zealand, attributing the doorcase of tho country population to the high wages in town. Won't somebody scud word to Captain Colbeck and Major Lusk that tho people who arc leaving (ho country districts are not going into tho cities of New Zealand, but are leaving New Zealand altogether. Lower wages in tho towns would only tend to send them out of New Zealand more rapidly than they aro now going. With all the advertising to bring people to this country, the people aro leaving it as rapidly as they are arriving.

Suppcso Captain Colbeck had introduced a resolution attacking the "artificially high prices" of farm lands and decl- i-i-ng (that “the farming industry cannot pay ‘the high rents' and compote with other industries." That would have been u centre shot. I wonder how tho captain gets tho idea that it would bo easy to beat down tho wages of labor in the cities when it never seems to occur to him that it would bo possible to deal at all with tho "artificially high" rents in the country.

It is perfectly evident to all, students of the question that it is absolutely impossible for farmers anywhere to pay high rents and high wages both at the same time. As rents go up wages must go down, and the farmer who pays both always "gets left," no matter which way his heavier payments go. Make the wages less than they are and ronts would become more than they are. If you would make the rents lower than they aro wages would immediately bo more than they aro. The farmers who work on tho land and pay rent are fortunate if they get enough Out of their labor' to pay them wages for their work. But the real farmers who do not pay rent aro workers as well as landholders. If they do not pay rent to others then they must pay a price for tho land, which makes the interest on their investment tho equivalent of the rent they would otherwise pay. Tho more routs they pay or the larger the investment made the less there is for labor, including their own labor as well as that of the hired laborers. The less rent they pay or the less' the investment in land values the more there is for labor, including their own labor as well as hired labor. Someone teach this captain and tho major the relations ol rent and wages, ol land monopoly and poverty-