THE INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY AND THE WORKERS' UNION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13421, 23 October 1905, Page 4 (Supplement)

THE INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY AND THE WORKERS' UNION.

TO TOE EDITOR Sir,—While it is quite impossible for us jo talco -notico of all the attacks that are belli? made upon us in the.press \vc cravo a little of your spaoo in which to take jiotic* of tho letter which tho Now Zealand papers of September' 27 report has been sent to members, of Parliament by tho Workers' Union.-

Tho first statement on which t*ho writer of this letter bases his claim for consideration is tp the effect that- tho International Harvester Company " has succeeded in completely obliterating all competitors in America and in tho Argentine." This is a most sweeping misstatement, as this company has scores of health}' competitors in America;!'some of them employing from 1000 to 2000 workmen, many of tlfcm several hundreds. _ The statement which wo mako is ones which, it untrue, is easy to refute, will bo found upon impartial investigation to be absolutely correct. si._ far as tho Argentino is concerned, this company and its predecessors liavo for a great many years done a large business there. Thp percentage which wo aio doing at the present time is vory simillar to what was done in tho same lines of machines fivo or-ton years ago. Thero lias been no decided ehango during that period, and to show you how particularly false the statements made by the Workers' Union letter aro wo would point out that he goes on to say in relation to the Argentino "tins is illustrated by the fact that £140 is charged in the Argentino for tho same machino that is sold in Australia for £fio." This statement was originally published in tho press of Australia, and obviously refers to stripper harvesters. believe that it will bo somewhat of a surprise to the Workers' Union to learn that tho International Harvester Company has flo\cr sold a harvester in the Argentine, and that the bulk of all the harvesters sold thero aro supplied by the vory Australian manufaetuiors who arc busying themselves circulating rumours of this'character. We are unable to.say whether it is a fact that £140 is charged to a farmer in tho Argentino for a harvester. If it is so, it is not for our machines, and we have no more responsibility for it than have tho New Zealand manufacturers themselves, and tho fault, if there is any. is obviously to be laid at the door of the very neonle who are, lor their own purposes, back" of this agitation against us in Australia, and may reasonably bo taken as a fair sample of what they will do at home if tho opportunify is ever offered to them.

These arc tho only direct- statements mado in the letter under review, and, being absolutely false, it naturally follows t.liafc either other grounds of offence must bo found against us, or tlie letter in itself naturally can carry 110 weight at, all, either with the Parliament, or the people of New Zealand. Tn addition to theso statements, however, the letter alludes to the sworn evidence before tho Royal Commission. We expect shortly to "be accorded an opportunity to rebut this evidence, and in tho meantime it would be obviously out of for us to say anything further than that the people of New Zealand should, in common fairing, wait until the case has been heard, and not pass judgment on the matter while but ono sido of the evidence has been presented. Again, we desire to call attention to the fact that wo do not wish in any way to seem to bo mixing in New Zealand politics, and that just so long as those who aro working against us confine themselves to facts no word will he heard Irom us on any political issue. Wo cannot, however, let 30 unchallenged such utterly incorrect statements as th'oso:that are made in the letter under review.—We are, etc., International Harvester Company of America. J. D. BvwATfin, Manager for New Zealand. Christchurch, October 18.