"PRODUCTION EXCEEDS CONSUMPTION."

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18076, 26 October 1920, Page 7

"PRODUCTION EXCEEDS CONSUMPTION."

TO THE EDITOE. i-Vu. —TOia workers jairougbout the dominion have been told time and again that -production and still more production is the groat panacea, to reduce tho coat of living. That, I beiievo, is quite true. Commodities should be much cheaper in a wsll-stocked market of all the necessaries of life. There is an exception to this rule, a-pparontly, and those who have been preaching thrift and economy—to wit, the Homo and Dominion Governments—are at present urging, and. are guilty of, wnat 13 known as the gcnslow policy. For proof I refer you to the cablegram in your issue of the loth inst., under the heading of "Wool Markets—Production Exceeds Consumption,' growers advised to ho.d. In referring your readers to tho cablegram in question I would draw attention to paragraphs ''sixthly" and "seventhly" and quote from the latter as follows: "And the ooinmitto© suggests that the Government of .iot Zealand should request the Imperial Government urgently by telegram to give an underta.king not to unduly 1 force its , wool on tbo market, but to hold stocks firmly, and only place them on the' market in such quantities as will be absorbed without seriously depressing prices." This quotation moans, of course, a "corner in woo! and that our New Zealand producers wish to get as near ae maybe tho fat returns obtained during the war, and their fear is that if the Imperial Urovornment pu*s its stocks freely on the market thfat (here will be on appreciable lowering of values. This, is granted, and while consumers have no' wish to deprive the woolgrowars of fair returns, they would be justified in objecting to the Inflated prices of-the past few seasons. It is a mistake to s-ay that production exceeds coneumption—that is, had tho Imperial Government - bought the wool at fair values and sold liberally to tho manufacturers, th© : consumers would have benefited by getting their woollen goods at a much less price than now obtains, and instead of mon'a tailor-made suits being quoted at 12 and 14 guineas, it is" reasonable to su-opo°e that a good suit could have been go't for 6 or 8 guineas. As things obtain, busings men at Home have ha<3 recourse to wearing suits of dungaree. In the dominion wo aro wearing out old suite, formerly relegated for use in ashing, shooting, or digging in the garden.

Tho Imperial Government is primarily to blame, buying huge stocks of wool giving fancy prioos for the eamo. and tlon hoarding up to -ho tune of fivo million balea of wool, thus causing a scarcity possibly unemployment at tho mills, a mand for higher wages, all of which are reflected m tho dominion. A T oiv thero is a flutter and alarm on account of a likelv fall uy , prices, v Every possible means will bo token to prevent thie, onri, backed ud bv tho two Governments, "will in all likelihood succeed, and the consumers bo asked o pay the impossible prices now charged for' woollen poods. The workers generally are accused of indulging in a go-slow policy, the effects of which tend to increase the cost ol lmng. Take the miners, for instant*. Thcix methods undoubtedly have raised the prioo of coals to the consumer, retarded industries depending on supplies of coal but what is tho difference in the Imperial Government buying huge stocks of wool hoarding same up. and thus foroiug up prioea of all wonllen goods to such an extent that no nrenual worker can afford to puioha*.without substantial cost of lirin" bonu»os It is to be hoped that the Imperial an-d Dominion Governments mil do the fair thin"as between th? woolgTowcrs and tho coif Eiuners. In conclusion, I would eay that it is no consola;ion 10 ;ho workers to l>o told tiiot more monoy would return to the dominion if high prices are maintained in the Old Coufltry. Ibeee prices are reflected here, and the woolgrowers can find many W ? S I , their sur E !u3 Moncv; without benefiting the workers to such an exlent as compensate, for the high cost of everything woollon.—l am, etc., ■i- Cross.

OTAQO LAND BOAED ADMBnISTEATION.' TO TUB BDHOB. Sin,—The two iollowiug items appeared la the Otngo Daily Times:—The firist about a week ufe'O, and tlie other yesterday:—(l) Air Mitchell % lu-duy asked whether the leut-es of runs 3228, 21,USi) acres, aud 210 c, 4155 ucres, in the Olago Land district, had ben granted lo lwo brothers who already held 17,000 acrts, and if two idaya Jater a Waitaii lease of 2020 acres had uJeo been granted to those men." The Minister of Landa said this matter had already been brought under lab notice soma time ago by the lion. Ur Lee, ■ aud ho had immediately issued instructions tor a special report on the matter. The report hod not yel reached him, but he understood -' thai ulreauy the Land Board had agreed to tie transfer. If it was fonnd that there had been any more aggregation oi land suitable lor other purposes, stepe would be taken in .regard to the iraneaction." (2) "An informal dSoussiim took place at. the meeting ol the Land Board yesterday with regard to lands Bet upart lor so fiction by returned eoldiers, and which , ' the rolJiers did not seem disposed to take ■' tiff. ,Jt was mtutioned that the d«nand lor land! by soldiers had diminished, as Vas oulj to bo ex- • peetal and was still diminishing, the returned men being gradually absorbs £1 the ordinary avocations of the community. There was a fail area ol available land lying idle and naprodacIvc, and this was gradually deteriorating. Aβ ■ the manners of the board considered that it -was '" te . wtCTeete of the dominion that these lands should be settled, it was decided to mfcie ■ representations to the authorities with a view to ■' d7'r' g ,A vitian3 t0 "PI ,1 ? for land that tne eoraiere did not want." Section 1 block' XL Nascby district, waa balloted lor, and diipwsed ?L\v soldier at the same- meetog that this informal discussion took place, and it ■itlw,. t, TnS W ! '"" J ' eVOr been a ~mplaS? Bfrom8from . h. u ,; f °r as . to my "° l being a careful tenant. Die rent has always been pui<T6usctu?hc'boa X rdTl h6 iD advaDC,; - cue board is from year to year, and I have m ■ October 16. ' E, ' p P S^,ffi ; them• rn £ n ° thing to do with at Naseby ocennted bv Mr m tion and - houEe '

received l£ coition with this £tZ?%t^ e history" E lck 200 >' cars mto old Irish

THE ne TEMERE DECREE • TO THE Kbiiun '..'.■ • gated the proposed amendment to the marlow with close attention everything portal- - atizens, I havo never up till the present time heard of any change being mSde mTuSI" Miorioue and much-discussed decree ■*•*££ S3 w£, Tecful ■'■ authorities do not a/ato one Jot ■ ljmg principlee." I n any case, if it Kae KeeV altered, we are certainly entitled to" ask wht* the character and extent of the For, instance, Doe. 'the decree in itsform p«h,bit any priest of the R. 0.; Church or any other party from of. rHaati marriages in cases where theyTrc Vcon ■ ducted under the ajgis and with the riteV ; and that the children arc illegitimate? .; "If everything is perfectly straight and open' aid there is no amere penaee anywhere, it ought not to be difflovlt to give a categorical answer• L fh« a !?5 OM f i qUC6 u tl( ? n - And this,i:thrnk, is the giE of the whole controversy. Both Zealand, I hove a very real and keen interest' ■ m th:s matter, and I believe I have right ■ i to Itnow exactly where uo stand. The PreeW ■tery of Dunedin seems inclined to adopt the line of least resistance, and take refuge be- 1 Jiuul >,ne somewhat academic of spiritual independence; though ev«n in this . ' if your report of what took place be correct! ' they do not seem to bs , too sure of theirground. In certain sifuatione the principle of spiritual independence is an admirable one/ and to ba whole-hoartedly commended; bui" hke everything else, it has its limitations' J,t is a good principle when it is the allyof truth and righteousness, but then only: it is qmte obvious to any intelligent and though {ul person that it would never do to use such ft principle indiscriminately; to "do this would be, m many cases at least,,simply ' to pvo the halo and sanction of re&ibn to error and wrong, and thus* to make it a pro-' ljfic cause of ovH rather than, as it is meanf to be, and ae it ought to be, the remedy for all iha,t is amiss in human things. If : ' Protestants were to give their aseeiit to. all' the■ claime and pretensions of the Church of Rome, which that church might very easily cloak with the euphonious and high-eoundin" " title of spiritual independence, they mi"ht ', :ust as well give up all their contendinca and efface themselves at once. In conclusion, I wish to say that there is no need for any •". ?.^v bc « Mn , SUte and Romnn.' Catholic Church; I, for one, at leaet, am in 310 way apprehensive of any such contingency The State has a perfect right to see that ite ; laws, whether about "marriage or anything else, are respected and obeyed, and tot flouted and set at naught by any sect or" party, and I believe it both can, and' will.''.'6ee that this is done.—l am, etc., PbOTESTAOT. : . [In last week's Outlook' Professor Dickie ; discusses interestingly the point raised by. our correspondent. Professor D-lckie says:— "Nor can I accept Sir John's bare statement that the new Codex Juris Canonici supersedes the Ne Temere Decree. It is a codffi- • cation of the existing law and practice. of the Church of Rome, and not the proinulgi- ; tion of a new law. Sir John is oortavily' ! no authority on any branch of ecclesiastical law, however great an authority he may bo in his own special study. Probably he aov<?r.' ' saw the Codex till it woa put into His hand's'•■ by his present clients. Judges may err in : ■ their legal pi-onouncemcnts. Advocates may speak the whole (ruth. But their distinctive task is to make out the best case for their clients that they possibly can: W o do rot accept their statements without some proof. Sir John knows so little of the Codes-.thaV'i he spoke of it ee an authoritative etateiuentV of doc<n'nc, as if ho were to say that ?]ie-"' Book of Order is tV onlv nn*hori«ativo doctrinal standard of the Presbyterian of New Zealand! I think tliat the briefer"' statements of the Codex must be interpreted r ' in Ihe light of the more de'jiilerl pronounces.""' men's of the eepara'e documents on whicii r ' it is bafted, unless the Codex itself expressly"! states the contrary, either in general tenna ' : at tlv b»<f-'ntim» c-t th- md or Rn"c-fica.lly ;o in ceTtnin cases. Rev. Robert Wood wiitoa : lTi-e thn' he has compered the No Tomero Decree with tho Codex clause by chuse, and. ~ lhat cvory'hing in the IVcreo is" incorporated - in the Codex, except that sometimes the " s wording of the Codex is more concise. Pro- ?' bably ho is the only Pro'cstnnt in New Zen- / -' land who line done so. Doubtless ho will tell • us the results of his examination by and>bv:">'■Mwntinio let its rcmomber Sir John « Findlay spoke r_<rt as nn objective auihontr ' on canon law, but according to his brief " and suspend judgment til! wo have • further n light upon the , subject."—Ed. O.D.T.]