“DIRECT ACTION” BY FARMERS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26033, 22 December 1945, Page 10

“DIRECT ACTION” BY FARMERS

Sir, —The accusation of inconsistency laid by Mr W. D. Mason against the Dominion president of the Farmers' Union, Mr W. W. Mulholland, is altogether without foundation. Mr Mason is in no position to judge, as he is not a member of any farmers' organisation and has probably never heard Mr Mulholland speak on the subject of “ direct action.” Mr Mulholland, during his term of office as Dominion president of the Farmers’ Union, has filled the position with distinction, and earned the respect of all members. He has always taken a broad view on every issue, and constantly counselled against ” direct action.” On this account he has incurred some criticism from the hotheads,” but he has the solid support of the great majority of farmers. I have heard Mr Mulholland address a meeting on several occasions and he has always received enthusiastic support from his hearers. It comes ill from a non-unionist to cast unfounded aspersions at one of the most popular and trusted leaders of the farming industry.— I am, etc., J. S. Elliot. Middlemarch, December 18.

Sir,—The particular motives and methods that were used in the abolition of the country quota (let alone other matters) so clearly reveal and condemn themselves in the eyes of every fair-minded person that no attack like that of Mr W. D. Mason Can clothe the nakedness of such actions. The flood of recent high-pressure legislation on top of what has led up to it, and the growing threat of things to come, are a form of very drastic direct action — a war of nerves—not only against the farmers in partcular, but also against every citizen of New Zealand who values freedom and fair play. It is these actions that have roused a feeling of deep resentment among the great majority of farmers and are causing them to join the federation in rapidly-increasing numbers, and without any compulsory unionism to make them join. Rather than foment trouble, Mr Mulholland and the majority of those in executive positions, while deploring what is occurring, are doing their level best to counsel restraint, cool judgment, and clear vision. Recently one North Island branch severely criticised Mr Mulholland as “ too meek and mild another called on him to take direct action or resign. As one who has attended meetings addressed by Mr Mulholland, he impressed everyone by his coolness, his sound common sense, and his fairness. He has tirelessly impressed upon farmers their duty, despite difficulties and frustrations, to do their utmost to grow food for a starving world And he very fairly gave the Government the benefit of the doubt. Now that the door of co-operation has been slammed in the farmer's face, however, Mr Mulholland is bound to criticise the folly of this attitude, and to warn the, authorities. Sufficient to say that if he is spared to continue in office, his prestige will continue to expand in city and country alike, and his ability and fine character will continue t to make themselves felt long after calculated personal attacks are forgotten.—l am, etc., A Working Farmer.