SALVATION ARMY AND SMALL HOLDINGS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3033, 1 May 1912, Page 81

SALVATION ARMY AND SMALL HOLDINGS.

SEQUEL TO EVICTIONS. CRITICISM AND COMPLAINTS. IFnoii Oub Own Coebesiokdent. 1 LONDON, February 7. S* The Charity Commissioners are holding an inquiry into certain charges made against the administration of the Salvation Army small holdings at Boxted, in Essex. For some time past a number of the small holders have been dissatisfied with the Salvation Army regulations, and matters were brought to a crisis by General Booth ordering some half-dozen families to be ejected. The ejections were only carried out after a great deal of obstruction on the part of the holders, w.ho made formal complaints to the Charity Commissioners. The Boxted scheme owes its start to the liberality of the late Mr George Herring, who wrote a letter to General Booth on November 29, 1905, in w'hich he said : “As I believe there are enormous tracts of land here that can be utilised and made to pay, and thus keep the working man in the United Kingdom, I naturally don’t like to see him sent away. If you could send away the idle loafer, how glad I should be! My scheme is to keep the honest worker here; and let me candidly confess, though this idea has been in toy mind for years, yet I would not attempt it without the aid of your Army. Your organisation is the only one possible for carrying it out.” Mr Herring formulated his scheme and made an initial grant of £40,000, with the promise of a further £50,000 if the experiment was successful. THE CASE FOR THE MEN. Mr A. J. David, K.C., pointed out the case of one holder who nad an income of £1 per week from property in London. The other holders submitted that he did not come within the provisions of the scheme. It was urged that the Salvation Army insisted on the men buying goods from the Army, and on the question of over-charges, counsel gave the following alleged samples : itat-traps, charged to the holders at 3s 6d each, sold retail in Colchester at 2s each. Planet hoes, charged at 29s 6d; subsequently, upon complaint, holders were credited with 5s 6d each upon this charge. Asparagus plants £4 17s 6d for 3250. Upon complaint holders were credited with £2 8s 6d. Tomato canes, charged from 3s 3d to 3s 9d per 100, could be bought at 2s Id per 100. Ploughing charged at a higher rate than that general in the locality. Fowls 4s a head—a good many affected by disease before delivered. 'Peas 50s—market price 40s. It was further alleged that tw'o men were turned out merely because they had signed a petition to the Army. The land, too, was very poor, and the produce was sold by the Army at -very low prices. As examples Mr David mentioned the following : Two hundred and sixty broccoli sold for 2s 2d, 130 for Is 3d, and 100 for lid. Thirty-six cabbages sold for a penny a dozen —less 10 per cent, off for management. Eighty-five cabbages sold for 2s 6d. Sweet peas, 144 blooms sold for a penny. Potatoes 2s 7d a sack—market price 78Runner beans, Is 6d per bushel. Broad beans were said to have been sold at la in Colchester when they fetched 2a to 2s 6d in London.

Witnesses were called to prove that the 'ejected men worked hard, and only objected to the autocratic power of the Army officers, who graded the produce, and generally ran the colony. It was alleged that no one could make his holding a success on such unfavourable terms. Finally the Army offered to reinstate the men on new agreements. The Commissioner here interposed, stating that he trusted that the men to whom the offer to return to their holdings had been made by the Salvation Army would give it theirserious consideration. He was empowered to state that the Chief Commissioner felt most strongly on the matter, and warned the men that whatever might be the result of the present inquiry, the Commissioners had no power to order General Booth to reinstate them on their holdings. If anyone possessed that power it .would be the Attorneygeneral, and' the matter would in all probability have to go before the High Court, and this would take a long time. Meanwhile, he warned the men that they might find themselves out of employment, and his travels through the rural districts of England unfortunately convinced him of the scarcity of agricultural work. He strongly advised them to consult with their counsel, and give the offer now made by the Salvation Army their serious consideration. SALVATION ARMY’S REPLY. LONDON, February 7. The case for the Salvation Army in the management of the small holdings was told by Colonel Iliffe, director of the colony. He informed the Charity Commissioners that he had been accustomed to fanning from early youth. Before purchasing the Boxted land, Mr Herring inspected it with the witness, and considered it was the most suitable of all that had been offered him. The land was properly prepared for the settlers, and besides ordinary manure. 120 tons of basic slag were put on it. The best breed of pigs and the best kind of fruit trees were selected, and the work of choosing from hundreds of applicants was carefully carried out by a council of officers. Ur Weidman, the present farm adviser, had himself occupied a farm' in the district for several.years, and he knew the nature of the Boxted land thoroughly and all its previous treatment. The management provided the settlers with everything re-,

quired for the cultivation of the land, and also with maintenance money. The amount of these allowances was debited to their capital account. , Questioned as to his alleged autocratic rule about the pigs, Colonel Iliffe said he made the rule because one of the 'settlers sold his pigs and drank the proceeds. After that the men were not allowed to sell pigs without first mentioning the fact to the management. The concrete houses were a failure, and others were built to succeed them. He agreed that there had been occasional accidental overcharges, but these bad been rectified as soon as discovered. The reason the furniture of the settler Gough was distrained on was because he sold his stock and went away. As to the trees sent to Mrs Bramwell Booth, she had only six, and she paid for them. The assertion made by the settler Gates that £IOO was spent in preparing two plots of land for the inspection of General Booth was absolute nonsense. Thirty shillings covered the expenses. As to poor prices for vegetables, some settlers persisted, against instructions, in cutting broccoli whose heads were little bigger than a crown piece. Counsel for the settlers said that if any of the settlers had been ejected for the reasons given in General Booth’s recent letter to the press, then General Booth and his council were maladministering the funds.

The Commissioner said he was not inquiring into the General’t letter, but into the charity. He would not allow these proceedings to be used f( r extracting evidence to attack General Booth. In cross-examination Colonel Iliffe was asked to name publicly tho men who were declared to have been indolent, but on the advice of counsel he. declined, and after considerable argument the Commissioner said the occasion was privileged. The names were then written down by Colonel Iliffe and handed tu counsel, but as some of the men demanded that they should be made public, the Commissioner invited the two leading counsel to see him privately. On resuming, counsel for the settlers said he w 7 ould not press his request that the names be made public. During the sitting the Commissioner commented on the clearness which characterised the Salvation Army s method of keeping books. In addressing the Commissioner on behalf of the rejected small holders, Mr David referred to Colonel Iliffe and said : “I describe him as a man of commanding personality, and I sdggest that he has been overbearing. A man of strong character is required for the position he occupies in this place, but while may have with him the * fortiter in re you also should have the ‘ suaviter in mode. He would never meet the men collectively, and you will readily understand that a man of the domineering character of Colonel Iliffe would exercise an influence on the individual man that he might have some difficulty in doing over the men collectively.” Replying for the Salvation Army, Mr Hughes contended that the detailed complaints were trivial and not made out. The scheme vested absolute discretion in General Booth. It was never intended to give the men any interest in the land; it would be idle to give them security of tenure before they had proved themselves suitable. The evictions had been humanely carried out. It was unfortunate that well-meaning persons had allowed their sympathies to run away with them, and that irresponsible agitation had forced this inquiry. “These men were getting something for nothing. The complaint of a man who gets a present that isn’t quite as good as he expected is rather ungracious." He ob. served that, as this was co-operation, it mattered little whether charges were high or low, “ because ultimately the profits will be divided among the men themselves.” With regard to the offers made to the men to return, Mr Hughes said there were some men, such as May, the ringleader, they could not take back. “He is an impossible man in any community. His nature is such that his main pleasure in life is stirring up trouble. Some men are too difficult to live in any community. They had better go and live somewhere by themselves.” Before the hall emptied the rejected small-holders went to the counsels’ table and warmly thanked Mr David for his advocacy of their grievances.