THE CASE OF THE FARMER.

Southland Times, Issue 22052, 27 June 1933, Page 9

THE CASE OF THE FARMER.

To the Editor. z Sir,—“John Bull” has been attacked by Mr Derbie for his statements and suggestions in connection with the recent sudden rise in lamb prices and Canterbury’s effect on the local market. He may be at fault and Mr Derbie quite right. Be that as it may in this present question but it is well known that the small farmer who is not fortunate in having shares in a freezing company is down, and freezing companies and all trades monopolists are riding on his back. The local freezing companies this past year spent £30,000 on improvements and after doing so paid their shareholders 12 1 per cent, and all through this and past seasons are paying their employees extremely high wages. All this while the farmer and his family are working for a bare existence with the possibility of being evicted if things improve. The latest Chamber of Commerce statistics show that the farmer is only receiving 16/- for what costs him 20/- to produce. There is a trade monopoly over all he requires, a price is quoted which gives everyone who handles the article a paying profit, and he must pay it or leave it. Has the farmer any such monopoly over his stock, dairy produce, or grain? Only last Friday a farmer purchased a much needed article. He had, of course, to pay the price asked. He then asked that they would ring the railway and ascertain the railage. The first reply was 12/-. This was questioned as being exorbitant and he was then told it would be 6/6. This again was questioned, when a third quote was given of 3/9. What sort of business is this from an over-staffed and over-paid public department? The purchaser then inquired of a bus driver ana found he could have it put off at his gate for 3/-. There are two things that are standing in the way of a return to prosperity or a so-called of the Budget” of this country. Firstly the penalizing of the primary producer; secondly the high administrative costs. Too many thousands on the Civil Service receiving exorbitant salaries and too many still in the prime of life receiving excessive superannuations rang—ing from £5 to £2O per week. If several millions were retrenched from the administrative costs of this country and applied to subsidize the man on the land it would go a long way in enabling him to stay there.—l am, etc., “COCKATOO.”

To the Editor. Sir,—l noticed a letter in Saturday’s issue of your paper written by Mr A. Derbie regarding fat lamb prices and at the same time answering John Bull's” letter. Here are two nuts for Mr Derbie to crack: . No. I—Why is it that a 371 b lamb is (or was) 3/- a head cheaper than a 361 b lamb and heavier weights dropped in proportion, when we have a man in this district who has handled the meat at Home and who definitely states that heavy and light weight lambs all go out to the retailer at the one price? No. 2—Why is it that last year the rate of exchange was supposed to be 10 per cent and we farmers that shipped our lambs were only allowed 7J per cent? And finally I state here to the farmers of Southland that the time has come for a freezing works of our own and whether prices are high or low we will get all that is in our fat stock.— I am, etc., PROGRESS. P.S.: The Farmers’ Dairy Federation has been going for a number of years and has proved a success, why should not a freezing works?

"FARMER.”