GREAT NATIONAL RALLY

Taranaki Daily News, 18 December 1930, Page 11

GREAT NATIONAL RALLY

FARMERS TAKE UNITED ACTION ECONOMIC REFORMS DEMANDED POLITICAL SCHEME DISCUSSED About 1000 farmers attended a rally, the first of a Domin-ion-wide series, held under the auspices of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, at Hawera yesterday. Mr. W. J. Polson, M.P., Dominion president, presided. Associated with ; him on the platform were members of the provincial executives of North and South Taranaki and Wanganui. An apology for absence was received from Mr. Adam Hamilton, M.P. x x . ‘ In a speech of an hour and a half Mr. Polson stated that the meeting had been called at the instance of the political committee of the Farmers’ Union to discuss the economic and political needs of the farmers. He dwelt on the reforms desired by the farmers and urged them to stand together in seeing that the reforms were carried out. ' ' Resolutions were passed asking for compulsory conciliation and optional arbitration, a railway board and economy, protesting at the. payment of 14s. a day to single men without dependents on relief work, demanding the readjustment of taxation, decreases in Government expenditure, easier money for farmers, and the abolition of land taxation. Finally the meeting decided to do everything in its power to place in Parliament those candidates who would pledge themselves to support the farmers platform. “ 1 , d 1

WELCOME TO DELEGATES

TOWN DEPENDENCE ON COUNTRY. BUSINESS MEN URGE ECONOMY. .6 : • * / ’ • The Mayor of Hawera, Mr. E. A. Pacey, in extending a welcome to the delegates said he would like the farming community to remember that townspeople and country people generally were interdependent and, there was no enmity between them: Farmers were the “backbone” of the country, but the back- , bone- could not carry on without the aid of other sections of the community. It was up to everybody to keep a stiff upper lip and hope for better times in the future. Farmers. had not all the troubles to.themselves; -business people also were finding it very difficult to > carry on. . . - In adding the welcome of the business men, Mr. F. W. Horner, president of the Hawera Chamber of Commerce, said he had attended the last annual conference of the Associated Chambers at Mt. Cook and he could say that the business men of the country saw the need for economy and ? had learnt the lessons of the last depression ten years ago. It was clear that there was a need for economy among all classes. Suggestions were made for the pro-tection-of various trades, but he questioned whether the protection secured, was in the best interests of the country as a whole. Every argument tnat applied to protection for the wheat industry applied equally to the need for protection to the dairy industry. Mr. Horner believed that there was a silver lining to the clouds. One of the <reat opportunities presenting itself to the country to-day was the opportunity to force the Government to make those economies . and retrenchments which were so necessary. They were all aware of the tremendous losses on the railway system. After all, while a depression stopped the. currents of trade . the law of • supply and demand never ceased to operate, the-needs of the worn were always existing and when trade started to, flow again it would flow with increasing force. . M'R). POLSON'S. ADDRESS. - Mr. Polson apologised for thp absence of Mr. A. Hamiltonl-MJP., from whom, he read a telegram' expressing . good wishes for a successful meeting. Other telegrams apologising for . absence and expressing good wishes were received from the president of the Associated Chambers of Commerce of ’New Zealand (Mr. H. T. Merritt), the president of the Sheepowners’ Federation (Mr. H. D. Aclahd), the British-Manufacturers’ Association, provincial presidents of the Farmers’ Union, the Mayor of Inglewood, Mr. J.*W. Winfield, and the Mayor of Stratford (Mr. P. Thomson). “This meeting,” proceeded. Mr. Polson,; “has .been called at the instance of the political committee of the Farmers Union to which the work of organising such gatherings has been delegated.’ The policy which would be discussed, proceeded the speaker, was not dictated by any sort of .panic,, but by prudence. The soundest qnd best method was to take the farmers into their confidenceand place the'matter before them, for the farmers surely knew their own business better than-anyone else and could diagnose the disease and prescribe the remedy. The disease might need the knife to put it right; probably it would. Political parties might find this unpalatable, but it could not be helped.. It took courage to express one’s opinion and he was going to take his courage in both hands and discuss the question from the viewpoint of the farmer and apart from any political consideration. He was prepared to stand or fall by the verdict of the farmer. The whole community depended upon the success of the primary producer, who exported 91 per cent, of the produce sent from New Zealand. - . r Bad times were world-wide but conditions in New Zealand were artificial, uneconomic and unfair to the primary producer. It was for those things a remedy was being sought. Some who had not studied the situation would ask why conditions had reached such a pass, but it was because legislation had created privileges and shelter for one class against another, by arbitrary interference and by class taxation which «ae bad law. When times were good the farmers had submitted, but they could not afford to acquiesce any longer, for to do sb would mean annihilation. ‘‘We can help to restore the prosperity of our industry and tlie Dominion if we unite, and this gathering is called for the purpose of explaining proposals to ■ that end,” ,he said. “I propose briefly to lay down the policy of the Farmers Union and the remedies proposed. CO-OPERATION WANTED. Mr. Polson invited townspeople, whether traders, workers or business men, \to study the proposals because if they were understood everyone must agree ■ they were in the interests of the Dominion. He asked the co-operation of all sections in order to. remove misu -7 -rstandings and bring about pros-

perity for all classes. The Farmers’ Union programme riiearit a square deal for everybody. ■' > ; ■' The first plank was for equal opportunity for. the farmer. Would anyone deny them that right? Would anyone say other sections should shelter under Customs tariffs, wri-ge awards, subsidies, contributions and other “ground baits to inefficiency while the farming community should hot? As obviously all sections of the community could not receive favoured treatment, then none should receive it; . . ; ’ , t .i,'• Mr. Polson went on to illustrate the position of the farming community by means of a chart showing the cost ot farming and of everything else at 60 per cent, above the mean economic line, whereas the returns from farming-were far below, the line. Until those two lines on the graph were brought , close to-, gether the’ farmers ■ must suffer. If the fest of the :community agreed to equal opportunity for the. farmer was it not reasonable to begin readjusting taxes eo that the' whole burden would not fall on the man on the land, who while responsible. for the whole of the export. production was getting the smallest share of the reward? The duty on wheat must go. Costs could be cut ‘ through. ■ the Custotns,;. thus ensuring cheaper necessaries of life j and. cheaper tools of production. The price of all goods was regulated by the tariff to the-price of which.'New Zealand could manufacture them, and the result was ■practically the shutting out of quantities of British .produce despite the preference. It was useless to plead that New Zealand gave Britain. 10 per cent, as against foreign 40 per cent. It no difference to a drowning, man iT he were drbwped' in 10,WJpf • wter or 40. New Zealand wds -gbiiig the way; of Australia- in spite -of - and was refusing to face-, the' , facts,' tinkering with uneconomic remedies, increasing costs :and' - only j customer.; • . '. He illustrated.; woollen goods, boots and shoes. The value of boots and shoes imported in 1028 (the last return) was £1,177,000, upon which the. present dutv was £300,000, making ,the cost to the” wholesaler £1,460,000. The - loral manufacture of boots and shoes in. 1928 amGunte<i to. £lyltK7joooj or total-cost of £2,676,000— a total . retail cost of somewhere about. £4,000,000. The cost of local boots must be £300,000 less if there were no duty on imported boots, so that the retail cost without the duty would be £3,100,000 or a saving of. £900,000. The persons engaged in the bootmaking and tanning industries numbered 3000, and the total wages about £500,000. It was clear that the saving to the country, if all the boot operatives were pensioned off. on full wages and never did a stroke of work would be £400,000. •. ■/■■:' ' -. ■ . ’■; ; ; :. * “PROTECTION NO CURE.’’ Higher .proteotibri and borrowing would I ‘not cure: The cost' of taxation could be reduced only by readjustmprit. It might mean some sacrifice to some sections but all should share m that sacrifice. One business man had boast-, ed to the speaker that his income was £36,000 a year. Income tax could be steepened as incomes rose, and luxuries could stand more tax. The result of such a readjustment would be what incomes would lose in taxation they woul gain, in cheaper cost of living. ■ ' Lower costs would be a cheaper proposition than high protection. Labour had no need to fear anything from such a policy or from any policy that, would increase.prosperity. Labours tear was unemployment and he ventured to euggest that its goal should be constant employment at economic wageri instead of high wages with tremendous unemP Mr. Polsbn said the-Arbitration Court had restricted and trammelled industry and created false standards and , ideas that brought stagnation to the whole community. In time of Repression it had become, a; curse to the country. Flax workers, according to Press re-, ports, wqre distressed and out of work, but yet, encouraged by the Court, were demanding relief, work rather than-ac-cept less th'an'Hs a day to carry on the industry. ' ' ‘ , ~ „ “That’s half the truth about the flax industry,” ' said an" interjector. “You’ve said nothing, about the capitalisation of the industry and, you’re not game to., “What capitalisation has the flax industry?” asked Mr. Polson. “Nothing! It is exactly the same with the freezing industry.” He referred to the tact that at wayside ports like Wanganui the for lighterage was 9s 4d an hour ( Not enousrh!” said an interjector) and up to IBs for overtime. That union was a close corporation. Its restrictions were worse than the wages. . .. Z OBLIGATION TO WORK. “There is too much talk about the right to work, but not enough about the obligation- to work in this country,” said Mr. Polson. He went on to explain optional arbitration and compulsory conciliation for which the Farmers’ Union and other employers .were asking. Conciliation councils torday were ‘’refusing to, meet because they knew that if'the employer did not take the dispute on to the Arbitration Court the workers would. The farmers wanted. to make It compulsory for employ-

ers and workers to agree before matter went to the Arbitration Court.. The fact was too many were relying on; ■! the State to provide conditions and (“Too many M.’sP.l” cried one in .the. ■ audience) while the producers who were ■ responsible for the fortune of thrjcoun-r,™ try had no consideration; at all.! and worked at a loss. While’ prices could.!’■ not be remedied, there were other direef‘ tion's in which costs could be reduced.. B Railway works which could never.payf™ were being piled up and 14s a day being B paid to single men. The annual ■ loss .; now was £1,500,000 and wjien sent programi ie was completed st-would ■ be nearly £2.500,000. It was clear th«.tg» the construction of railways needed ■ complete The country had. 1000 ’■ miles of railways which were not, pay- ■ ing. Passenger traffic was decreasing all the’time. While interest charges werq rB soaring the passenger traffic was rapid- ;B ly dropping and the staff was being in- ,B creased to carry. the ( lesser number of B passengers. (Laughter). 1 . He was not going to throw stones at;- B Mr. Stirling, but Mr., Stirling was getting £3500 a year arid he was dear am B the money. He was satisfied they had ■ to nut the railways in the hands of ■ a business committee and. give them a ■ free hand. , I Costs of government were too high. It. ;■ was suggested that the salaries of -B M.’sP. should be cut down. He agreed .■ that everyonb must bear his share.. New.y-B departments were being created and.the | cost of others increased. ;Mr Polson B eaid he. believed in education, bub the. .. Education Department was costing hew ■ Zealand £4,000,000 a year,', . while m , | Victoria, where the population was ■ greater and the ..system equally fine, I the cost wae Only £2,500.000. . I 1 Mr. Polson instanced tne growth or y | some State , departments, quoting the I Friendly Societies’ Department which//...; starting with a small staff to- give an eve to that particular, work, grew until it cost the country over £25,000 a year. He believed that ’ department could be cut out altogether; . . , f? ' “UNNECESSARY The Department of Industries «id ? Commerce he . described as recent and unnecessary department whose; chief occupation seemed to be issuing: unadulterated balderdash as bulletins ;, for the information of the public.; Mr. poison quoted an extract from Bulletin :,y No. 10 as an illustration, of his mean? /y ing:— ’ ' ’

-• “Exports of wool,; it should be particularly noticed, only amounted to 553,298 bales, valued at £B,is6r 309 in 1929-30, in comparison with.,;-.:;; 687,873 .valued at £15,923,157 the h previous year, a reduction of • 134/ '535 bales valued at £7,000,000. Thih. accounts for the greater part of the reduction of £8,656,537 in the total r exports for- the year 1929-30. ’ \ , In other words, said Mr. Poteon, the v; department had'taken in this held-oter wool at - £63 a bale, although rough calculation would have .revealed; that the average price of wool in 1929-30 was less than , £l5 a bale. ' ~ The cost of money was too high, Mr. ....- Poison maintained. It must dome down He had proposed for the assistance of . farmers'an extension ,of the Rural hi- -. .. . termediate Credits system backed,.by Government bonds such as were behind.* the long- term rural advances. The system had been emasculated- by vest- ; ed interests. .He advocated that because • the machinery was already in working ,-v order and the associations were, rn'close - ■ touch with the individual farmers. . If such Government support were ■forthcoming the -bonds, could, be sola ; abroad and the money, put in .stock and chattels to assist in tiding, farmers . .. over. He proposed to go much further and create an appeal council with the Minister of Finance as chairman, t®which deserving cases might be, referred by the association through the Rural. Intermediate Credits ■ Board. It was better to-keep bona fide triers to assist in maintaining production than to let them join the ranks of the unemployed. He would suggest that the levies ox ! the Meat and. Dairy’ Boards be. partially ' 1 diverted to provide funds* to .be subsidised £ for £ to meet ..interest pay-. .!•: inents for deserving men. He believed they could find £50,000 a’year in. that ■. wav. ’ The system would be- of special . . assistance. to wooh 'to' enable; them to hold their wool,, at present almost worthless, aidvyould also . be a - great help to dairy farmers. , , ■ ; Mr. Polson regretted to say that the - State Advances Department appeared fa be restricting its .operations, at a .time--;r-when they were most needed. It .warlike a man lending an umbrella in :di weather and -taking it ' back when ram . fell.. .A’ moratorium, in hi? opinion,. was dangeroils unless’.it were a qualified moratorium giving power, to the Supreme Court; upon (application by a rnort-. o-agee to- whom. the non-payment or principal would mean hardship,. todjft the moratorium. While.he hesitated; to suggest Ifa Moratorium at all, in? any form-some appalling cases had al-.jr ready been brought under his men driven, off their farms when their-; indebtedness was comparatively small because’ of : their inability fo‘-pay the .capital hum'. , DEFEATING, OF LAND. The cost of transport and land lax- ;'. ationi which Mr. Polson said. inflicted ■ too great a burden upon the farmer, brought up the subject of de-rating. He declared the rates were subsidising ->■ motor transport to carry national traffic in competition with the railways. Farm-, < ers were enticed to rate themselves fa ? get a share, of their, own , petrol tax to perform work they could do without, which work. was for the benefit, of'someone else. / '. , New Zealand’s competitors .were‘de-- - rating farm lands. The same applied to land taxation, which was unknown in every , part'of the. British Empire except < in Australiai and New Zealand. A pro- ? mineht authority had declared that land taxation was an appeal to the predatory and covetous' instincts; of ;man.‘ Eyery. penny absorbed a portion of the capital. ■ ? value, /The principle/ said Mr. Polson,' was meant'originally to . apply to and building values to pay for services ' ; such as lighting, sewerage, footpaths, ' water, . parks' and police. In the city it was . sound but it had been extended ?gi to country lands, and was now interfe*- 1 , ing with land values. ‘ . . . • ... commission appointed by the Government had reported against it. He g warned his hearers that Labour (“Is." this a non-party meeting?” said an in- y terjeetdr.), no matter how it might dis- 1 / guise the fact, supported'land taxation,.; and he quoted Colonel Wedgwood Benn, whi had dealt with i Labour’s preisejit :'; proposals to tax land. ' A mortgage taxation was equally unsound and many (American States had <-< refused to tax mortgages for fear tho:tax would be shifted to the mortgagor. That wag precisely . what happened ini New Zealand, but in addition the mortgagee- paid the tax. " • TAXATION OF MORTGAGES. Mr. Polson pointed out that the tax was specially aimed at-the good farmer, who mortgaged his land in order to develop it. . • “What does the mortgage tax come? , to?” asked an interjector. Mr. Polson said he would answer any questions later, . . ’ -i The unimproved value tax was equally unsatisfactory as unimproved values..

included a large amount of .values created by individual owners. x Speaking of the Unemployment Bill Mr. Polsoii remarked that although criticism" in the House had been general no one had voted against the third reading of.the Bill. All realised it was an experiment and he and others had agreed,;that the success or failure would depend on the board and its policy. The Minister had appointed his own board, overlooking the nomination of the primary producers, and, as chairman, ap-’ peared to' have influenced its policy. At all events the result was that the 14n a day standard had been established iind endorsed as a principle of unemployed relief irrespective of the condition of the applicant, yet unemployment figures were up to 10,000 to-day in spite of all the-money spent. No small farmeY earned 14s a day, even in pod times, and the result of such a policy would be the tramp of hundreds if farmers off their farms to join the .•anks of the unemployed. He was not a pessimist. He believed that the country could shoulder its troubles. He believed that the dairy industry was beginning to revive, though-he could not say the same for the wool and meat industries. What would happen in regard to keeping up production? The policy must be changed or the result would bo catastrophic. He ventured to say that before the

winter there'would be an enormous in- < crease in the unepiployed relief and the scheme, as at present formulated,'.must crash under its own weight, bringing yhaos and misery. Tariff walls made goods cheap where they were purchased’ and dear where they were sold and the duty paid. Protectionmud high costs had caused untold trouble and the body economic had become a huge inverted pyranpd, the apex resting on the farmer and the base growing broader and heavier. The fact was the Empire had learned about mass production but had neglected to study mass organisation. “X want to say this,” concluded Mr. Polson, “tlie farmers can receive benefit only from their organisation by standing behind their organisation.” Would the farmer demand equal opportunity or would he submit to being v- crushed?. Would ,he demand his rights from Parliament and would he stand up for them ? The people of Hawera, he felt sure, and every other town would support;him. The people knew there z was nothing unreasonable in the proS irramme. r lsiey knew that the whole of the 1028 exports amounted fb £56,000,900:and that the amount of the exports for the coming -twelve months would probably be less- than £30,000,- .. 000. The x taxation budgeted for this year was over £20,000,000 and local; i bodies raised another £6,000,000 in rates. Could the people carry on with the three or four millions which would be' left?. Whore was taxation to come from th? following year? It was clear that ■ drastic and immediate decisions mußt.be-mad®. I, ' ‘ | • COMPULSORY CONCILIATION. In reply to a questioner’. Mr, Polson stated that he had already advocated that Parliament should ba called -to-, , gether soon as possible after the return of the Prime Minister in order ' . to deal with matters of importance' in ■ legislation. , > "■ . , The following motion was then.put to the meeting, and carried:—

Thii meeting, convinced that the egeet pf the operation* of the Induatrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act has been to restrict employment, cripple industry, and create stagnation, joins with the empioyare’ organisations in demanding that a system'of compulsory conciliation and optional arbitration be substituted for the existing law.

Mr. Polson , had dealt A with ' all the matters thoroughly in his speech, said Mr. H. E. Blyde, the mover, but he thought there was justification'in moving the present motion, If, years ago, the farmers had shown th® unanimity shown to-day the state of the country would not be as. it was/ Legislation had'been brought in because other classes in ? the community had had their organisations and the farmers had not. ■ - “We aro not aeking that any section of the community should be penalised,” , said Mr. Blyde, “but we feel that if compulsory. conciliation with voluntary arbitration is brought in great benefit will result.” In seconding the resolution, Mr. Dawes (Westmere) said that 'when the ~Arbitration Act was passed the Government pushed a very vigorous land policy. Crown lands were put on the market and. country taken up under the Lands for Settlement Act. This set up - a great -number of small farmers. •X There were still in the country a great deal more small farmers than big farmers; ' . The small farmer .represented., both capital and labour. He was a capital- .. ist' because he owned the land and a wage-earner in . that he had to work his own land. What were the farmer’s wages? Nobody, would disagree when he said- the 'price of hiswages ? was the price Tie got for' his produce on the London market. There ,he was in competition with countries, which • had a lower standard of living than New Zealand. The New Zealans farmer's wages ? were in open coin petition with thosejof the Poles and the Danes. Yet the wages of-other sections of the ’ community were higher. Some said if the standard of living in l New Zealand, were lowered , the farme'r would get less for his butter in New- Zealand. But the prices of butter in New .Zealand, were fixed the London tariff. z Conciliation meant >tha winning oyer of a person and making, friendfl. The flax industry at the present time, for example, was right up against the wall. Mr. W- A. Sheat rose to ask if questions were to be allowed. The chairman left it in the hands of the meeting and the meeting emphatically said “No.” The motion was then put to the meet-' ing ’and carried, one solitary “No” being recorded. He was the questioner. “WASTE ON RAILM r AYS.”

This meeting expresses its. indignation at the waste of public money in th® continuation- of a railway construction programme which, it has been shown, will add considerably to the enormous loss the railways are already making, and de- . mands th® cessation of new work and the utilisation of the labour in productive employment.

In moving thia motion Mr. C. D. Dickie (Hawera) said that all would agree that there was a great deal of squandering of money in railway construction. He protested against the continuance of this and instanced a case where a costly station had been erected. It was found later that they were unable to run trains into it. Railways were becoming more or less out of date. In Germany the railways were losiucr millions and in England they were° unable to pay interest. They were building one of the biggest viaduct in the country at Mohaka and the land around it was hardly worth farming. • • .... Mr W E- Carter (Alaugatoki), in • seconding’ endorsed the previous speakere views aid " said that the construe-

Cion of new lines should be. taken out of the politicians’ hands to see first of all whether they would pay or not. Instead of building non-payable lines lie believed it would be better to assist county councils to put down good roads. The estimated annual loss on the new main South Island line was £140,000, and how the Government could put down a new line in face of . that he did not know. If they had not built the Ppunake line the country would have been hundreds of thousands of pounds in pocket. Manures were carried on the railways at. half rates, yet many companies were sending their dairy produce on lorries. They must be fair. Mr. J. S. Tosland asked if the chairman would accept an additional recommendation to the motion. He said that the Government at great cost had set up a railway commission and yet took no notice of its recommendations. He favoured the setting up of a non-poii-tical board to control the railways. This addition was agreed to and the motion as amended was carried unanimously.

This meeting records its emphatic protest against the continuation of the payment on relief works of 14s per day to single men without dependents, for the reasons that at present the farmers are unable to obtain labpur at reasonable, rates and the taxpayers are. bearing an increasing burden.

Mr. H. G. Dickie, M.P., in moving the motion, said the president of the Chamber of Commerce had stressed the interdependence of town and country. In Canterbury the townspeople had got belijnd their farmers at the Associated Chambers of Commerce so that a resolution supporteel by the rest of New Zealand had been lost. At Hawera the townspeople realised bow . their interests were bound up with those of the primary producers. Under the unemployment scheme the maximum wage was 14s per day and no higher amount would be recognised for subsidy. Still tho maximum tended also to become the minimum and standard rate. On Government relief works, however, 14a per day had been the rate and was etiil. He had seen the men working and he always felt that 9b per day was a reasonable wage for single men. On relief works the single men could get good meals for £1 a week, leaving them ample. He held that men on relief works should be given every inducement to seek work elsewhere. STANDARD OF LIVING. ’. ’

Mr. R. Campion, (Fordell) said the motion as it applied only to single men would have no effect upon the standard of living. The farmers were as jealous as anyone else of New Zealand’s standard of living. It appeared that the £1,000,000 would not be enough,to pay everybody 14s a day. If anyone went without “14s a day it should be the men without dependents. Numbers of capable men were voluntarily taking reduced wages and it was not fair to them if their money, taken in taxation, was used to. nay men, -frequently less efficient, double the wages. There were no dissentient voices when the , motion was put.

This meeting declared ifs conviction that the first essential in reducing costs is to so readjust taxation that the necessities and tools of production may be lowered in price by means of reductions in the customs tariff, the difference being ,

made up by increased income .taxation, • ( .

In moving the motion Mr. Polson said taxation should be based on ability ‘■to pay, and tha,t was why the Farmers’ Union had declared' in favour of income taxation in lieu, of customs taxation so as to reduce the burden on. the primary producer. Income tax was paid only by those able to bear it. and consequently if customs taxation on’.all but luxuries was eliminated it would decrease the costs to the primary producer and would stimulate production.

INCOME TAX FAVOURED.

In seconding Mr. T- T. Murray (Tokoy stressed the point that income tax would hit all" alike, whereas .cubtoms taxation was the most vicious form of taxation. Not only did it increase the cost of living but it also 'increased the cost of production. • • ■ The motion was carried unanimously.

This meeting demands drastic decreases in all'Government expenditure, beginnjpg at the top and extending in equitable through all grades of the public service,. ’ • . ’ ' ■ • ■ (

In listening to the past resolutions, said Mr. Thrush, he wondered how the country had managed to carry pn. If the farmers got behind -the M.’sP. the reforms would come. ! A great deal had been said about reducing the M.’sP. salaries, but how could. ,they be cut when a “tin-pot” clerk in the town got the same wage? They were all agreed that economies should take place, .said Mr. J. Dentop, Levin, in seconding the motion. He did not agree • with Mr. Thrush about the salaries of M.’sP. The country, was over-governed. If they had 30 M.’sP. and paid them well they would get more efficient service.

tc What would you do with the other’ fellows?” asked a questioner. “Put them on the dole,” said another voice. -

There was the question of the Government superannuation of civil eeryantis. They were given a subsidy of one-third on the fund. Could the country afford it? • ' “No!” cried the audience.

That this meeting, realising that the primary industries of the Dominion cannot be maintained under present conditions unless finance for farmers at reasonable rates and in sufficient amounts can be made available, urges the Government to give effect to the recommendations of the Unemployment Committee of the House of Representatives and afford similar support to the bonds of the Rural Intermediate Credit Board to that which it gives to the Rural Advances Board; also that special provision be made for relief in urgent and. desirable cases along the ' lines proposed by the president: of tho Farmers’ Union from his place in the House.

Mr. J. Cocker (Eltham), who moved this motion, said that finance was the chief trouble to farmers. Before, 1014 the average price for wool for several years was BJd per lb and dairy produce was hgher then than it was to-day. Money was then advanced to settlers at 44 per cent, whereas to-day the lowest obtainable was at 64 per cent, and people were lucky if they could get it at that. All their produce was now down below 4he level at which the 'farmer could- make anything for himself. .The Rural Intermediate Credit Association legslation was intended to assist much more than it had done. The principal reason for it not doing so was that it had not been backed by the Government. The bonds were not signed by the Minister of Finance and they were not as the long-term bonds. Only £.360,000 had been made available and this was not very much to assist (he country. If the bonds had been signed by the Minister of Finance they could be sold on the London mar-

Yet and would bring money to the country. Easily 90 per cent, of the farmers were cither mortgaged or in the hands of mei'eantile associations. He knew of an instance where a man was asked to sign a document which would have meant that the whole of the money from his milk production would have gone to the firm and the man would have been unable to buy a thing from anyone else. If his wife had wanted a new dress he would have had to ask the firm before he could buy it. Mr. Cocker said ho had known of propositions turned down by the central board that had afterwards been taken up by the Bank of New Zealand. Yet they were charged with encouraging 'unsound finance. Did the Bank of New Zealand take undue risks? “NUCLEUS OF RURAL BANK.” The motion was seconded by Mr. J. S. Tosland, who said that the rural, credits system was of very great assistance and was the nucleus of a rural bank. If rural bonds were “O.K.ed” by the Government it would bo of very great assist -.nee in providing money for farmers. The motion was carried unanimously.

“We want you to be with us all the way,” said Mr. Higgins, Matamata, in moving the following motion: —

Thia meeting, realising that rating for reading purposes is no longer a fair burden upon the primary , producer inasmuch as the roads > are carrying national traffic in competition with the railway, demands its abolition and the substitution of petrol taxation; further, this meeting points out to the- Government that the Dominion’s chief competitors have also abolished land taxation as a capital tax operating unfairly and draws attention to the additional hardship and injustice of such a system of taxation in a country dependent upon the primary producer.

Mr. Higgins sad he wanted nothing from any Government as long as the other .interests were treated in the same way. The farmers were capable of carrying their own burdens, but he would ilikc'to see the Government pass an Act keeping the children out of the cowsheds. ° It had been said at Auckland recently that New Zealand • was built

on the slavery of women and children. The farmers admired their wives and children and they wanted to make their lives as happy as possible. One of the things that was going to help the fanners was derating. They wanted to remove what was a tux on the land. Mr. Downie Stewart had said there was nothing better for the farmers to go for than derating. The farmers would support the railways if derating were carried out, and the railways would become a payable proposition. Mr. L. Hammond, Hunterville in seconding the motion, said derating was no new thing. It was an accomplished fact in Great Britain and Ireland. In 1914 £600,000 had been paid by the farmers; now the rates were £0,600,000. In addition they were paying petrol tax. for the privilege of using the roads they had made themselves. Let the men who were using, and often misusing, the roads pay for their maintenance. In Taranaki they were not perhaps very far :, iar with the land tax but in other parts of New Zealand the burden was crushing; it was really a first mortgage on tho farms. A voice: The rates arc the second! Tho only reason advanced by those in opposition to the abolition of the land tax was that it was easy to collect. Tinies had altered and the Farmers’ Union now strongly supported the substitution of income tax. FARMERS AND PETROL TAX. It seemed that the motiqn was inconsistent with the one previously passed opposing indirect taxation, said Mr. D. L. A'. Astbury, Mangatoki, in moving an amendment opposing an increase in the petrol tax. Petrol was much too dear to-day, he said, because of the taxation placed upon it. The farmers used ' it every day and an increase in the taxation would cause another rise in the costs of production. As far as land tax was concerned if it were abolished a substantial amount of revenue would have to be made up somewhere else. Mr. Kelliher seconded the amendment. Mr. Polson pointed out that petrol used for farm purposes was exempt from taxation. It was a pity that Mr. Astbury' had not ascertained that before, putting them to the trouble of listening to him. The amendment was lost and the motion carried, ,

POLITICAL PLATFORM. Thia meeting, seeking equal opportunity for the farmers, pledges itself to stand behind its leaders, and do everything in its power to place in Parliament those candidates who will support the platform embodied in the resolutions passed by this meeting and l undertake to fight for the farmers’ cause.

In moving this Mr. J. R. .Franklyn (Wanganui) said that many problems dealt with that day showed the necessity of such action. As producers they were dependent upon the laws of supply and demand. They had to take whatever price their produce brought on the London market, whereas they had to pay wages fixed by Arbitration. It was essential that they should stand behind their leaders, to whom they must recognise they had not been altogether fair in the past. i One of the planks of tho Farmers’ Union was that they should go into politics, but not into party politics. Some people, however, had the idea that unless they went into party politics they would not get anywhere, but he held that view was wrong, as the facts over past years had proved. He pointed out that certain Acts that had been in existence for the past 20 years had not been interfered with though various political parties had been in power. In seconding Mr. A. P. Melville (Fordell) said that producers must take steps to support the men who would help the primary producer through the difficult problems they had to face, irrespective of party, 'rhe meeting would show the whole Dominion that the primary producer was up against it and must have relief from his .difficulties.

A speaker moved as an amendment that prospective candidates be asked also to devote their attention to inquiring as to the position of export values of produce on the British market. The chairman stated that this could not be accepted as an amendment, and tho motion was carried. “In Mr. Polson we have a sincere and honest president. The more I see of him (he more I appreciate his efforts,” said yir. T, ’l'. Murray in moving a vote ,*f thanks Io the charman at the conclusion of tlie meeting. The pinging of the National Anthem_

concluded an enthusiastic rally. The arrangements reflected credit on the or - I ganising abilities of the four provincial secretaries, Messrs. D. Lo Cren Morgan (North Taranaki), F. G. Seddon (Wanganui),, E. K. Cameron (South Taranaki) and H. Hunt (Stratford). Mr. Camcr n in particular carried out a difficult task viery creditably, and he and his three associates were very warmly thanked, by tho president for their services.