CORRESPONDENCE

Taranaki Daily News, 17 October 1931, Page 23 (Supplement)

CORRESPONDENCE

BOBBY CALF INDUSTRY. l(To the Editor). Sir, —'I did not notice ‘'Lover of Animals’ letter till this morning, but I agree with your correspondent in pretty well everything. As to the crayfish business, I am not very well aware, but on reading your correspondent’s letter J. camo to the conclusion that cruelty is rampant in a good many avenues of business where living species arc concerned. It has been tho nature of the human race to prey upon some of the lesser live species for ages. As to educating the people to put a stop to the bobby calf and crayfish industry, I think we have a contract, and I suggest it be brought up in the schools, and. the boy scouts would be good material to start on, seeing their motto is cue good turn a day, anil also they are taught to be self-re-liant, observant and all that is manly. Some of the scouts may be Cabinet Ministers in the future, and now is the time to sow the seed. The clergy should take up this matter and preach it in the churches and the girl guides could also be taught to abhor any sport or business that savours of cruelty. I do think there is a ray of hope of the people waking up to tho cruelty business. Look at the more humane way prisoners in gaol are treated cotnpared with the way they were treated iu days gone by, when people who were only caught poaching on some barou’s estate were either hanged or transported in hell-ships to Van Diemen’s Land, and the barons and lords of the land could go hunting over poor people’s crops and cared not a fig for them; the gentry had their sport. That is all done away with now, showing that people are waking up. To herd little calves, just a day or two old, in trucks without food or drink for two days or three is certainly not good cricket and a very poor way of helping to solve the unemployed problem, as it must benefit only a small portion of the unemployed. Last year’s bobby calves would have been about ready for killing now and this year’s calves be kept till next year. That would employ as many men, if not more. Old Egmont is as serene and stately as ever and looks as if an eruption was the last thing it thought of doing—l am, etc., LOVER OF DUMB ANIMALS. Stratford, October 15, 1931. SUBSIDY ON SUPERPHOSPHATE. (To the Editor). Sir, —It was with interest I read the article in your issue of the 12th relative to the Government subsidy on fertilisers and the arguments used by you in favour of making the subsidy available to all classes of fertiliser on equal terms. I trust you will forgive my presumption. in endeavouring to refute the arguments so ably dealt with by yourself and allow me a portion of your valuable space to present the other aspect of the question, which undoubtedly swayed the minds of the Government iu making the allotment of subsidy apply to superphosphate only. At the last meeting of the North Taranaki executive of the Farmers’ Union the president moved a motion on similar lines as advocated by yourself. At the meeting, which was well representative of delegates of every branch of the Farmers’ Union in North and Central. Taranaki, the matter of the subsidy being paid on super only was fully and freely discussed. ’When the motion was put to the meeting there was not a single vote recorded in favour of the subsidy being paid to every class of fertiliser. Personally I consider the executive of the Farmers’ Union arrived at a wise conclusion. 'ln the first place if the £loo,o’oo subsidy granted by the Government was divided among every class of fertiliser the amount of reduction received by tho farmer would be so small as to render no assistance to the farmer, but, if applied to super only, the reduction will be a substantial one and help tide many a farmer over the difficulties which ho is now compelled to grapple with. You have always advocated fostering British trade and tiade within the Empire. I would like to point out that by making the apportionment of the subsidy universal you would be fostering foreign trade to the detriment of our own and the British, as practically with the exception of one low grade of basic slag all the fertilisers imported into New Zealand are of foreign origin. Again, should our fertiliser works be closed down a large number of men would be thrown out of work, and eventually the benefits we now derive from the allotment of raw material wo receive from Nauru would probably bo lost to us for all time, and probably when the countrv again returns to prosperity we would "find our fertiliser works like our freezing works, which had been built and fiiuinced by farmers’ capital, in the hands of those whose first and main consideration is big dividends regardless of the consequences to the farming industry. _ As regards any drop in production, it the subsidy leads to a larger consumption of super in proportion to other manures we need have no fear as all field experiments carried out under practical supervision have proved that the application of limo (on which the farmer already receives great concessions) followed by super has given results equal, if not better than any other class of fertiliser. Finally, I consider the Government to be commended for its action in only subsidising what is a primary industry employing a large number of men, and there will be little to fear that with the Hon. D. Jones as Minister of Agriculture and tho Hon. R. Masters as Minister of Commerce and Industries that the farmers will not receive the maximum benefit from the subsidy. I am, etc., H. A. HUNT. Stratford, Oct. 15, 1931.