EXCESSIVE BURDENS.

Taranaki Daily News, 27 April 1932, Page 12

EXCESSIVE BURDENS.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —In your issue of April 22 a correspondent, Mr. C. H. Austin, deals at some length with “Excessive Burdens.” In his attempt to show that the farmer is the person who is carrying the whole burden of the economic blizzard, he allows his selfishness to carry him to such length as to render some of his statements open to question. He says, inter alia, “With regard to fertiliser companies, who employs the railways, for carriage of manures?” Does Mr. Austin know that the 1930 Railway Commission reported that concessions given in the carriage of fertilisers (lime not included) represented a loss, of £120,000 annually to the Government? To-day the railways carry six’ tons of manures from New Plymouth to Stratford for 4s 2<l per ton. This price does not pay for wear on the rolling stock .and axle grease. Mr. Farmer shows his appreciation’ for this concession by giving the motor transport his produce to carry to the seaport. Of all the dairy factories adjacent to the railway , line In Taranaki, only one factory north of Eltham puts its produce on the railway. So if the credit for giving the railways fertilisers to carry belongs to the farmer, little consolation is derived by those who are called upon to make good the deficiency in the working of the railways, and the large amount required for the upkeep of our roads. Surely if the taxpayers are called on to contribute, to ensure cheap fertilisers for the farmer, he in turn has a responsibility, in putting hjs produce.on the railway wherever possible. If the farmer is in sucli. a. parlous plight as your correspondent would have us believe, why has a statement, which appeared in your paper, “that 75 per cent.- of the farmers were in a sound financial position to-day,” gone unchallenged? This statement was made by Mr. Moss, president of tile Taranaki Chamber of Commerce, at a meeting of farmers in North Taranaki. If the same percentage of workers were in a sound financial position, the farmer would be getting much better prices than is the case-at present. If this is not so, how came those prosperous years when wages were high? In my small circle of acquaintances there are several who nave been forced through wage reductions to institute butterless days in their homes, whereby the whole family goes without butter. lam also reliably informed that in a public institution in Taranaki treacle has taken the place of butter for one meal for the staff. Carry this a little further and see where you get to. Get all the people into the habit of going without butter and cheese, and the dairy farmers will find themselves in the same boat as the woolgrowers, who thought they could hold their wool-until they got any old price they asked, but to-day they find out that the march of progress went on, manufacturers- found substitutes for wool, the people got into the habit of wearing these substitutes, and the farmers institute “wear more wool” campaigns.

If all the wages are taken from the workers, we are still surrounded by a social order consisting of railways, roads, harbours, hydro-electric schemes, drainage and water schemes, public hospitals, modern homes, and, lastly, modern farms. All of these were built or developed with borrowed money, which has to be repaid, or repudiated. The Labour Party’s policy on currency is endorsed by the leading men in the Old World to-day, who agree that a managed currency, with stabilised prices, is the only solution of the problems which confront us to-day, as it is impossible to continue a 1932 civilisation with a money system which is hopelessly out of date.—l am, 6tc.,

R. D. C. MCNEILL. Hawera, April 23, 1932.