SHEEP-OWNERS' UNION

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIIC, Issue 14274, 13 August 1910, Page 6

SHEEP-OWNERS' UNION

—a3ss» UE'JiKiNG rEli..:-[nii::-;T',i AL'DKJL.

In movina he adoption of the report and b;ilaiKe-shc»' at the annual meet-

Inc 'd til" C:M.t-'..hiW . ;: lKep-o'.>-nor;,' !"l.in.i. ;,t. Chr.Mcllur. h. last Wedn"SI'lay, the ,-,-t:,-iiv: President. Mr U . O. ! Adam!. .. : ,i, | -Miat th- rmon's past year had been M Pa,nous. Slicop-im uri's ; terested in the noeo.s-iiv for eombini alien, and he -thought it would be , admitted that the results of a. combination between the sheep-owners of : Canterbury and the- rest of the do- . minion would he. beneficial to shecp- • owners as a body. The system of eom- : bination seemed a, noeessitv in every jwaik of life, and to protect themselves sheep-owners must also combine. Art- ; isans and labourers were probably tlie | first to recognise the advantages of ; united action, but commercial eompan- ■ ips had since adopted it, and combined . for their own protection, llie farmer was strongly an individualist and , preferred --to go on his own." but in ; certain things combination was neecssl.ity. He. was not certain what were the ; rates for selling stock in the North [ Island, but they were much higher ithan in Canterbury, where there wero lanuers' co-oncrativo associations. i That was a good instance of the beno- ; fits of ciiiubination. The difference .between farmers and sheep-owners as

primarv producers :\nd practically pverv husiiu-ss was that where thoi-'p was increased expense the " prima reproducers had to pay it, themselves. The merchants, shipping men and hiukhrs. wlicn iner»a-od cost was encountered, could raise prices. Buyers "in London, unfortunately. could not he induced, to i;ive more for wool and mutton when the producer had to pay more wn<;es and taxes. That difTeronoo mado p.omhipatiop all the tr.oro pecessary. Spoakhie; of the controversy rc.eardiiiLc the draft on wool, he said that sheep-owners had mil thnui:ht much ahuiit the matter. hut liL'.iin's showed thai, it cost \\>w Zealand growers hel.wen L'o!).ir,i I ami C!;n.l!OI) !'iT annum. The drai'i lias all old custom, and arose siiaolv throne]; feullx scales ami hail |rl;i»!i. It was new possible to weiol, iV oo! with perfect aeeuracv, and then; was no reason whv biiyors ' should tenelii; by the draft. Home buyers had taken in> a dictatorial am"! hlull'hi-- altitude", and had fiid that they would ncl lniy if tiie. draft wore ahnlishod, the growers would lie Hs. per hale worse elf ouine; to buyer- - values h-iim redm-ed. If ihai were the ease, he added, surely tli<> buyers v.-ouid vocr'.v<' ihe os. henofit and whv .should they make siieh a fuss ahout obtaining it The article '■• aid that 700 EiirJi>h fn-Mis had pledecd themselves not to buy if • he draft were wit'idrav.-ii, but "rowers had no por-d to take that threat seriously. The firms eouhl pot help luiyiiifr whether fhev wanted to or not, and if growers took a firm stand the system would hn abolished and a proper business basis would he arrived" at" T'iic-v would srt paid for what thev sold and the buvers would pay for what they cot. The draft was really a secret comm.s-ion. It m'eht ho .said that it only involved individual growers to the extent of a. few shillings, hut with other thin?:?, a. pound hire and another there raised workir.e expen-es on a lartre numher of properties from 10 per cent, to 2o tier cent. The u'rovers wore entitled lo askwhen such ibiucjs would .ease, as they were the people ttho had to pay. Coiitinnine- the president commended the work of the Labour Exchange to 1110111hers.