NOTES AND COMMENTS.

Tuapeka Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 4898, 9 October 1901, Page 2

NOTES AND COMMENTS.

On tbe whole the first conference of the

county representatiie farmers' union tives of the New 'conference. Zealand Farmers'

Union may be considered a success. Mistakes naturally enough were made, though not ot a serious character, but no doubt the experience gained will prevent their repetition on future occasions. Perhaps the most obvious mistake was the tearfully overloaded agenda paper presented to the , meeting which utterly precluded time for thoughb and left no time for intelligent discussion, and was no doubt responsible for a number of the random, if not very foolish, statement made. A time limit is certainly necessary on the speeches of members and equally so is some restriction with regard to the number of resolutions that a member should be allowed to propose. If such a course were adopted it might be possible to hope for resolutions of a more sensible and useful character. It seemed as if some members were only concerned with the number of motions they brought forward being entirely indifferent as to their reasonable applicability to the practical conditions of the colony. But this is a matter for which a remedy may be easily found in the future. Of the collective intelligence ot the Conference aud its practical capacity for dealing in a sensible manner with those questions affecting farmers and the great industry ihey represent, there can be no doubt whatever. If the Conference accomplished nothing else it showed that farmers have clear and comprehensive ideas on all the leading public questions and require only the opportunity which the n9w organisation provides to give forcible . ventilation to- their grievances and show the manner in which they should be redressed. There is one lesson tho Conference haa , taught which it politics in the would be well, in conference.- the interests of the ■ Union, fchafc farmers should not overlook or forget, that is the wisdom of correcting a tendency on the part of their delegates to gratify the desire on every opportunity of having what is known as a " fling " at the Government. There was more than one instance of this disposition during the cour-se of the proceedings i and nftn a ' weak or yielding chairman, judging ' from the rancorous spirit displayed by a few of the delegates, it would have taken ' even a more pronounced form. This, ' from the outset, has been the rock on j which, it was feared, the Union might , come to shipwreck. Events have , shown that this fear was entirely juati- i fied. And hence the necessity for I branches exercisiug the most careful * circumspection in the selection of their representatives. " State farms," said ■ One delegate, " were a failure; be bad j known of one boy who had been sent , from his district to one and he had only < learned to smoke and drink." Very 1 logical this. As an argument to illus- < trate the worthlessness- of the boy it ! might be fairly considered sensible, but j aa an illustration of the uselessness of ; State farms it was entirely unconvinc- '. ing. .but more unpardonable was the i offence o* the delegate who said " the ' Government had established poultry \ farms in various districts and imported horses and bulls, but this was all done i for a purpose : to make the farmers be- i lieve they were doing a lot for them." | This was malignant to a degree, aud it is. * hardly to be wondered that it called t forth a sLrong remonstrance on the part ot another delegate, as well aa a reproof I from ihe chairman. A. similar spirit < was displayed by the same delegate * when be stated that " the Government j last year reduced the duty on kerosene, ( but the consumers still paid as much for * t

it as ever. The same thing occurred in regard to tea, but they still paid the same price for it, and the middleman made the extra 'id per lb which was taken off the duty." It ia unnecessary to aay that thia statement is grosaly inaccurate, and ia unfair to the " middleman," otherwise the storekeeper, whom it is sought to make a scapegoat of in order tliafc the Government may be again v got at.'' Statements of this kind must inevitably destroy the influence of the Union and, if persisted in, red ace the proceedings of the Conference to the level of a fa*-ce and ultimately lead to the shipwreck of the organisation. There mast, in the ordinary course of things, be many matters advocated by the Union contrary to the avowed policy of the Government, and if open antagonism is to be avoided, and it is desirable that it should be, the bifctor partisan or political malcontent - spirit should be absent from the proceedings of the Union. Sot if that; is impossible ib should, at all events, not show itself in the offensively aggressive , spirit of which a few instances have jusfe^. been given. ""*" It will, no doubt, surprise many farmers , in this district to kabisits at ihe discover that a ma- . oonpbrencb. jority of representative farmers are strongly opposed to any interference - with the law as it is i^d ministered and©* tbe Babbit Acb, Against Mr Hogg's .amendment to the Rabbit Act, which would materially restrict the power of the Inspectors, the Union Conference ■ ab Milton last week emphatically recorded its dissent. Perhaps, however, ,. a better estimate could be formed of the value of the opinion of the majority at the Conference if something were known of their status as farmers — whether they were large or small landholders. The conclusion that they belonged to the former class appears to be warranted by the statement made by one ot the objectors to the amendment in qaestiou that '* the whole trouble was due to those ignorant cockatoos who allowed the rabbits to overrun tho property of neighboring landholders." Bat however this may be it must be admitted that a very strong point was made by Mr Buciiland in favor of the Acb in its present state when he said " there was only oue Inspector, and it was hopeless to expect that he could obtain a conviction if the case was tried on a question of preponderance of evidence." This is a very striking summary of the position as ib would be uuder conditions that placed a landholder in a rabbit prosecution on an equal footing with the iuspector as regards the weight and bcope of evidence tendered, Let us suppose, then, that the inspector was overweighted, as he certainly would be very frequently, what would follow ? There can only be one answer : There would be (ewer successful prosecutions, and there would be, ib may be fairly assumed, relaxed effort among farmers. Terror of the law, and nob a sense of duty or an intelligent understanding of his own interests is ab present the influence ia very many cases that induces the farmer to apply himself energetically and with sotn9 degree of system to the destruction of the pest. We have proof of thii iv the case of the small birds which, though they admittedly do a vast amount of damage, are not made the object of any systematic method of destruction. Indeed, we aware that farmers will nob eveu distribute poisoned grain that has been given to them free of cost. It therefore certainly does seem that without a compulsory law which always ensures that the inspector will bo " top dog " in a prosecution we might calculate on haying the rabbits, like tho poor, always with us."