THE SLAUGHTERMEN

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXV, Issue 10713, 3 February 1913, Page 5

THE SLAUGHTERMEN

ATTITUDE OK THE LARGE COMPANIES. A U.N'iaN"sErRETAKY'S VIEW. Mr J. H. Bishop, of the XV, of the Slaufthter«n intone witliun Wropm*mta: vo on Saturday, extho opinion that, the decision JJX in Wellington on ?'-7,'- .«,■•'•! have a VW'V far-reuch-1-riday wou.d u< u » •' f «- ff i » in,, "Sir George Chiionl, S ail Mr Uisliop, "endeavours to make H*pp,urthat'th3 companies «* in their .^oa. solely by « isiro bo consent the xnterestg of the. former. He e wtes thatif the ,j,«»an«ls of the men «« * U aiuiunl out |ay of notles* than £IOO,«K) will bt» involve, and that U hu.Dc of this sum will ultimately com* ™to! iho-potkotsof the community. I do not know how he drives at his figures, OT hasis of tho increase «t Waingawa. I should say that the total outlay >o fci,. -i., extra waives arc conr-erned, beVimfl." 'what has been offered, will bo *ot more than £IO.OOO per year. ■Wh«w does the other i£Bo,Oop come sa* T ii«*T«j with Sir George that any made will cwno out of the -n'.r.ketx of tho farmers, "ho experience in tho past has shown that if a tHWcossion of one halfpenny por head ■■i* jnado to tho men, the farmer has -so pnv probably, one shilling per head ThivH. no doubt, accounts for tho high dividends paid to sharehold--ws, ami 'the largo reserve funds posby tho big companies. I will put' t'h'ft question- .straight to the farmers: Can they not wo that these hV c-onm-ipio-s are exploiting both ■them and the workers? Tho determination. of those companies to el<«e tho works at the present time involve vh" farmers in a much bigger loss than that stated by Sir George Clifford. Thcv will probably lose the whole profit of a c/\n«on, which will amount to wnsido.rnMv -more than th© £IOO,OOO. And what "will the companies thomlose? 1 am-informed, on what I Jx-ilovo to he reliable authority, thnfc the eomoan ; cs will make a pood deal more than they lose by the clos■;u..t dwn of the -works. But that is rart Hie point, so far as the men are concernrd. We should Tike to know •If a hid lot. of the farmers has been taken to see if thov are favourable -to Ireinsr a season.. 'The Farmers' Union Executive has stated that it eufhe action of ' the companies. "Rut bow 'is the executive composed? Is there'one solitary member of tho ■oveoulive who has sheep for export this season?: Why has.taw. resolution. passed by the Wairarapa. branches of flip Farmers' Union, recommendin:; tTio pay merit of 30s per hundred, not. T>o<mi 'roijffminicated ' to Sir | George Clifford ? Tt seems to me that the companies have had no desire to nwet ■the men from the very beginning. Tiier n-ro out to crush the Union, and that is plain from the free labour proposals of Friday. But they"-a re. going to make the 1 : farmer pay every time. : T quite agree'with'Sir George Clifford, that tho frozen meat industry is one organised machine, and that every department should receive a proportionate profit. Does Sir ■George seriously assert that either tho fanners, or the workers have received a fair proportion of the profits in the past? And what of the torsos? Is it fair that the companies, which" have received more than their fair share of the profits,' should (dip •out at the back door and escape all the losses, leaving the unfortunate farmer and tho men to carry the baby? Tho farmers are dancing to a very pretty tuno that is being piped by the close corporation that regulates tho price nfVfats a« well .as of wages. The free labour proposal is very fine and large. Does the farmer realise that '■he stands to lose heavily by the employment of indifferent workmen? Is he prepared to take the risk of his meat 201'ng on to the London market in-such a condition tb<i+. i+« Trade is reduced from first-class to third class? And th°n. supposing free labourers and iodifferent labourers are found — and T doubt very much that they will he—what w-iH 'happen ?"Mv opinion ;?. that it will be the heginning of one of the greatest, upheavals that this Dominion has ever seen. The Wsiiht strike will be only a cireiimstnneo compared with it. Sir George Clifford says that" tho companies .pro hound to defend the producers' from an inequitable expense. He has fail<s to "show the extra expense would be if the men were to receive 30s per hundred, and he has utterly foiled to show that the expense would he inequitable. He says that the <tompanie.s want to prote<:'t tho work-ers'-f-rom ah inequitable. adjustment of payments. He has failed to *how that the payment asked > by 'the .slaughtermen is inequitahlo. We call the other employees, and tho workers and Arbitration Court of Australia to witness that it is not. The sum and substance of the companies' attitude is contained in Sir Georgo's > very frank, remark that tho companies are out to defend themselves from an expenditure which would prohibit tiie maintenance of their institutions in a fitting condition for their important functions. That is the whole point. The companies, not satisfied with a fair thing, are anxious -to squeeze the iarirtera a" little, morel Their 1 important functions, it seems to me, are to "keep down ■■wages,- keep" .dtfwn the , price of; istoek. keep .up -the dividends' •of. up ■.-huge reKeiTes. „I can forgive Sir. George for his inconsistency when, in one. breath; he says he wishes to protect the companies, so that they may bo able to perform their 'important functions,' and in the next .say® that tho bulk of that mysterious £IOO,OOO. loss would come out of, .the pockets of the farmer;; but I. cannot excuse him for treating the farmer a.s though he were a schoolboy and the workers as though they were fools. Tlte not ttohool-children. The work or s are not