The Waipukurau Press. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. SATURDAY, MAY 21, 1932. SMALL FARM SCHEME

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXVIII, Issue 125, 21 May 1932, Page 4

The Waipukurau Press. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. SATURDAY, MAY 21, 1932. SMALL FARM SCHEME

“Mr. Coates is like the majority of those who are applying for allotments under his small settlements scheme —he is prepared to try anything once, states the “Christchurch Star,” apropos the ten-acre holding scheme. “But he cannot logically contend that a rush of applicants proves the success of the scheme. Not even the applicants themselves would care to make that claim, and they are in a better position to judge than the 1 Minister. Everybody will wish the scheme well, but it is of very doubtful value because it involves an original outlay of half a million pounds and infinitely more than that afterwards. Even as a temporary ; means of absorbing a percentage of the unemployed it is, more costly > than the country can afford at the moment, and it may end in loss and disillusionment to a very desirable class of prospective settlers.” Opim ions vary as to the possibility of sue-., cess attending the new system of unemployment relief. For our part we . feel that unless the area proposed is of exceptionally good quality it will not be large enough to ensure permancy, therefore involving a likely heavy capital outlay on which there would not be an adequate return. The proposal from Whakatane to place 5000 men on the land under condition tending to add substantially to the relief of unemployment as welj as the volume of production is much more purposeful—in fact—such a measure is long overdue. HARD ROW TO HOE In the opinion of the “New Zealand Financial Times,” the editor’s lot is not a happy one, particularly with a financial newspaper. “The threat of libel hangs like a sword of Damocles over his head, states the “Times.” “No financial newspaper can escape libel actions altogether and do its job. But woe betide the luckless editor who makes a mistake. Even a printer’s error can be serious. The “N.Z. Financial Times” was singularly free from libel actions until the Mercantile and General Insurance Co., Ltd., came at us for £5,000 and got an apology. Since that day, every person or concern that has had criticism levelled has put in a lawyer’s letter on libel. Needless to say, no apologies have appeared and from what we are. told some first class libel actions will be fought. Writs totalling £21,000 have been promised and we shall be pleased to accept them all.' • Libel actions take time and money, but we cannot grudge anybody their legal rights. Every financial newspaper which tries to protect the investing public has to pay for its mistakes (if any) and ,win its spurs.” FARMING COSTS 0 ; '-‘X ■ .i Did the recent reductions in workers’ wages help the farmer? was the question pointedly asked at the an-

niial conference of the North Canterbury branch of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, states a Press Association message from Christchurch. The general view was that there had been little, if any, material benefit to production and the following remit' was passed and forwarded to the Dominion conference for discussion: That as no reduction in the cost of production on farms resulted ft om the reduction in award wages and civil service salaries, careful investigation should be instituted to ascertain where it is that the economies are being held up. In an address Dr. I. W. Weston, lecturer on farm.economies at Lincoln College, emphasised the point that it was the fixed debt and not wages which wa;s the£,principal charge in the costing system.