“QUO VADIS?”

Waikato Times, Volume 118, Issue 19661, 22 August 1935, Page 9

“QUO VADIS?”

(To lhe Editor-) Sir,—At the forthcoming general election there is no doubt that guaranteed prices, which directly hinges on the monetary question, will be the prime factor for consideration. If a majority of the electors, particularly In rural districts, decide against guaranteed prices for produce it will not be because they do not \vlßh to receive more for the goods they have produced, hut because they have been tricked and bluffed Into believing that this method of meeting their difficulties would be in some way either detrimental or disastrous. Your correspondent Air R- G. Young lias ably dealt with the guaranteed price question, Let us ignore political speeches and one-sided articles, widely circulated In order to deceive tho mass of the people, and also with the object of shielding vested interests, and view the whole question logically and dispassionately, Tlie guaranteed price could definitely be paid to primary producers when, and not until, the nation controls the policy to 'issue money and credit. Who -shall say that this cannot or must not be done? Why not? Surely this key to our distributive system must be in the hands of the people. It, cannot be, In this age of plenty, when only the distributive system is failing to function, that \vu arc going to allow it to continue in the hands of a private money monopoly working for self-interest. How are we to trust politicians who tell us that this cannot bo done? Now in this connection it will always he noticed that this monetary issue is carefully side-stepped by supporters of lhe present Government The following instances will suffice. Recently a correspondent, “Raglan Elector,” asked Mr Stewart Reid llirce simple quest lons - directly concerning the monetary issue. Mr Reid dared not answer, lml replied that those questions did not concern him \YliaL an admission!

During a meeting at To Awumutu recently lion- Adam Hamilton, Acting Minister for Finance, tailed to accept a challenge to ten minutes’ debate, in which the iiucslionor declared he could prove him wrong. At ti meeting in the same town on the following night- a dairy company employee, challenged Mr Lnngstone, M.P-, to debate. When the challenge was ’ accepted he, knowing that ho would bo undertaking die defence of a tost cause, was obliged to shuffle out of the corner .in which lie found himself* Monetary reformers have issued challenges to debate this all-import ant question with Nationalist members, including Cabinet Ministers. These challenges have invariably been avoided. Naturally! ilow could they undertake the impossible task of defending Hie present system of socalled sound and sane finance in debate. and still expect to pull Ilm wool over the eves of the electors? I,el, us ' face facts. Tho present supposedly sound and sane system lias been proved a ghastly failure and we have only to rea'ise die thousands who are living in a state of semi-starvation in Ibis land of plenty tn know that this system cannot and must not continue. No candidate who Is not prepared to face this issue mid stale definitely whether lie Is for Or ti gainst ■monetary reform should ~i,,i-j; Hie consideration of electors. The issue before electors is whether no | i bey will allow the conlimial|uu of u financial system which,

a llt rough its failure to hoop pace with Hie progress of plenty, is dragging people to I'urtlior depths o f povorty, and will continue to do so while it is permitted to remain unaltered. Jn conclusion, Sir, your readers aro urged lo note the memorable statement made on January 2<>, 192-'i, by [ho lVight Hon. Reginald McKenna, at Ihe annual meeting ot Midland Bants shareholders: “And they who control Ihe -credit of a nation ’direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people*"'—l am, ole., THEMIS. Ohaupo, August IP, 193r>