THE AGRICULTURAL. LABOURERS' LEAGUE.
[To nu EDITOR or TES " SPRETATOR."] SIR,—TO the ordinary outsider, who knows nothing, but what he is told or reads, of the conditions connected with farming, and the relations between landlords, farmers, and labourers, the article in your issue of March 2nd must give a wrong and unfor- tunate impression. This article was apparently " communi- cated," so it is to be supposed that it does not necessarily contain your views; indeed, it is almost impossible to believe that it could. When the whole country is organizing its businesses, professions, and trades, it would have been strange had not the workers on the land also organized; the really strange thing is that agricultural labourers have not organized long since, and, as one who has always been in close contact with landlords, farmers, and labourers, I am convinced that both the former would have wel- comed gladly an organization that would have tended to improve the welfare or happiness of the latter.
But to suggest, as this article suggests, that the formation of Agricultural Labourers' Leagues (or Unions) is to counter the formation of the National Farmers' Union, is a stupidly dangerous suggestion, and, I venture to say, is absolutely contrary to fact. The N.F.U. was never formed with the intention of upholding the farmers' interests against the legitimate interests of the labourers. There is no farmer who does not realize perfectly well that these interests are almost identical, and that in farming the old Cornish motto " One and all " is absolutely applicable. The writer of the article in question seems to look on the unfortunate farmer as some greedy beset seeking what prey it can devour. Undoubtedly farmers are having a better time now than they have had for many a long year, but too many people forget the barren years, the neglect, and the shameful manner in which farmers have been treated sometimes in the past.
And if farmers are having a good time so are those who assist them, and whose living comes from working on the land. I have yet to hear a single farmer state that he regrets to see the rise in labourers' wages as now fixed, though there are many far-seeing and very wise farmers who regret that the old partnership, as it may well be called, that existed between master and man on many farms, is fast dying out under the pernicious influence of the teaching of so many of those who advocate and assist in the forma- tion of these Leagues. The further suggestion that landlords and labourers should combine against farmers and miller is simply foolish. Farmers have found it necessary to form the National Farmers' Union in order that their interests may be watched over and guarded, and they realize thoroughly that it is logically necessary that their labourers should do likewise; but to suggest, as Mr. Green suggests, that the two must be antagonistic, shows a lamentable lacie of knowledge of farming and a dangerous wantof common-sense.
I am not a farmer, nor am I a member of the N.F.U., but I venture to say that I know more of farmers than Mr. Green appears to know, and I fancy I have a far deeper knowledge of agricultural labourers.—I am, Sir, &c., HAROLD Wisms, F.R.G.S.
Previous page
