24 QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. [1 Juny, 1901, 
finds in framing laws, making regulations, or drawing up a scale of rates to suit men — 
who, while calling themselves farmers, have interests in so many things that have to 
be dealt with under other heads, often being adverse to the farmer's interest. When 
a farmer, who is by nature a producer, becomes a buyer, a miller, and consumer, 
there must needs be a little difficulty in providing even rates where each interest shal] 
receive its just due. One of the first charges upon a Government is to place its land 
so that it can be utilised and will give the best account of itself ; this is done by settling — 
people uponit who, in every respect, shall increase the power of the State by increasing — 
its population, providing for its wants, and in other ways contributing to its revenue, 
Next, that Government should, in every way, make the transit of its production so — 
easy and cheap that, as raw material, it can be placed with advantage on our markets, 
thus ensuring the attention of all buyers. I am not one of those beings who can never 
see good in action or intent in what is done by a Government to whom I may be 
‘opposed. I believe that at the heads of our departments we have men who seek to 
work them forthe public good as well as for the increase of revenue. With respect to 
‘our wheat industry [have given them the credit of carrying it at as lowa rate as possible, 
bavely on the paying side, for the sake of helping us as producers. If, as such, we are 
satisfied with the rate of carriage, what have we to do with its transit after it is manu- 
factured? Why farmers should be turning the State upside down by petitions and 
letters. all headed “ Farmers’ Grievance,” because the rate on flour is high, I cannot 
tell. The Government say, “ We will carry your wheat at almost a loss, but when it is 
manufactured we must make that loss good by increasing that rate, and its burden 
will be borne by the consumer, who is everyone.” The farmer cannot fail to see his 
advantage. The low rate for wheat opens every market. He has the advantage of 
sending away hundreds of bags of wheat at a low rate, and pays the increased rate 
only on the ten or twenty bags of flour as a consumer. If there is a grievance, 
as a consumer he must stand on the same level as others. As to the rate on 
flour, that belongs to the miller, or, more particularly, to the consumer. It can~ 
not be the producer's. The petition presented to the Acting Premier said: “If the 
rate on flour were reduced, the Warwick farmers would get 5d. per bushel more for 
their wheat.’ This is questionable. We admit it would allow the miller to place it, 
say, at Toowoomba at so much less, but we are inclined to believe the shareholders 
would want the extra profit to put machinery in better order or to reduce overdraft, 
&c. Local mills do not give more for wheat than the buyers from a distance. Then, 
again, it says, “ Why should Toowoomba be made a dumping-ground for Warwick 
wheat, thus robbing the farmers of Toowoomba of 7d. per bushel ?”’ The petitioners 
syould alter this by a reduction on the carriage of flour, and then Warwick can dump 
its flour on the Toowoomba market, and where will the farmer’s benefit be then ? 
This petition omitted one clause to have crowned such legislation for the farmer—viz., 
that a special rate be charged on all wheat being carried from centres of production 
where local flour-mills exist, thus helping those mills. For our industry we say, Let 
us rather have localised mills by a heavy rate on the flour than localised markets for 
our grain. ‘The low rate for our wheat opens to us all the markets. If the rate on flour 
is lowered it will benefit. all mills, and then those who have cheaper rates and can 
buy in larger markets will be better able to compete with our local mills, though we 
are producers. If our farmers will attend to the production and the Government 
carry it at the very lowest rates, then it will find its way into every mill in the State ; 
for we yet have to learn to produce as cheaply as do others. The question is—Does 
the rate on flour belong to us as producers, or is it not rather the millers’ and 
consumers } ' ’ 
Our producers will not think; we are here to think for them, and to carry back to 
our centres our thoughts. As producers we have a power. The power is being used 
against our best interests ; for to-day consumption is telling the producer how and 
at what rate he shall produce. We want to direct that power, so I would press for an 
opinion on this subject, that we can carry back not personal but collective decision. 
DISCUSSION. 
Mr. W. Deacon (Allora): I certainly was disinclined to speak at first, on 
account of the tangle which this subject appears to have got into. We should 
first of all eliminate all this talk about Warwick and Toowoomba. The people 
generally should consider the interest of the consumer—the interest of the 
people. When producers produce a large quantity of a given product it is the 
duty of the Legislature to get that product to the people who consume it. We 
produced in Allora and Warwick last year 630,000 bushels of wheat, or more 
than half that produced in the State. We cannot eatit all. All this talk about 
