Immigration and Other Matters

We recently received a letter from a subscriber which is of particular interest because it deals with questions which bear directly on the prosperity of the majority of the people of this country. Our correspondent starts out by asking: “What are the prospects this year for farmers?” This is a difficult question to answer definitely as so many factors have to be considered but, viewing the situation as a whole, it is our opinion that from now on conditions for farmers will steadily but slowly improve. Manufacturers and labor are beginning to realize that prices and wages must come down if business for them is going to improve. This is a decidedly hopeful sign for farmers, as it means that lower prices will to some extent at least be counter-balanced by lower cost of production. Another encouraging thing is that the value of the English pound, both in Canada and the United States, continues to advance, which makes it more easy for Great Britain to buy from us, and indicates at the same time that trade in the Old Land, which normally take about 70 per cent. of our total agricultural exports, is becoming stabilized. The improvement in exchange of other European countries is also encouraging as it indicates that, slowly but surely, the world is getting back to normal conditions of trade.

Our correspondent, after pointing out the difficulties returned soldiers have to contend with who bought land during the boom of war-time prices says: “Surely the Government won’t push them for payment. They can’t expect a man to pay money when he can’t make it. I think they deserve generous treatment and all the chances they need.” We heartily agree. In many cases the men who went overseas and endured all the horrors of war, came back home to find that there was no job for them. We cannot repay them for what they have done, but the least the Government can do is to deal as generously with them as possible. Our returned men don’t want charity, all they want is a fighting chance to make good.

In referring to an article we had in our Christmas issue on Immigration, our correspondent says: “I can’t see how a grand immigration scheme is going to benefit Canada at the present time. The railways, and especially the steamship companies will benefit, but if there is a rush to Canada this spring, what are the immigrants going to work at? An immigrant can only be an asset to the country as long as you keep him employed; as soon as he is workless he becomes a liability. ‘Oh,’ say the immigrant boosters, ‘we only want farmers.’ Well at the present time there are more than enough of us. ‘No,’ says the agricultural official, ‘that isn’t so. All you farmers want is pure-bred stock and you will make money. Look at the prices paid for baby beeves.’ Yes, sir, look at them, and if all the farmers in Canada had pure-bred stock and were raising baby beeves, the price would be as flat for them as it is for scrub stock, as there would be more on the market than the market count absorb.” Our subscriber, in proof of this contention, then goes on to say that now that every farmer has bred-to-lay poultry, they are producing eggs so fast that if they cackled every time they laid an egg, “they would die for want of breath,” with the consequence that prices for eggs have gone lower, and lower, until bred-to-lay poultry now “don’t pay for feed.” It is well to remember, however, that if there is but little money at the present time in good stock, there is assuredly none at all in the nondescript variety.

The price of farm products, like the price of other commodities, are set fundamentally by the average cost of production - not the average cost of production for Canada alone, or for one year, but the average cost of production of the world, taken over a period of years. The farmer who is most successful and makes most money, is the one who can reduce his cost of production below the average. The use of better live stock, better feeding methods, etc, tends to lower the cost of production, and that is why these things are advocated by agricultural officials. The remedy for over-production is co-operation and better marketing methods, although along with these should go a study of markets with a view to preventing over-production.

Quality production should be the watchword of Canadian agriculture in the future. New Zealand and Danish butter has been recently selling in Canada at a higher price than Canadian butter, for the simple reason that it is of better quality. During times of scarcity such as obtained during the war, good prices can be realized for farm produces regardless of quality, but when supply has overtaken demand and the market becomes more discriminating, only the high quality product, be it beef or butter, finds a ready market, and the stuff of mediocre quality goes begging for a market.

“Until the money returns to the farmer,” continues our correspondent, “and he is able to again buy what he needs, the stagnation of trade is bound to continue. There are lots of things I need right at home, but I can’t buy because I have no money. The same thing applies to every man paying for a farm. In some cases the interest alone will be paid and any man who can pay off part of the capital and interest as well may consider himself fortunate … Let manufacturers forego some of their profits, they are big enough in all conscience. Labor is down and when cement is cheaper than gold, we farmers will soon make a demand for this commodity alone that will help some … There is no use preaching ‘back to the land’ and having meetings and club discussions on how to keep the people on the farms. Just as soon as the profession of farming gives as good returns in hard cash as any other profession, then the landward movement will be solved, but until then the chance of making more in the city will always be taken. Once the farmer was satisfied if he got his food in return for his labor. Now he is ambitious for his boys and desires to see them in a better position than ever he had, and why shouldn’t he? … Let our immigration boosters first have work for our intending immigrants and then, ‘let ‘em all come,’ and create our home markets, which means prosperity for all.”

We have quoted somewhat extensively from our correspondent’s letter because his remarks are very much to the point. It is all very well to tell farmers they should keep on producing and keep on buying, but when they cannot do these things because they have not got the money to hire help or to buy the things they need for production, such talk is likely to be disregarded, and the more quickly manufacturers reorganize their businesses so as to produce at a minimum of cost, and then have the courage to tell labor that they have done their part and they expect it to do its part by accepting a cut in wages, so as to bring prices down to a point where farmers can afford to buy, the better for everyone. We don’t quite agree with our correspondent with regard to immigration. What we want is a well-balanced immigration policy whereby both producers (farmers) and consumers (urban workers) are brought into this country. Labor is opposed to bringing in more city workers because it believes that it will tend to lower wages, but it is quite willing that farmers should be encouraged to settle here because this would increase the production of farm products, and thus tend to lower the cost of living. Normally we export about $80,000,000 worth of agricultural products. Most of this goes to Europe. If the people who consume these products were transferred to this country it would obviously be to the benefit of Canadian farmers. The trouble is not that we have too many farmers, but that we have not enough consumers in our towns and cities.