18 



THE AGRICULT L' i t A L N EWS. 



Jakuauy is, 191:; 



from agriculture, and its encouragement in the rural 

 industries of to-day is one of the outstanding duties 

 of agricultural economists. JSut before viewing the 

 subject in this aspect, it may be well to enquire into 

 the benefits that are consideri>d to arise from a wise 

 division of labour generally. 



Division of labour in any nnciertaking increases 

 the amount of work done, always provided there is 

 sufficient work to keep each individual continuously 

 employed. Thus there are two conditions for the 

 economic employment of the system: efficiency of 

 labour, and sufficiency of work to he done. One of the 

 more obvious advantages of division of labour is con- 

 tained in the proverb, 'practice makes perfect', and, 

 even in agriculture, the truth of this statement is too 

 well known to require illustration. The second advan- 

 tage lies in the fact that a loss of time is involved 

 when the same worker is continually removed from 

 one task to another of a different nature. There is, 

 however, a compensatory influence in that a change of 

 work lessens the monotony of existence; but, from the 

 employers point of view, at all events, this objection 

 to specialization is considered to be more than counter- 

 balanced by the higher rate of wages which specialized 

 skill always demands. 



I.,astly, one has to recognize in division of labour 

 one of the chief indirect causes of the evolution of 

 labour-saving machinery. The intelligent workman 

 confined to one particular series of operations is contin- 

 ually on the .alert to discover and apply some means of 

 reducing the physical and mental strain which his task 

 involves; this attitude led to the invention of the slide 

 valve of the steam engine, and to numerous devices in 

 the spinning and weaving industries. A similar atti- 

 tude in agricultural labour is greatly to be encouraged, 

 and this leads to considerations of division of labour 

 in its direct bearing upon agricultural progress. 



The fundamental difference between agricultural 

 product ion and the manufacturing industries lies in the 

 fact that agriculture, perforce, covers the broad land; 

 raw material can be brought to the manufacturer for 

 him to work upon, but the agriculturist must seek his 

 work. Moreover, the agriculturist is forced to adapt his 

 work to the seasons which makes specialization in 

 labour a matter of difficulty. Again, he has little 

 chance of forecasting Huctuations in the demand for 

 produce or in the supply of labour, and even if he had, 

 the nature of his work renders it impossible foi- him to 



respond as ■piiekly to these changes as can the manu- 

 faccurer. 



In spite of those difficulties there are forces tending 

 to organize agriculture in .in industrial way. and a more 

 definite division of labour must be one of the ultimate 

 result-!. The more extensive employment of agricultural 

 machinery is one tendency which stimulates division of 

 labour. The improvement of macliiner}' with a reduc- 

 tion in price, the introduction of interchangeable 

 parts, the various systems of joint ownership, all render 

 the employment of labour-saving devices a normal 

 development in modern agricultural progress. A demand 

 is created, broadly speaking, for men who can be trusted 

 with resjjonsibilities. The rapid increase of knowledge 

 concerning general estate administration, the scientific 

 feeding of live stock, the control of plant diseases, the 

 rotation, manuring and selection of plants, and the 

 grading and packing of produce for distribution, have 

 for many years been creeping into the regular routine 

 of the ordinary estate, and this is now beginning to 

 call for practical men of the artisan type with special 

 skill in one or another of these different directions. 



But that in agriculture which lends itself most 

 readily to division of labour is any system of co-opera- 

 tion in which the scale of production is sufficiently large 

 to provide a continuous supply of specialized work. Not 

 only do such schemes uplifo the labourer, but they tend 

 to draw into agriculture men of high administrative 

 ability who have hitherto sought their earnings of 

 management in the manufacturing industries of laro-e 

 cities. 



The modern tendency in established countries is 

 in the direction of running large estates with special- 

 ized labour, or else small holdings on which an owner 

 with limited capital performs his own manual work 

 In the case of the latter class, division of labour shows 

 itself in the co-operative schemes which are necessary 

 for the collection and distribution of the produce. The 

 establishment of co-operative societies, of agricultural 

 banks, of the various central factories for dealing with 

 sugar, cotton and d.iiry produce, characterize the bring- 

 ing of modern agriculture into the state of the more 

 organized industries: and although such concerns as 

 these do not directly bring about division of labour 

 on the land itself, they have a stimulating effect, 

 and certainly put a check upon rural depopulation. 

 Not the least benefit derived from their institution is 

 the fact that they bridge the g.ip that previously 

 separated the agriculturist from the wholesale markets 

 in the great industi'ial centres of consumption. 



