THE FARMER'S MAGAZlNJi* 



THE FATE OF THE STATISTICS BILL. 



We are ineliued to believe that Mr. Caird really 

 meant well with his Agi'icultural Statistics Bill. It 

 read, moreover, as a measure framed in all moderation, 

 and calculated to work easily with those to whom it 

 was intended to apply. Unfortunately, however, the 

 proposition came from the wrong quarter. There was 

 a Doctor Fell feeling about its introduction that it was 

 not very difficult to understand. It is not so very long 

 since the honourable Member for Dartmouth was in 

 something like open antagonism with the general body 

 of agriculturists. As the model Free-trade farmer and 

 special Commissioner, the Country party may have 

 thouglit they had little to thank him for. He is going 

 to put some more cross questions, and will be trying to 

 show us up again, uo doubt. 



1'he signal defeat of the Statistics Bill must be 

 iu a great degree attributable to this. Of the bill 

 itself, we repeat, there is very little to complain ; 

 and on its own merits, we confess, we do not see 

 why such a plan should encounter more opposition in 

 England than it lias done in Scotland or Ireland. 

 But it was made a party question. The representatives, 

 indeed, of the agricultural interest appear to feel far 

 more acutely iu the matter than the agriculturists 

 themselves. Even the leader of this opposition, Mr. 

 Packe, is subject to continual correction when he 

 touches upon the subject in his own county. 

 Almost the only practical farmer examined before 

 the Lords' Committee spoke directly in favour of t)ie 

 collection of these statistics, while Mr. Bankes Stan- 

 hope, who represents him in Parliament, is as decidedly 

 against them. Mr. Ball, again, the member for Cam- 

 bridgeshire, will not have such a system on any terms, 

 while some of the warmest of his supporters stand 

 committed to its advocacy. Still, even the landlords 

 do not all pull together here. There is, perhaps, no 

 man in the House who takes a greater interest in the 

 cause, or who understands the farmers better, than 

 does Mr. Miles, the member for Somersetshire. We 

 can all remember how excellent a President he 

 made of the Royal Agricultural Society. Mr. 

 Miles voted for Mr. Caird 's Bill. " He was as- 

 tonished that it should have met with so 

 much opposition. He was in possession of facts 

 which proved that the agricultural interest did not 

 offer the slightest objection to making returns, so long 

 as they did not interfere with produce and stock." Mr. 

 Caird did not propose to iuteifero with produce or 

 stock. Then, Mr. Henley is in favour of what he calls 

 " pure statistics"— of the acreage, that is—" the only 

 thing that is really valuable." Mr. Caird asked for 

 no more. These, be it borne in mind, are two leading 

 members of the Conservative cause ; both with high 

 characters in their own homes as good landlords, and 

 both with a sound and practical knowledge of the 

 question. They may differ in some minor matters of 



detail ; but, as far as the object anfl the principle is 

 cencerned, they go thoroughly witii Mr. Caird. 



Now, had Mr. Miles or Mr. Henley introduced this 

 measure, we cannot help thinking it would have met 

 with a very different fate. Let us remember, and 

 take example from what has been already accomplished 

 in this way. What was the great secret of success iu 

 Scotland ? Simply the fact of the point being put to 

 the farmers by those they knew and could trust in. 

 It is absurd to suppose the system, if only properly in- 

 troduced, would not work as well here. When ^e know 

 already that on the first time of asking so 'cute a consti- 

 tuency as the Yorkshiremen, ninety-nine out of a hun- 

 dred, filled up the returns, it is idle to question the prac- 

 ticability of such a plan. But unfortunately our own 

 national Society would not make the eflbrt. That terrible 

 " Charter" once more stood in the way. Still, any 

 known man might have done it. We give Mr. Caird 

 every credit for his intention. His work, in short, 

 speaks for itself. He must know, however, that his 

 name is scarcely palatable in a certain quarter; and 

 that, perhaps, few in the House would tell less fa- 

 vourably when taking a lead in rural affairs. 



In a somewhat lengthy discussion which ensued on 

 the motion for this second reading, there was in reality 

 very little advanced against the principle. Mr. Packe 

 seemed to think the farmer is the only man asked for 

 this kind of information ; whereas there is scarcely a 

 calling but has to give it. In almost every branch of 

 trade returns are made. The stocks of sugar, tea, and 

 other articles, are exactly known ; as well as what is on 

 shipboard, and what is to be expected. Agents are 

 sent to America to traverse the cotton producing dis- 

 tricts, and make estimates of the growing ci'op. A 

 shipowner states the number of his ships, and their 

 tonnage— what he gave for them, and what he may 

 have borrowed on them. But no government thinks of 

 these returns singly and separately. It is the gross 

 amount that is required. Besides, is there any 

 business in which the individual detail is so easily 

 known as the farmer's ? Would a landlord or agent 

 go to the acreage I'eturn to know what the tenant 

 is doing? And, does not the village parliament make 

 out its own return week by week, and year by 

 year ? What I have in wheat, you in beans, and he 

 in barley. " When," says Sir Cornewall Lewis, " this 

 question was first brought forward in this House it was 

 met by several lion, members — as it has been by some 

 hon. gentlemen who have spoken to-day — with ob- 

 jections which I cannot help characterizing as par- 

 taking of the nature of prejudice and clamour ; I 

 allude to those objections founded upon the alleged in- 

 quisitorial visitations to which a system of agricultural 

 statistics would give rise, and the compulsory means of 

 information to which, under its operation, it would be 

 ixeccssary to resort. When this question was first 



