274 



THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



for it. Piece work appears to be desirable for tlie following 

 reosons : —1st : It enables the farmer to get his work done 

 more expeditiouslj', and at the proper season, with less super- 

 vision on the part of the master. 2nd : That, generally, it 

 is lesB expensive than day work, and the master pays for no 

 more than is done. 3rd : That, regulating wages Ly the 

 quantity and quality of the work performed, is an incentive 

 to industry, and affords greater scope for the exercise of 

 skill, thereby giving the industrious and skilful man his 

 legitimate a.lvsntage over the lazy and indifferent one. 

 4th : By placing higher wages within the reach of the 

 labourei-. the temptation to tbe best of oui rural population 

 to leave farming work for other spheres is Lsscued. I 

 would here remark tliati consider it essential to the sjstem 

 working properly for both master and man, that the price. *o 

 be paid should be fixed either before the work is com- 

 menced, or, at most, after the men have had one day's trial 

 And here, gentlemen, although 1 may be travelling some- 

 what out of the record, I would observe, in conclusion, that 

 I am not one to agree with those who speak harshly of the 

 English agricultural labourer. I am often surprised — know- 

 ing, as I do, that they are in many cases used as machines — 

 to have as much as possible taken out of them, and then 

 turned aside ; and, considering the wretched and comfort- 

 less hovels to which many of them have to return after a 

 hard day's work, with many and severe piivations, known 

 only to those vvho go upon errands of mercy among them — 

 I say it is a wonder to me that they are generally such an 

 honest and well-conducted class of men. 1 have found, in 

 the main, that those who are treated with kindness and con- 

 sideration appi'eciate it, and evince their gratitude by taking 

 .1 greater interest in their master's concerns. i\Iany little 

 acts of kindness may be shown to themselves and families, 

 that will cost their employers comparatively little, while at 

 the same time it may afford them much comfort, and con- 

 vince them that you are anxious to promote their social 

 welfare. I have lately real with much pleasure one or two 

 articles in the Mark Lane Exprcsi), relative to the Sunday 

 work of the faim. There is, no doubt, much more done than 

 need be; a little forecast on the Saturday, and extra help 

 on the Sunday morning for an hour or two, wouUl prevent 

 this. I am aware some men like an excuse for not attend- 

 ing a place of worship ; but it behoves us as masters as far 

 as possible so to arrange our work that the blame may not 

 rest with us. The employment of boys on the Sunday can- 

 not for a moment be defended. Many a man has traced 

 his downfall to his youthful occupation of field-keeping on 

 the Sunday. It is much better, and is carried out by many 

 farmers, to employ men for this work — one to take the 

 morning, and the other the afternoon. By this method they 

 each have part of the day for public worship. The articles 

 to which I have alluded also recommend very highly the 

 distribution amongst pur labourers of that most useful and 

 interesting periodical, the British Worknum. Having 

 adopted for some years past this practice myself, T join the 

 writers most cordially in their recommendation. I have 

 found the distribution to be attended with a good moral 

 effect upon my labourers and their families ; and although 

 they may not adopt total abstinence views, yet the reaJing 

 of these periodicals, illustrated with such beautifully exe- 

 cuted woodcuts, tends to check that inordinate love of drink 

 which is the ruin of our rural population, and has fostered 

 a desire to cultivate more provident habits. But whilst I 

 advocate and commend a kindly feeling towards the em- 

 ployed, we must not forget that neither charity, philanthro- 

 py, nor other good feelings of the same clsss, will enable 

 farmers to pay labonrerfs good wages ; nothing but good pro- 



fits will, in the long run, enable us to do this ; and good pro- 

 fits can only be obtained by a close adherence to the well- 

 known maxims and laws of business. 



Mr. P. H. Frere ^Cambridge) said he was sure every 

 member of the Club would feel under deep obligation to Mr. 

 Howard, for the great piias which he had bestowed on the 

 preparation of his introductory paper (cheers). He had him- 

 self come there with a strong impression of the great import- 

 ance of piece-work as the only practical test of the cost of 

 labour. Never was there cheaper or more economical matmal 

 labour on the land than that which had been done in the nine- 

 teenth eeutury by gangs of English navvies, who were paid 

 entirely by piece-work. He might contrast their work with 

 that which was done in Ireland duiing the famine a few 

 years ago, when the ordinary rate of wages was 8d. per day, 

 it being a question whether it should not be raised to lOd. or 

 12d., to enable the people employed to keep body and soul 

 together. From what he saw of the labour performed in Ire- 

 land at that period, he was convinced that there never was a 

 dearer labourer than the Irishman receiving 8d. a day. Until 

 they came to teit the cost by piece-work, they could not 

 possibiy tell whether labour in a partictilar district or neigh- 

 hood were cheap or dear. At the time to which he referred, 

 drainage was being introduced in Ireland, and although wages 

 was but 8d. a day, the actual cost of drainage per acre was 

 two or three times as great as it was in this country, where 

 wages were from 20d. to 23. a day (Hear, hear). 



Mr. H. Trethewy (Silsoe, Ampthill) agreed with the pre- 

 ceding speaker, that they were all very much indebted to Mr. 

 Howard for introducing the subject as he had done. The 

 gentleman who sujgested it for discussion declined to bring it 

 'forward. The committee, however, thought it so important, 

 that they decided upon retaining it on the card, taking their 

 chance of being enabled to induce some one to undertake it. 

 Mr. Charles Howard having been appealed to, aa a gentleman 

 who was likely to do justice to such a topic, he responded to 

 the invitation, and the paper which he had just read would 

 convince anyone that the committee acted with sound discre- 

 tion in placing the matter in his hands (cheers). In esti- 

 mating the coat of labour, they must all feel that they had 

 d fficulties to contend with, and that the difficulties were in- 

 creased by the circumstances of different customs prevailing 

 in different counties. For example, in some districts it was 

 customary to give the labourer a certain amount of beer or 

 cider — a practice to which Mr. Howard adverted — in addition 

 to money, and it was import.ant to ascertain whether or not 

 beer or cider was given in the generality of cases. It had 

 been objected to piece-work, that it required more supervision 

 than day work. For his own part, he was of a contrary 

 opinion (Hear, hear). He thought it was much more easy to 

 check piece-work than day-work (Hear, hear). That higher 

 wages would almost always be earned by the former than by 

 the latter, there could be no question. At the same time, 

 though higher wages were paid, it did not follow that the 

 work would be more costly to the farmer who paid them ; oa 

 the contrary,- he might get a given quantity of work done 

 cheaper. It would be easy to elucidate that by example. 

 Draining might cost 9d. or lOd. per pole, if the work were 

 done by the day, and only 8d., if it were done by the piece. 

 In the latter case the labourer would earn more money than in 

 the former, and yet the work would cost the farmer less. 



Mr. J. B. Spearing (Moulsford, Wallingford), after ac- 

 knowledging the practical value of Mr. Howard's paper, said 

 as a farmer he felt the desirableness of having as much work 

 as possible done by piece ; but, as they all knew, there was a 

 great deal of work that could not be done ia that manner 



