25 April, 1917.] German Challenge to British Agriculture. 215 



responsible statesmen on the food crisis, it foreshadows a new policy 

 for stininlatin": and developing Britisli ajiriculture. Such a policy will 

 doubtless take into account both war-time requirements and the require- 

 ments of peace. 



Obligations on the Farmer and the State. 



In war time there is an obligation on the jiart of the farmer and 

 an obligation on the part of the Stale. The farmer must raise the 

 productivity of his land to the highest jinssible pitch of development 

 with the capital, labour, and equipment at bis command. The State, 

 on its side, should give tlie farmer reasonable encouragement and, as 

 far as possible, organized assistance with respect to the factors es.sen- 

 tial for production. Lord Selborne, in an appeal for increased produc- 

 tion, shows the obligation resting on the farmer. " You have," said he, 

 " something more on your shoulders than your own business to-day. 

 You are no longer individual farmers making your owti fortunes or 

 losing them. You are the trustees on i/oiir oh7i land to do your best for 

 England. You have your duty quite as clear and as definite as the 

 captain of a cruiser or a colonel of a battalion." 



Germany prepared for Armageddon on an agricultural as well as 

 a military basis. The State impressed on the agrarians that their 

 obligation to the Fatherland ivas to make Germany agriculturally self- 

 contained. 



On the other hand, the State, by adopting an economic policy 

 favorable to agrarian interests, and developing a thorough and compre- 

 hensive system of agricultural education, fulfilled its obligation to the 

 farming community. 



The results we have seen. Germany has surpassed Britain in crop 

 prndnclinn, live stock production, and in man-carrying capacity per 

 unit of area. 



Why Agriculture in Britain Lagged Behind. 



TIk' question now is whether Britain will organize and develop her 

 agricultural resources and re-establish the leadership in agriculture 

 that was once hers, l^either in respect to richness of soil, suitability 

 of climate, nor in individual effort is Britain inferior to Germany. 

 But in respect to organization of her agricultural forces and resources 

 she has lagged behind. She has regarded agriculture as a sort of indus- 

 trial step-child, with its needs subordinated to those of commerce and 

 industry. Germany, on the other hand, realized the danger of becom- 

 ing over industrial, and set to work to devise an elaborate set of 

 machinery — administrative, educational, and commercial — for the pur- 

 pose of leading, teaching, and financing her farmers and so developing 

 the full resources of the State. 



In comparing the systems of agriculture in Britain and Germany, 

 the outstanding point of difference is the extent to which the plough is 

 used. Taking the average of all farms in the two cotintries, we find 

 that on the average 100-acre Briti.sh farm approximately 30 per cent, 

 of land is devoted to crops, and 70 per cent, is devoted to grass land. 

 On an average the 100-acre British farm has 70 acres devoted to grass, 

 20 acres sown to cereals, 7 acres to roots and legumes, IJ acres to pota- 

 toes, and i acre to fruit and gardens. 



