Economics of the Size of Farms 157 



in their spare time; or they may take passengers to and from market 1 , 

 or into the neighbouring towns, covering by this by-employment what 

 they lose through their incapacity to give full employment to their 

 beasts. But such by-employments can only be undertaken by 

 allotment holders, and not by the small farmer, whose holding will 

 claim the whole time of himself and his family. And even allotment 

 holders cannot be sure of fully compensating themselves in this way 

 for the necessary expenditure on their horses. In districts where 

 small holdings are common, for instance, there is no sufficient demand 

 for this superfluous horse-power. In such cases the small agriculturist 

 tries if possible not to keep a horse at all. He gets his ploughing 

 done by some neighbouring farmer. A large farmer will often do this 

 for him at cost-price. But naturally he has to wait until his neighbour 

 has done his own work, with the result, very often, that his holding is 

 ploughed in wet weather and sown at the wrong time 2 . A small 

 farmer 3 holding 40 acres told the present writer that he had at one 

 time eight acres of arable, but had given this up, because the necessary 

 horses cost too much in view of his rent. Small patches of arable 

 could only pay, he said, if the farmer had other work for the horses 

 on the roads. The case is altered, of course, when the horses are not 

 required in the first place for plough-work, but for carrying the produce 

 of the holding to market, perhaps daily, or several times a week. 

 In such cases it will pay the farmer to keep one or two horses : 

 ploughing will be a mere by-employment for them, their chief work 

 being the carrying business. Thus in giving evidence on the small 

 holders of Shropshire Mr W. H. Lander stated that they kept 

 horses for the purpose of carrying poultry to market and of taking 

 passengers, and also used them in the actual farm-work. "If he has 

 to hire a horse to plough his ground of course that alters the question 

 altogether, for if he has to pay for horse labour it would very soon 

 take away all the profit 4 ." On the other hand, as the area of the 

 holding increases the relative number of horses required decreases. 

 The small arable farmer holding 20 acres needs as many horses as 

 one holding 40 acres, for, as has been seen, not till the latter area is 

 reached can two horses find full employment. An arable farm of 

 80 acres, under ordinary circumstances, will not require more than 

 four horses ; while one of 160 acres will only require six 5 . Statistics 



1 E.g. Report of 1894, qu. 33,310. 2 Read, op. cit. p. 9. 



3 Mr Ackland, of Long Bennington, near Newark, Notts. 



4 Report of 1894, qu. 33,298 ff. 



6 According to Mr Davis of Pensaxt and Mr Selby of Epworth (Lincolnshire). Mr Rider 



