MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



2 September, 1919.] 



MR. CASTELL WREY. 



[Continued. 



them, but if farms were worked on a more business- 

 like system than I think the majority of farms are 

 worked to-day, and were better organised, I think we 

 should have a better class of labourer who would 

 take more interest in his work. There are, in my 

 opinion, two difficulties, one is the organisation of the 

 business of farming, and a better response from the 

 labourer. If farming were organised in a better 

 way the labourer would take more interest in his 

 work, and there would be less necessity for the Wages 

 Board they would not interfere so much. The 

 other difficulty is the question of feeding-stuffs 

 for which we are practically dependent upon foreign 

 markets, and you cannot compare them with the 

 produce of our own home market, in my opinion, as 

 the one is so very divergent and far apart from the 

 other. There is no meeting ground to handle the 

 price upon. 



7687. We do not get very far. Does the cost of 

 wages form any recognised proportion of the cost of 

 producing wheat, for instance? There is no doubt 

 about that. 



7688. They do? Of course they do. 



7689. They form a pror" *ion. Is there any re- 

 cognised percent ge? I should not like to mention 

 any percentage. 



7690. Mr. Ashb>/: I would like you to consider 

 rather carefully for the moment this question of 

 the pedigree stock sale that you mentioned. Wa 

 it not inevitable during the war that there should 

 be some accumulation of pedigree stock in the country 

 because of the difficulty of getting exports of stock 

 away:- Let me put it in this way: In your parti- 

 *ular case although the amount of profit shown in 

 the year 1918-19 was very largely due to the Stock 

 sale, you had been accumulating that stock for some 

 years and the charge of maintaining that stock had 

 shown in the previous profit and loss accounts? 

 Yes. that it quite true. 



7691. It is quite possible, therefore, that in your 

 you had not been having the normal sale's of 



pedigree stock in the two or throe preceding years 

 because, like some other pedigree breeders you found 

 it difficult to sell your pedigree stock during the war 

 period? Yes. I am afraid I influenced my chief to 

 sell the pedigree herd because I did not think it 

 was a business proposition for a farmer. 



7692. Your general position, as vou said last time, 

 is that the pedigree herd is rather a drag on the 

 rest of the farm? Ye<i, it certainly was. 



769.3. And it was difficult in any case to make 

 real profits on a pedigree herd? Looking at it from 

 a farming point of view I think it is. but if you 

 specialise in pedigree stock it is a very fine busin'os-. 



7</t. Although the profits on this sale did affect 

 that particular year's result the charges for main- 

 tenance would 'ome into the previous years' accounts? 

 Ye8, a great many \t-.u-. 



5. Bearing in mind the letter you have read 

 to us as to the principles upon which your valuations 

 are carried out you will agree, I suppose, that if 

 it were necessary say this autumn to disperse the 

 stock of the farm the value you would expect to realise 

 would be very much greater than the valuation? 

 Yes, a great deal. 



7696. I notice, as a matter of fact, that the valu- 

 ation has only increased about 35 per cent.? Yes. 



7*107. Koiighly speaking the market value, assuming 

 the beasts have remained of the same quality has gone 

 up at least 100 per ';ent. ? I take your figure I 

 have not worked it out myself. 



7696. I think this is rather an important question. ' 

 because you do. as a matter of fact, show profits! for 

 the last five vears? Yes. 



7699. The valuation as you have said is quite n 

 conservative one. and it looks as though the valuation 

 only increasing by. soy. 35 per cent., nothing that 

 is likely to happen so far as we can see during the 

 next year or two a regards a fall in prices will 

 affect your valuation? No. I do not think it will. 

 I think the valuations have been very conservatively 

 made. , 



77iiO. S'o that the total results are, as a matter of 

 fact, rather ni-tlcr than an- >'hcwn by the balance 

 sheets!' Yrs. | nnl sure they are. 



7701. Now will yon turn to your costings just for 

 a moment. In Table 1 (a), if you run down the 



rate of wages for men from September to the middle 

 of October, 1917, you have 4s. 6d. ? Yes. 



7702. On August 12th, 1918, it is 9sl. Id., is it 

 not? Yes. 



7703. That is another year ahead ? Yes. 



7704. That is a special harvest rate? Yes. 



7705. You have the figure of 6s. as the rate per 

 day of a horse? Yes. 



7706. How do you arrive at that? I have not; I 

 have taken the local custom for that figure. 



7707. You have not been able to cost your horse 

 labour? No, I have not been able to do ib in the 

 past, but I hope to be able to do it in future. 



7708. The Chairman : On the last occasion you said 

 you were working out the cost and you thought it 

 would come to less than 6s. ? Yes. 



7709. Mr. Ashly. In Table 1 (6) you have 

 differential rates for horse labour, 6s. and 3s. 4d. dan 

 you tell' us how that is? I see it is there, but I 

 really cannot explain it; it is an error, I am afraid. 



7710. In that case why should you make the 

 difference between 6s. for drilling and 3s. 4d. for 

 harrowing? I am afraid it is an error. I had not 

 noticed it myself until you pointed it out to me. It 

 ought all to .have been at 6s. 



7711. That would necessitate a revision of the total 

 figures, would it not? Yes, it would. 



7712. Would you look at rents. I see in Table 1 (a) 

 you have rent at 10s. per acre and in Table 1 (6) 

 you have rent at 5s. per acre? Each field on the 

 farm was valued by the valuers in 1915 field by 

 field and a separate rent apportioned to each field. 



7713. You use their valuation for this purpose? 

 Yes. 



7714. Would you look at 1 (a), rates 2s. 8d. in the 

 on 4? Yes. 



771"). That is 8s. an acre assessed value, but you 

 would not pay 2s. 8d. in the , because you would 

 only pay on half the value of agricultural land? 

 Yes, that is so. 



7710. Management you put down at 2s. 9d. per acre. 

 How do you arrive at that figure for management? 

 Half of the agent's salary and the whole of the 

 bailiff's salary is put in and divided by the number 

 of acres. 



7717. I understand that in the profit and loss 

 account you did not include the management? No, 

 it is not included. 



7718. You have not the whole of the farm costings, 

 hve you? No, I have not. 



7719. If you had, the accounts would not agree on 

 that basis, would they? Yes, if you had them on an 

 acreage basis. 



7720. They would not agree unless you put the 

 management into the statement of expenditure and 

 income? The costings are worked on a field to field 

 basis, and of course for the balance sheet it is worked 

 on the total results of the farm. 



7721. How do you get at the interest on the 

 machinery, for example? I worked it out on rather 

 a rough system, but it is only the way I can arrive 

 at it really. 



7722. t)o you take as your capital value of the 

 machinery just the machinery which is used on the 

 arable farm or the total machinery used on the farm? 

 The total and spread it over the whole acreage of 

 the farm. 



772.'!. I notice you have in all cases " cartage of 

 wheat to station at Is. per quarter." Yes. 



7724. That is according to a local 'istimate, is it?- 

 Yes. It is a long mile and a half to the station, and 

 a Is. a quarter is a fair price. 



7725. Mr. Untrhelor: If you look at Table 1 (n), 

 that is, 10 acres you have got " cutting with binder 

 half day 13s. 64<L"? Yes. 



7726. The details are given, one man at 9s. Id. and 

 three horses at 6s.? Yes. 



7727. Is that a 4 ft. 6 binder? No, I should think 

 it would be a ft. binder. 



7728. Do you really suggest that with one man and 

 iln. . horses you could cut 10 acres of wheat in half 

 a day with sncli a binder do you seriously tate that 

 -in h ;i binder would cut 20 acres in a day? It would 

 depend u|>on the field of course. I do cut 20 acres 

 a dv on sonic fields. 



F 3 



