ROTAL COMMISSION ON AGRICULTURE. 



16 Stflemktr, 1919.] 



MR. L. N. GOOUINO. 



[C'OllttHUtll. 



year* which would only recur, perhaps, oneo in 80 

 rear*, ami in that way you get a different state of 

 thing* preaentod? You mean I ought to have taken 

 th lat four yearn ami .neiag.-d tin- profit out on 

 the tlo.i.o capital ? 



9500. Y*, when you are averaging tin- profit for 

 10 yearn, 1 suggest* to you that the proper thing is 

 for you to average the capital employed in the (arm 

 during thoM- 10 years ami also t .i\eiagc tic. 

 of interest? Yes, 1 MI- what you mean, hut if you 

 take tho lost four years, the profit* are what I should 

 call war profit*. 



9591. Yes, and tho capital also is a war position? 

 Yea, but it takes that amount of capital to-day to 

 farm the farm, does it not '' 



9592. 1 am not disputing that. I only say you ure 

 carrying back over 10 years a figure which is only 

 of to-day's application 'f Yes. 



9593. Air. ./. M. ///!/ r.< : I do not under.-.! an. I 

 otnc of your figures. I have taken out the average 

 of your Farm I), which is a mixed-soil farm, and for 

 the first six years from 1909 to 1914 tho average 

 profits are t'7*-S. and for the next three years they aro 

 1,645? A gooj deal of that arises from the fact 

 that at the outbreak of war there was a largo amount 

 of stock on the farm which was realised at war prices. 



9594. At all <-M nix that would not appertain to 

 the rear 1916-17, would it; you would have sold it 

 by that time, would you not:' Wo continued breed- 

 ing, you see. 



9595. At all events that is the position. According 

 to your figures, if the land is let at 350 and 7,000 

 is the capital, the farmer would want to make a 

 profit of 700 to clear himself ? That is right. 



9596. Ypu have said that on page 6? Yes. 



9597. But he has not made that; he has only made 

 402, according to you. I am talking of Farm C 

 now? You were talking of Farm D before. 



9598. I will come to Farm D in a moment. In tho 

 case of C the average profit for six years is 402? 

 That is the net profit we made until we let the 1'arm, 

 only there is 250 rent to come off that there is the 

 Schedule " A *' assessment to come off, which ia 

 860 



9599. That leaves 152 profit:- Yes. 



9000. Yet you say that in order to make ends 

 meet it must yielii a profit of 7(X), rent .'{50 and 5 

 per cent, interest on 7,000 capital, 350? Yes, 

 that is right. 



9601. Then the man is losing money? Unless he 

 is making more profit than we did. In- is. 



9602. \Vlien that man came to take that farm off 

 your hands, you could not have shown him that y>u 

 had made a pinny piece of profit during all those 

 years:' We showed him the balance sheets, that is 

 all. 



960.1. You could not have let that farm in 1915 to 

 n new tenant nt &H) a year when, as a matter of 

 fact, all thos,. years you had not made a penny-piece 

 of profit- -however, the figures speak for themselves, 

 and I need not go any further. Ho A <'o ymi arrive 

 at 7.nm capital;* That is only an estimate. 



9004. What wa.- the valuation of the stork- it is 

 4-H it not : '> 



9605. How do you arrive at tl stiinate. how do 



you work it out? It is just over 15 an acre. 



980G. You do not take it from tin- actual amount 

 of money that '1 - man has got in it? I do not know 

 what he has got in it. 



9607. What did you have in it* I could not say 

 now, but I should say there was somewhere about 

 '<> in it in li'll. 



B. C5.IXPO is ,,.,! 7.K">- \,,. 1,1,1 it would cost 

 considerably mop- to-day to stock the farm than it 

 would have done then, would it not? 



iv take Farm I), that is! I.HU acres ?-_ 1 . 1 1 L' : 

 it is a misprint. 



9610. That '.a, I n let to a new tei t in 1!H8 at 



a rent ot f( 



JH1II H.-i... again, to work the farm |T.ipci ly yon 

 *ay a capital ..f not lw than tl.l.om would U-'re- 

 quin-d. and tint an average profit of 1.5(10 must be 

 made in order I omen re the rent and the interest? 

 That ii to. 



.'. In this estimate of profit have you put any- 

 thing for the cost of management? No, 1 have not 

 put anything at all down for management, 



!Nil3. How much is the cost of management? I 

 could not sa\ what it cost on that particular farm. 



:'<ill What i.:>- the salary of the manager? : 

 not think 1 should state that; why should 1 state 

 that? 



That is part of tho expenses? The man 

 ol that farm .'iad four farms to manage at the same 

 time; he was i.ot managing just that one particular 

 farm. 



9016. What wis the allocation of his salary to this 

 particular farm? There was no separate allocation. 



9617. Taking it per ai,e, how much would it work 

 out at? I cannot tell you at all; there is no charge 

 for management. 



'.Mils. On page 5 you sa\ with regard to Fan 

 " The profits vs shown alx>ve have very little relation 

 to the profits likely to be made during the present 

 year or in the immediate future, as costs are much 

 higher than thoy were in 1918. The labour alone will 

 be increased by r.bout :JO for the present year, and 

 still more for next year "? Thai is right. 



9619. If a mau has to pay 750 a year rent and 

 interest on 10,000 capital at 5 per cent., 750, and 

 wages 300, on your own estimate there is a IOM, not 

 only of 412 per annum, hut of 700 or 81)0 per 

 annum? There perhaps may be this year; as 1 

 said before, thc-o may boa very heavy loss this \..n 



Vet this tenant took this farm in 1!H8 at a 

 rent of 750? You are mixing the farms up now. 



9621. No, I am still on D? I) is C15.OOO capital, 

 not 10,000. The tenant of D took the farm in 1! 



!M ;_'_' Yes, an! to pay the inlere-i ,.n U">.'l) 

 capital he would have to find 750? That is right. 



!(>'_'3. The re-it is C 7.50? Yes. 



9624. That is 1,500? Yes. 



9625. And the wages will be at least 300 mor. 

 year, as you say ? The point about the wages referred 

 to Farm " A." 



!'ti-_'6. Yes, but it would refer still more to this 

 farm, would it not? Yes; 1 cannot tell you what it 

 would be for this farm. 



9627. It would ho (|tiite 100, would it not, for 

 labour? Y'es. quite. 



9628. That is 1,900, and that would leave this 

 gentleman l>00 a year to the bad? V 



! 'I ;_".). Do you suggest that this man. who I suppose 

 is a dii cut and shrewd enough fellow, would go and 

 pay r~~iO a year for a farm on whii-h ho loses r.xx 

 a year? It 'looks to-day as if he is going to lose 

 money on it. 



9630. It is hnrdly credible that a man would do 

 that, is it? If you take the last four years, or the 

 last five years, the profits have been much higher 

 than the average. 



I. Tin' average for the last three years, as I have 

 already pointed out to you. is tl.(>l5? He has taken 

 it in the hope of making something like that. 



:'<i:f_>. 1,000? Yes. 



'.M>;|:|. According to your figures, ho has to make 

 1,500 pins an increase of wage's of 100, that is, 

 1,900, so that he has a considerable loss lacing him, 

 according to your figures anyhow? It looks like it 

 to-day. 



'.Mi:H. Do \iiii seriously want to ropic-ent to tho 

 Commission that that is the average state id tho 

 farming industry throughout, the district that you 

 are acquainted with? No, 1 should not like to say- 

 that. 



IKi-Vi. Are von a representative of the fanners sent 

 to us lo show us this terrible slate of depression in 

 (lie farming industry, while at the same time there 

 are other farmers that you know, or might know, who 

 ; re making more money, ami who really could show 

 us a heller presentment of the rase than you are non- 

 doing? What I was asked to do was to produce the 

 accounts "f the \ Ksiato. nh'ch 1 have 



done, for the Farms A, B, C and D. 



