MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



61 



17 September, 1919.] 



MR. H. ARMOUR and MR. G. G. MERCER. 



[Continued. 



10.858. Mr. 1'arker: In reply to Mr. Cautley you 

 said that the average yield for wheat, barley and 

 oats on your farm was rather above the average of 

 the yields in Scotland? Yes. 



10.859. Are the figures suggested on Table No. 1 of 

 your precis for the minimum prices based on the 

 experience of your own farm or on the average yield 

 in Scotland? The experience of my own farm. 



10.860. Then the average yield in Scotland being 

 less than your own farm, these minimum prices re- 

 quire to be revised ? Yes. 



10.861. What revision would you suggest? You put 

 wheat at 58s., based on your own experience. What 

 should that figure be if based on the average yield in 

 Scotland? In that case wheat would possibly be 

 taken at four quarters, and barley would be taken 

 at four quarters. 



10.862. What would that raise the figure to? I do 

 not know, but it can be worked out. Then oats would 

 be five quarters. 



10.863. In each of the figures you have given for 

 wheat, barley and oats, you are one quarter above the 

 average? Yes; that is about it. 



10.864. So these figures want reducing by one 

 quarter? They would. 



10.865. Mr. Nicholls: I wanted to ask you, Mr. Mer- 

 cer, whether the directors of the Chamber are practi- 

 cal farmers? (Mr. Mercer): I think nearly every 

 director is a practical farmer. 



10.866. And engaged in the business? Engaged in 

 the practice of agriculture. There are one or two 

 perhaps not, but the great majority are. 



10.867. With regard to the potato lists, when we get 

 the further information, if you do not mind, I would 

 like to know the reason for the contrasts between 

 Ayrshire and Forfarshire with regard to the amount 

 of seed put in per acre. In. Ayrshire it is 30 cwt. to 

 the acre, and in Forfarshire it is 22 cwt. ; and in some 

 of the evidence we have had before us. it is down as 

 low as 16 cwt., and in one case 15 cwt. Will you try 

 and find out why in Scotland the quantity should be 

 high in comparison per acre? What may easily 

 account for that difference is the size of seed 

 planted. That at once makes a difference in the ton- 

 nage per acre. Then in Ayrshire these are early 

 potatoes, and they plant them very closely. I have no 

 doubt that that is the reason for the 30 cwt. Their 

 drills are closer together, and they plant a little closer 

 between the plants. That will account for the differ- 

 In <iK Then do you think in Forfarshire they really 



do xo in for big seed? That may account for it. I 

 could not tell you definitely at the moment. 



10.S69. There is a lot of "difference between 22 cwt. 

 and 15 cwt. in some of our cases. Then with regard 

 to f:irmyard manure, the Ayrshire manure is 14s. a 

 ton, and tin- Forfarshire manure is only 10s. Is the 

 murk really a better quality in Ayrshire than in 

 Korfarshire!- You might find" that out? I think part 

 of the reason there again is, that in Ayrshire they buy 

 a lot of that manure, and know exactly what it costs. 

 In Korfarshire this would be dung made in the cuttle 

 courts and taken out. and the farmer has just allo\\ cd 

 10s. a ton. 



10,870. I am a little bit puzzled, Mr. Armour, about 

 the reference in the last paragraph but one of the 

 precis. I am not quite clear what is meant by 

 "excessive and cross-cropping"? (Mr. Armour): 

 F.xcessive and cross-cropping is this; that you will find 

 there is a great number of farms in which a barley 

 crop has been taken after oats. :ind in ;ilso many 

 cases a wheat crop. Whichever crop a farmer thought 

 In- was going to make most out of. he would CTOW- 

 crop with that crop, and he would avoid the potatoes 

 because he was scarce of labour and it was a more 

 expensive crop to produce. 



I. It i really successive wheat crops? Suc- 



wheat crops." (Mr. Mercer) : Most of which 



\vcri- grown under pressure from the Agricultural 



Committees. (Mr. \nn<nir}: If you adopt thnt 



system, you have to pay the penalty for it. 



10.872. You mean it not only draws the land extra? 

 But it decreases the productivity. 



10.K73. It <\<M- not have the same labour on it? 

 Tt it not thnt; but if you have a green crop you can 

 I|C:TI it. 



10.874. Under the Education item paragraph (8), 

 1 am not quite clear whether in answering Mr. Walker 

 you made it clear that you were referring to the rates 

 for education and not the education itself? That 

 is so. 



10.875. But in an answer earlier on, you did make 

 a reference to the extra time taken by dads, I under- 

 stood you to say two hours a night, when sometimes 

 they have to go for training, and in some cases four 

 hours in the daytime during the week, which will act 

 as a handicap against agriculture? There is no doubt 

 of it; because these boys, so far as Scotland is con- 

 cerned, must be exempted from their work to attend. 

 If you work nine hours on a farm and a boy has to 

 go to school, then you can only get seven hours out 

 of the boy. 



10.876. That is bringing it back to the education 

 item and not to the rate? Yes, but the rates are 

 going to affect agriculture materially, because there 

 is going to be an increase, and a big increase, in 

 Scotland. 



10.877. I admit the rate trouble is a burden on 

 agriculture; but I am anxious with you that these 

 boys should be better educated? Yes, I agree. 



10.878. And I thought your answer to Mr. Walker 

 was {hat you favoured the education of the boy, 

 and that the better the education the better for the 

 boy? Yes that is so. 



10.879. He must have time for it? Yes, he must; 

 and therefore it is going to interfere with the farmers' 

 operations. 



10.880. And you do not think that the education 

 afterwards will compensate agriculture as a whole? 

 No, it will not compensate it. It may compensate 

 the boy, and I hope it does. 



10.881. I mean will it compensate agriculture to 

 get a class of better educated lad interested in the 

 industry. That is what I am after? Yes, I quite 

 agree it would, if you could get them to stay on the 

 land. 



10.882. Of couse, we have to run the risk of that. 

 The tendency all the time is for a better chance for 

 every lad? Yes; I quite agree with those sentiments. 



10.883. Then I am not quite sure what the position 

 was about guaranteeing the acreage. There have 

 been several questions asked which have brought out 

 part of it, and I am to some extent satisfied ; but I 

 want really to know whether you consider that if 

 the Government comes along and says to the farmer : 

 " We will give yon a guarantee on cereal growing." 

 and the Government say : " Now we want you to 

 guarantee us a certain acreage, and shall insist on it : 

 and we shall also insist that a certain quantity of 

 labour is spent on that cereal growing so that it does 

 not go to rubbish," he is prepared to accept that 

 situation? Yes. 



10.884. You think he is? Yes, he ought to be. 



10.885. Then, further, on the question of wages and 

 the increase independent of the Corn Production Act, 

 I want to know whether you really think that the 

 wages in Scotland would have increased as they have 

 done if there had been no Corn Production Act at all ? 

 Certainly the wages would have increased. 



10.886. You think that the Corn Production Act 

 made no difference whatever to the wages? None 

 whatever. 



10.887. And that really what you or the Chamber 

 is after is asking the Government now these wages 

 are higher and are likely to keep up to give them some 

 guarantee that they have the money to pay the 

 extra? Is that what they are really after? That 

 is so. Farmers want to be able to pay the highest 

 wages in order to get the best men. We do not 

 want to be left with all the worst men ; and unless 

 we pay a good wage we will not get the men, so that 

 we are all in favour of the worker being protected as 

 well as the farmer. 



. 10,888. I have not yet heard how much permanent 

 grass land you have on your farm? I think you will 

 see it at the bottom of my statement. I had 4S 

 acres in 1913 out of 400; then in 1918 I had 25 acres. 



10.889. Is that old grass? Part of it is. It is part 

 grass I keep to graze my horses. 



10.890. But is it old grass land which was laid down 

 when you went there, or have you made it? I have 

 made part of it. 



