66 





. 1919.] 



. C..MM1 1"\ OM Aliltirri.Tl'UK. 



Mi: H. AKMom and MR. (i. G. MEKCBR. 



[Continued. 



young people to go on tin- lain!' It ig iho age at 

 It boy* ax a rule take to animals on the farm. 



11,01!!.' You arc aware that the (raving age in 

 Scotland now is 14? Yes, lint th. \ l.-a\c mm h earlier. 

 There ! MM h a thine; n- exemption-' 



ll,i. I know that to my cost; but \u HT<- 



aware that the whole trend is against exemption- 



ami 1 i|iiit- ngrec with it. \\ln-u \ou have a 



boy who is capable of taking tin- education in he 



should got all the encouragement he can. 



Il.nJl. I suppose you would ngre,- with me that it 

 is not BO much a matter of ability which slops further 

 attendance at school as a matter of poverty- I do 

 not think it is any good keeping a I HIV at school if he 

 is doing no good. 



11,023. Unfortunately this has applied to the- farm 

 clam of boy only.- 



11.023. On what capital are you putting this in- 

 terest which you refer to on Table No. I? 1O an 



10.024. Do you think it is quite legitimate to in- 

 clude interest on capital in your costs of production? 

 --I do. 



11.025. For what reason? Because it is money cm- 

 ployed ; and if I have to borrow the money I have 

 to pay for it. 



11.026. Do you apply the same principle in other 

 businesses? Do other business men charge up in- 

 terest on their capital!- Certainly. 



I 1. 1 127. Do they not look to tho profit to replace 

 that:' If a man has 1,000 borrowed in his busim-. 

 and he comes to make out a balance sheet he has 

 certainly to take into consideration that he has to 

 pay <_.vl for this 1,000. 



11,02$. I agree; but I am assuming that this capital 

 "i \ours is not borrowed? It does not matter where 

 it comes from ; it is there, and if I had not it it would 

 have to be borrowc <l. 



11.029. Your rent is given in the first column as 

 1 14s. Id., which I think includes some rates? Yes. 



11.030. Say 4.s. Id. for rates, leaving a rent of 30s.? 

 About that I think; or 32s. 



11.031. You told one of the Commissioners you paid 

 income tax on double your rrm ? -No. I did not mean 

 that seriously. 



11.032. You said it all tho same. 



11.033. Chiiirniiin: You said you paid on double 

 your rent and the landlord paid half? I said I paid 

 nearly half the rent oi my farm in income tax; but 

 that of course would never npply to the rent of my 

 farm. 



11.034. I misunderstood you? It all depends on 

 vour income and which source you get it from. The 

 higher your income of course you pay on a different 

 s. .il.- 



11,035-6. You were asked if you paid your income 

 tax on your profits, and I thought you indicated that 

 you paid it on half your rent? Yes; BO far as it is 

 applicable to my income, that is about the way it. 

 works out. 



t'hnirman: You were asked by Mr. Smith if you 

 made 1,000 a year and you said no, that was too 

 much. 



11.037. Mr. Thomai Htndtrton: I thought he had 

 definitely stated he was paying on that sum? I pretty 

 nearly pay on tint, but not <|iiite 



11.038. 'Mr. Smith: It wa* in reply to Mr Walker, 

 who asked whether you paid on Schedule B, and you 

 said yes? Yes. I pay on double rent 



11.039. Mr. 1 uni: So that you pay 

 on more than 1,000 a year'- Hut not on the profits 

 of tho farm. 



11.040. Surely if the profits are lower than that, 

 it is open to you to pay <>n them? As I said, most 

 of the farmers pay on tin- double rent. 



11.041. That it 'more than 1.1X10 in this case? I 

 think I explained to you. most farmers keep books and 

 know how they stand in regard to their accounts. 

 They do not make balances. 



11.042. Quito powiibly not: but that hardly meeta 

 tho point I put to you. You pay on double your 

 rent - > 



11.013. That in 1.200? Yet. 



11.044. And you have (li option of paying at 

 law than 1.000. your profits? Yen. 



''15. As a fellow Scotsman, it dnos not seem quite 

 in keeping, doe* it- It i^ open to you to take the 

 option? That u how it is <! 



11.046. Turning to a point raisc.l by Mr. Duncan 

 dealing with the question of wages, the wages went 

 up, roughly, over 100% between 11113 and 1918; and 

 one would expect that the labour staff being the same. 

 tho figure in 1918 on Table No. 1 would bo something 

 like 1,7-1" instead of i'l.I'tl, the amount puid in 

 money wages- I think it has been explained that 

 there" was a saving of work in regard to tho disposal 

 of the produce; and then it was also explained that 

 there was an insufficiency of labour to keep tho land 

 .lean on the tarm. Of Yours* when labour is dear, 

 there is a tendency on the part of tho farmer to save 

 as much of it as possible, and to do with an little 

 as possible; perhaps more than he .should do. 



11.047. I quite agree; but I rather gathered from 

 your answers to Mr. Duncan, that you had not been 

 having very much in the way of staff? I have h 



it in the way of wages. 



11.048. There is the same staff, roughly speaking !- 

 I have not the exact figures of the number of my 

 staff, but these are the wages I pay. Casual labour 

 comes in. 



11.049. Yes, but take the figure for 1913. I do not 

 want to labour the point very far. Had you a cattle- 

 man employed that year? I think I had a woman 

 with the cattle that year. 



11.050. And you had no cattlemen later? No. 



11.051. So that would make the discrepancy still 

 more marked, would it not!' It might. 



11.052. You suggested, in reply to another Commis- 

 sioner, that you saved a good deal of money by having 

 your hoy only delivered to Winchbtirgh Station, in- 

 stead of to Edinburgh? Yes. 



11.053. How many hours would that employ your 

 men in driving to Edinburgh? Just the day's work. 



11.054. The day's work would not by any means 

 cover the discrepancy ? No, not in itself; but there in 

 a lot of casual labour employed. You could not get 

 labour. 



11.055. Quito so; but you put it forward as a very 

 considerable item of saving by being able to dispense 

 with this driving to Edinburgh? Yes; but I have 

 done that at tho expense of the future crops. 



11.056. When tho carts go to Edinburgh, do they 

 come back empty? Yes, certainly. You do not load 

 up your horses both ways. 



11.057. Still, allowing for that, it would hardly 

 account for discrepancy? (Mr. Mercer): Of course 

 a catt Woman's wage, in 1913, helps to explain 1he 

 difference", does it not? It is making the 1913 wa/e 

 higher. 



11.058. Yes, I quite understand that? (Mr. 

 Armour) : Then there is a bigger green crop to handle 

 that year more potatoes. 



11.059. You deliver to Winchburgh Station now, 1 

 Mippose? Yes. 



11.060. I quite agree, it is a very big saving, but, 

 to my mind, it does not dear up the mystery of 

 the 317. With regard to the question of overtime, 

 tho 1913 figures would not, of course, include any 

 allowance for overtime?- I always paid overtime. 



11.061. Have you varied very much from your 

 practice hctuceii 1!H3 and 1S118? It is certainly more 

 now ; but I have always paid the men overtime at 

 the hay and harvest. 



11.062. You have no idea of what, tho difference in 

 projiorlion is? No, I have no idea. 



ll.0ti;. Turning to Table No. 2, you give the aver- 

 age pri'-e per quarter of wheat for 1913 as 32s. -.1 

 1 think? fc 



ll.Ool. Yon do not say what the average price for 

 ll'ls is. Could you give us that? 76s. 



I 1. 1 id. Then tho average cost of production of 

 beat for 1913, according to the same table. \\as 

 27s. 10d.? Y. 



11,066. And the average cost for 1918 was 53s. 8d.? 

 Yes, and 66s. and 4%. 



Il.<*i7. Will you look at these figures a little more 

 y. I see the cost of production has apparently 

 risen in tho neighbourhood of 93 per cent., from 

 27s. lOd. to 53s. 9d. I would not guarantee the ac- 

 curacy of tho figure, but it i- something in the neigh- 

 bourhood? Yos; the cost of manures will go up. 



11. <'><. I am not criticising the figures at all, but 

 I am taking them as they are here. During the same 

 period, your wages rose 64 per cent., and your profit 



