84 



KOYAL COMMISSION ON AGRICULTURE. 



S3 S*pltml*r, 1919.] 



MK. JAMES DONALDSON.' 



[Continued. 



11,639. But you remember that there is a potato 

 called ' Ip-to-bato"? Ye. 



11,633. In my experience the introduction of that 

 potato, assuming the same manuring and the same cost 

 of labour and of everything else, doubled the crop 

 traight away:- Waa yours an exceptional experi- 

 enced 



1 1,63-1. No, it was the experience of practically every 

 farmerP That may be; 1 do not know. 1 should think 

 that would depend on the varieties you had been using 

 previously. There are some varieties of potatoes, 1 

 think you will admit, which are much less croppers 

 than others.' 



11.635. Exactly; and this was a new factor coming 

 into play. It was a new variety. I am speaking now 

 of the years of depression which you have referred to. 

 The same thing exactly occurred with oats in my ili- 

 trict. 1 remember very well the variety " Abund- 

 ance " being introduced. The mere introduction of a 

 new factor in the shape of a new variety of oats called 

 "Abundance " doubled the crop; and there were tho 

 ame conditions of manuring, and things of that 

 nature? We certainly are indebted to our .MC<I 

 There is no doubt that they have done a very great 

 work indeed for farming. 



11.636. So those two instances appear to me to 

 demonstrate the possibility of increasing the output. 

 even when you are diminishing your cost of labour and 



manure? But you are selecting all the time, are not 

 you? Would you say, for instance, now that the oat 

 the " White Tartar would give a bigger produce or 

 * lesser produce than the " Abundance " per acre? 

 That, I think, depends on localities. 



11.537. I cannot say about that; but with regard to 

 how to meet a depression I am quite confident of this, 

 that decreasing the output of my land was certainly 

 not the way I weathered the storm that you have 

 referred to? You may have been exceptionally cir- 

 cumstanced. 1 am only speaking generally. I think 

 you will find those are the views agriculture as a 

 whole has taken, and I cannot take exceptional 

 instances. 



11.538. In paragraph 6 you mention that the basis 

 of the statement is the assumption that farming 

 " is not capable of adaptation to altered conditions." 

 Personally, I have always held the view that the terms 

 under which 1 hold my land, that is, under certain 

 conditions in the agreement and so forth, interfere 

 considerably with my power as a tenant of adapting 

 myself to the altered conditions which I wont through? 

 Yes; but there again you are touching on policy, 

 and I must not go into that. That will come out later. 

 I think you had better ask that question when tho 

 matter of policy comes up again. When you are 

 tombing on tenure, that is a matter of policy. 



11.539. I should like to be quite clear what you mean 

 by policy? I am sure you know what is meant by 

 policy. 



11.540. No, I cannot make up my mind what you 

 .mean by it? I say yon are touching on policy now 

 when you bring in the terms of tenure. 



11.541. But surely when you ask us to fix the prico 

 of corn for a numoer of years, and you say you con- 

 sider 8 or 10 years short, that is a matter of policy ? 

 Thi statement here is not asking you to do that. We 

 are putting this forward as an alternative. We say 

 this is going to happen unless another thing occurs, a 

 favourable agricultural policy. We are not making 

 any 'threats at all; we are simply warning you. 



11.542. Then I will leave it at that. At all events, 

 you scorn to agree, and you mentioned, that to (i\ 

 prices for 8 or 10 years would IKS a short view. Yon 

 aid thnt, diil you not? -Yes; that would be a short 

 view, in my opinion. 



11. .'13. I am a yearly tenant, and T will ndd 

 a yearly tenant who nt this very moment has notice 

 to quit. What value would it ho to me as a yearly 

 tenant to have prices of this kind fixed, you might say. 

 for 8 or 10 years, or 20 vears? This is again touching 

 on policy, and I am afraid T nm i not answer Ibis 

 question. 



11.544. T will take your answer, but it is most 

 unAatisfnctory. I was going to ask you another 

 question about the fixing of prices. You have already 

 admitted that you expect tho prices, taking the 

 long view, to be fixed for a considerable number of 

 yearn, and at the *ame time you say that landowners' 



are already raising their rent 60 per cent, in some 

 casoa. How can you expect the nation to agree 

 to a thing like that? Are. you asking me to give 

 evidence for the landlord? 



11,5).">. Vi if If I were a landlord 1 should ::iiswcr 

 that question by telling you that the repairs and the 

 outgoings of the farm have gone up very consider- 

 ably. For instance, with regard to repairs, you 

 might at leaet say it will take 200 per cent, more 

 than in pre-war limes to repair the steadings and 

 homesteads. But I am not here to put forward the 

 landlords' views at all. That is what I would say if 

 I were a landlord. 



11.546. Then will you answer me as a tenant? I 

 would answer tho same as a tenant. 



11.547. 80 that you agree with a fellow-countryman 

 of yours, who the other day answered that tho fixing 

 of prices should be .su<-h that there was a guarantee 

 of the wage for the worker, profit to the farmer, 

 and rent to tho landowners? I would agree that 

 all three must be considered. I have already stated 

 it in answer to the first question asked me this 

 morning. 



11.548. May I get your opinion on another point? 

 Does the Farmers' Union think that tho present 

 level of prices of agricultural produce must be kept 

 up? I do not know whether you mean tho present 

 prices of agricultural produce. Do you mean the 

 free market the present price of barley and other 

 things? The question is so wide that I am in a 

 difficulty. 



11.549. Yes; the present level of prices we have 

 been farming at, living practically on a high scale 

 or level of prices. 



11.550. Chairman: The question is whether you 

 must maintain, for instance, 75s. for wheat? Is it 



for next year? 



11.551. 'Mr. Edwards: No, the long view; as long 

 as you like? That would depend on prices. If the 

 price of farmers' corn drops, then you are going to 

 have the cost of living go down, and with the cost of 

 living, of course you would have the wheat go down. 

 You see how it is intermixed, 



11.552. But the point I was going to ask you was 

 this. Are you aware that after a similar crisis to what 



wo have now, attempts were made to maintain high 

 prices for agricultural produce? I am not aware 

 of it. By what means? 



11.553. By protection at that time? No, I am not 

 aware of it. 



11.554. I may tell you that that is the fact, and 

 that it miserably failed. Although you say you are 

 not here to advocate a policy, still you agree that a 

 scheme of fixing prices much higher than those of 

 the Corn Production Act is essential for the well- 

 being of tho industry, especially of arable land? 

 The prices originally fixed by tno Corn Production 

 Act, yes. 



11.555. I think you said that the farmers have no 

 confidence. Do you think that the first step in 

 fixing the prices in order to give the farmer confi- 

 dence to cultivate his land in the best possible way 

 is the fixing of a guaranteed minimum; or would 

 you favour something else previous to that? That, 

 again is a matter of policy. 



11,656. Mr. Green : I take it you wish us to outline 

 a policy to give confidence to farmers? If it is 

 within your province. 



11.557. You wish to dispel tho heritage of fear of 

 the 'eighties and the 'nineties? If it can bo done. 



11.558. I think we are all anxious about it. Do you 

 suggest to us that if we attempt to fix a fiunranteed 

 price approximate to the present we should fi (> * nn . v 

 more wheat sown this winter? -T really think that if 

 vein wish more wheat sown this winter, speaking quite 

 disinterestedly now T am giving you my opinion for 

 what it is worth, and my private opinion you should 

 fix your wheat price at 80s. for next year. 



11.559. Chairman: That is the minimum price? 



r 



11. Wl. Vr. (,'reen: Why I asked you was, because 

 during 1917 and 1918, when wheat was 75s. and 80s. 

 a (|iiarter, a great number of farmers did not have 

 sufficient confidence to sow wheat. I mean to say, we 

 had 90,000 acres controlled by the State under 



