MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



87 



23 September, 1919.] 



MR. JAMES DONALDSON. 



[Continued. 



11.631. Mr. Langford: A great many questions 

 has been put to you as to the representative character 

 of your evidence. You say that you represent the 

 National Farmers' Union, which is composed of be- 

 tween 80,000 and 100,000 members, and I take it that 

 you have come here to-day to introduce Mr. Wyllie? 

 That is so. 



11.632. You have come to-day at the request of the 

 Commission, and Mr. Wyllie is to follow you to speak 

 only to the cost of production ? That is so. 



11.633. You have been rather pressed by some 

 members of the Commission as to why you are not 

 putting forward to-day your own individual balance 

 sheet. I take it, at the right moment the Union that 

 you represent will be prepared through someone to 

 submit individual balance sheets? That is so. 



11.634. So that if you had been asked by the Com- 

 mission to bring balance sheets to-day, you could have 

 done so? Undoubtedly; but they are coming, with 

 the results. 



11.635. Mr. Wyllie is going to speak to that volume 

 of evidence? That is so. 



11.636. Which, at any rate, is conclusive proof that 

 the Union is seeking to help this Commission with 

 regard to the costs of production? I have already 

 said so 



11.637. You have been somewhat pressed by some 

 Members to give your opinion as to what the price 

 should be for next year ; and I think it is rather 

 regrettable that you regard it as a question of policy, 

 because it is important that the National Farmers' 

 Union should give some guidance to this Commission 

 with regard to what the price for next year ought to 

 be. 



11.638. Chairman: I think he said 80s.? Yes; 80s. 

 for wheat. 



11,039. Mf. Liuiyford: Then it is your opinion that 

 the farmers' case would be met by 808. per quarter for 

 wheat? That is so. 



11.640. Did you also state what in your opinion 

 would be a fair price for barley for next year? Be- 

 fore I say anything with regard to that, I want to 

 know whether we are to have free market or not? 

 I should say, taking it generally, 74s. to 75s., or per- 

 haps 73s. to 74s. would be a fair price for barley next 

 year. 



11.641. You are speaking of minimum prices? I am 

 -JM Diking of minimum prices. 



11.642. And the Union would like a free market 

 beyond that price?- -Exactly. 



1 l.lij.3. You have been questioned with regard to 10 

 years being a short or long view ; but, in your opinion, 

 is 10 years a short view with regard to agriculture? 

 That "is so. 



11.644. And if agriculture is to be put on a per- 

 manently safe basis, the principle of guarantees will 

 have to be for a term of years, not less than 8 to 10? 



That is so. 



. 1 ,645. You have been asked a question as to 

 whether you have taken into consideration that if a 

 guarantee of 80s. is givon. what the cost of that 

 would be to the nation. I take it, when you men- 

 tioned a guarantee of 80s., that was only applicable 

 to next year's price? Yes. 



1 1 .046. May I take it your view is. that that guaran- 

 teed price would necessarily rise or fall contingently 

 with the cost of production of the crop? Yes, for 

 later years. 



Il.fi-17. Then it is the principle only that you want 

 to be embodied] say, for 8 or 10 years? That rs so. 



II. (548. You have been asked several questions with 

 regard to improved methods of farming. I take it it 

 is your view, as it is also the view of the National 

 Farmers' Union, that much may be done in that 

 direction to assist agriculture? I have no doubt of it. 



11.019. You would not be so silly as to suggest that 

 nltural education h;ul rent-bed such a point that 

 it rould not be improve*!? I have not said so. 



11,650. In other words you think that the industry 

 might be helped considerably by giving better tech. 

 niral education both to farm labourers and to 

 formers? I am sure of it. 



I Ukil. It is within your knowledge that to-day the, 

 farm labourer is not so skilled as he was gome years 

 ago, at all events, as to the general run. Let me put 



25831 



it in another way. Is it not more difficult to get a 

 man who is skilled in the art of hedging or thatching 

 than it was? Yes, I quite agree with you. On the 

 other hand he has improved in skill with regard to 

 machinery perhaps. 



11.652. In consequence of the greater use of ma- 

 chinery on farms? I quite agree. 



11.653. And the farmers knowledge with regard lk> 

 the value of artificial manures and feeding stuffs is 

 somewhat limited? Yes; but that is being improved 

 upon. 



11.654. Those can be improved upon? Yes. 



11.655. There are other things which surround our 

 great industry which need careful looking into and 

 revision, such as the conditions under which the 

 tenant farmer holds his farm? Yes; but I think I 

 must again say that that should come up on the 

 question of policy. 



11.656. Quite; but let me have your personal 

 opinion only, if you do not care to commit the Union 

 to it, because it is important that we should get from 

 you, the first witness, that there are other things in 

 your mind and will be in your mind in framing the 

 policy which will considerably assist the industry 

 permanently? Would it not be as well to leave this 

 whole question until our policy has developed? I am 

 quite prepared to give the Commission my opinion 

 on. land tenure; but, on the whole, my own opinion, 

 though I bow to the ruling of the Chairman, on it is 

 that this is a matter of policy. 



11.657. Chairman : You are here to give evidence 

 on behalf of the National Farmers' Union. Your own 

 opinion on one thing or another is useful in itself ; 

 but it is not evidence of the opinion of the National 

 Farmers' Union ? Well ; I think security of tenure is 

 a very great necessity at the present moment. 



11.658. Mr. Langford: With regard to the mini- 

 mum wage, I put it to you that it is the opinion of 

 the majority of your members that the minimum wage 

 has come to stay and ought to stay? We do not want 

 to go back to the old wages and the old system at all. 

 I do not think for a moment we do. We want to see 

 better wages for our labourers. As I said before, if 

 there is any prosperity in agriculture, we want them 

 to take part in it. 



11.659. And you want to obtain such prices for your 

 commodities as will admit of some profit to the farmer, 

 and will admit of the farmer paying an adequate wage 

 to the farm labourer. Is that your view? That is so. 



11.660. You said just now, in answer to a question, 

 that the farmers would be perfectly willing to be 

 left alone; that is to say, they would be prepared to 

 conduct their business in their own way? Exactly. 



11.661. But I think you also said that if the nation 

 required the farmer to farm in a particular way to 

 keep the land under the plough that had been broken 

 up during the war, then the farmer would very rightly 

 ask the Government to see to it that after producing 

 the crops the Government need and the nation asks 

 for, they shall be produced at a profit? That is so. 



11.662. I think you have already said that the 

 Prime Minister made certain statements and pledges 

 with regard to the future of agriculture? We take 

 it so. 



11.663. But you know it is a fact; they appeared in 

 the Press? ^Certainly. We look upon them as 

 promises and as pledges. 



16.664. And in the House of Commons he has 154 

 members who are pledged to assist him to carry out 

 the national pledge? Yes, I think so. 



11.665. When the time arrives, will the National 

 Farmers' Union through the persons they authorise, 

 whether you or someone else, be quite prepared to 

 put forward their views with regard to the national 

 policy and their own individual farmers' policy as 

 to the future of agriculture? Yes. 



11.666. Mr. Lennard: I understand from your 

 im' <-ix that you and the National Farmers' Union 

 consider that we ought to deal with the problems 

 that have been put before us with a single-minded 

 \i<'\v to the interests of the nation as a whole, and 

 not limit our outlook to the interests of the farmer 

 and the agricultural classes? With regard to the 

 interests of the nation as a whole, I think they should 

 have pre-eminence ; but I think you must take into 



F 4 



