MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



Ill 



24 Hrjttember, 1919.] 



MR. J. COSSINS. 



[Continued. 



12.360. I do not mean to any that you have trouble 

 with the shooting tenant because we do generally 

 arrange that, but is it not really a handicap to the 

 farmer when one farm is let for two purposes?' As 

 a general principle, yes. Unless the occupier lets the 

 shooting himself I agree with you. 



12.361. It does hinder the best results in cereal 

 growing? I should say as a general principle 

 possibly it might do. I would not like to commit 

 myself at all, because I have never had a farm which 

 was infested with game, although I have heard of 

 them. 



12.362. If the shooting on a farm is worth letting 

 to a tenant there must be something there? With 

 regard to my farm there are a great many woods 

 and pheasants which were reared before the war in 

 the woods. My experience has been that when they 

 fed the pheasants in the woods we were far less 

 bothered with thorn. 



12.363. Mr. Parker: With regard to labour costs 

 have you charged that nt one rate up to 30th May 

 and at another rate after? Yes. You will notice 

 with regard to the seed crop tho labour is charged 

 on the old price. 



12.364. On the 30s. ? Yes. 



12.36.5. Then the figures are not quite accurate, 

 are they? Yes, they are absolutely accurate. The 

 seeds are charged a't the actual cost and also the 

 labour. 



12.366. Mr. Smith : I think you admitted, in reply 

 to Mr. Nicholls, that these costs per acre are rather 

 high for this second course 16 an acre? No, I did 

 not admit that, because I did not know. Mr. Nicholls 

 said so, but I have no means of knowing. 



12.367. Would you not agree that 16 an acre 

 represents a fairly high cost for cultivating wheat? 

 I have no means of knowing that ; those are my costs. 



12.368. Is it to be assumed that these are not 

 questions that farmers discuss amongst themselves? 

 Certainly, they talk about them. 



12.369. I do not know whether you are prepared to 

 admit that farmers do exchange opinions on these 

 subjects amongst themselves and that in that way 

 you get to know something about costs generally? 

 I am afraid I am rather sceptical with regard to 

 statements made by anybody unless they bring me 

 facts and figures to prove them. 



12.370. Especially farmers? No, any class of man. 



12.371. Would these different operations set out 

 here represent the full cultivation? They represent 

 the full cultivation of the course as it is given. 



12.372. You stated that very little had been put 

 into the land during the war? Yes. 



12.373. What actually do you mean by that? I 

 have used far less cakes. My custom pre-war was to 

 fork the whole of my stubbles, but since the war we 

 have forked nothing and we have also cross-croj>ped, 

 and the capability of the land has, therefore, gone 

 down to a great extent. 



12.374. You admit here that this represented the 

 full number of operations of cultivation and you also 



admitted that the whole of your straw went back on 

 to your land in the form of manur? Certainly. 



12.375. I suggest that that does not look as though 

 there had been very little put into the laud; it looks 

 as though the full amount had been put into it? 

 Everything that has been grown has been put in, 

 but once you stop your cake feeding you soon decrease 

 your corn yield. 



12.376. Apart from that, the full cultivation has 

 been maintained? No, because there has been no 

 hand labour put in. 



12.377. When I asked you whether this represented 

 the full cultivation, you said yes? Yes, so far as 

 the horse labour is concerned, but the farm has 

 deteriorated because we have not been able to do the 

 forking and keep it in the state it was in pre-war. 



12.378. Do you suggest that these costs in normal 

 times would be added to? Certainly, on to-day's 

 wages. If I had to farm my land as I farmed it prior 

 to 1914 on the now existing minimum rates of wage, 

 it would cost infinitely more. 



12.379. Your first statement would not be correct 

 that this represents the full operations of cultivation? 

 It represents the full operations of cultivation at 

 the present time. 



12.380. Yes, but that was not the question I asked 

 you. I asked you if this represented the full opera- 

 tions of cultivation, and you said yes. You said that 

 all your straw had gone back in the form of manure, 

 and if this represented the full operations of cultiva- 

 tion, I could not see how the land had deteriorated? 

 It has deteriorated, I say, through the want of 

 manual labour not having been put in and through 

 the absence of cake feeding. 



12.381. Could you tell us what you estimate the 

 deterioration per acre at? It is very difficult to say 

 certainly not less than 5 an acre. 



12.382. That is a very high figure, is it not? I 

 do not think so ; that is my estimate. 



12.383. Do you suggest that through the absence 

 of the hand operations and the absence of cake feeding 

 which you speak of your land has got deteriorated 

 to the extent of 5 an acre? And the cross cropping. 

 During the war we took a third white straw crop 

 which we ought not to have done. We took the advice 

 of the powers that be against our own judgment with 

 the consequence now that we have got to make up 

 for it. 



12.384. Would Uiis deterioration of the land be 

 reflected in the crops? Certainly. 



12.385. Can you give us your total yield per acre 

 from this land in 1918? I have not got those figures 

 with me; I thought I had. 



12.386. The yield was very good last year, was it 

 not? No, it was not. My dead fallow wheat yielded 

 four quarters per acre last year. This 4^ quarters 

 is the average. 



12.387. Do you suggest that last year's wheat crop 

 was not a good one? Certainly not with me. 



12.388. It is remarkable how farmers differ in 

 their opinions, is it not? My barley crop was a good 

 one last year, but not the wheat. 



(The Wltnett withdrew.) 



Mr. J. COSSINS, called and examined. 



12.389. Chairman: I need not refer you to the costs 

 of production on. your farm which have been pre- 

 aentcd to the Commission in a return prepared by 

 Mr. Wyllie on behalf of the national Farmers' Union. 

 The members of the Commission desire to cross- 

 examine you upon the items in your cost account.* 



12.390. Mr. ttdwardi: Is your farm typical of Dor- 

 setshire or typical of your neighbourhood? It is 

 typical of the neighbourhood. 



12.391. All large farms of this kind? All large 

 farms on the hills of Dorset. 



l'J..'J!>2. Do you consider that your land is really 

 suitable for the growing of wheat and cereals? It 

 hn.s been since my remembrance. 



12,393. Are these estimates that are given here 

 the actual records of the working of your farm? 

 Thi-v are records of the accounts that we keep. 



* See Appendix No. IV., Farm No. 30. 



12.394. Have you been in the habit of getting 

 separate accounts for various crops as they are down 

 here. We have before us No. 19 the cost per acre 

 of growing a crop ot wheat. That is followed by 

 the cost of growing a crop of barley and so forth. 

 Have you been in the habit of keeping accounts 

 according to this method? Yes. 



12.395. Do you think that they lead you to a truo 

 conclusion as to tho final result of your farming? As 

 far as my experience goes they do. I have followed 

 the same practice for many years. 



12.396. To take first your cost of horse labour, 

 you say as regards the shoeing of horses " four sets 

 new shoes per horse per annum, 9s."? That is for 

 1918 the 9s. 



12.397. The present price, 1919, is 10s. ? Yes. The 

 price varies. Just recently it has gone up another 

 Is. 6d. a set. 



