1 1 



KOYAI. COMMISSION OS AGHH'U.TI UK. 



SIR DANIKI. HALL, K.C.B., l-.li - 



| ( 'uHli 



give higher wagw in order to get back from the State 

 the additional expanse to the laimer. Do you think 

 that ii likely t No. 



881 A* you know, there is another person equally 

 .tr.nig, in fart, stronger than the other two, largely 

 interested in ngn. "Iture namely, the landlord. Do 

 v ,u think it is t itll likelv that ho is above conspiring 

 with either of the other two in order to get an 

 increased rent from his land if the prices of oom- 

 niuditie* grow ? No, I see no evidence of that. 



I'-L' You see no evidence of why he should or should 

 not? No, of the land owner ever having done so. 



283. You have heard of tho Agricultural Rating 

 Act. That Act, 1 think, was given by a Government 

 at a time of considerable agricultural depression. 

 Before that Act came into operation, rebates were 

 given very largely for rents, were they not ? You 

 mean that landowners were giving rebates on the 

 current rents? 



284. Yea? Ys. 



285. IB it within your knowledge th'at the moment 

 that Act became operative those rebates became less 

 and less, until they died out altogether? I am .not 

 aware of any cases within my own knowledge of 

 the rebates being stopped because of the relief of 

 rate*. 



286. No; but they did stop as a matter of fact? 

 The relief of rates began, and coincided in time, with 

 just the turn of the tide in agriculture generally, 

 did it not? 



287. I understood that the relief was given in order 

 to give some advantage to the farmer at a time of 

 tress F Yes, I suppose it was. 



288. It was given at a time he wanted it? Yes. 



289. Is it not an open secret that immediately 

 after that the rebates given by landlords were with- 

 drawn P It is not within my knowledge. 



290. But they had been given for many years, 

 had not they? Yes. 1 should say so. 



291. Then would it be a fair assumption that the 

 advantage which accrued to the farmer primarily, 

 subsequently went to the landlord by increased 

 rents? I do not knqw. I think historically that 

 coincided with a time of rising prices. 



292. I take it that the extra food that has been 

 grown daring the war has not been a negligible 

 quantity? No, certainly not. 



293. It has been a considerable item, in assisting 

 in a national crisis to feed tho people of this country!' 

 Certainly. 



294. Do you believe that it would imperil the 

 security of the State, and possibly endanger the 

 lives of the people, to allow agriculture again to 

 recede to the position it was pre-war? That is the 

 position I stand for above everything else that it is 

 not safe to let agriculture go to the wall in a country 

 like this. 



295. Then may we take it that it is the policy of 

 your Department that agriculture in the future shall 

 be something in the nature of a security for the 

 State an insurance, so to speak? Yes. 



296. Then if it is to bo an insurance to the State, 

 coincident perhaps with keeping up a big Navy and 

 a tolerably large Army, the State must pay for it? 

 If need be. That is what we maintain. 



297. If prices had not been regulated by the Food 

 rol Department during the war they would have 



beon much higher than they would have been for 

 farm produce, do not you think? Yes, much higher, 

 for all tho farm produce. All the food prices during 

 tho war, o far as they have been fixed, have marked 

 drprn the farmer's produce. 



296. Then nothing has been given to the farmer by 

 the war of fixing prices? A great deal has l>een taken 

 away from him. 



299. A good deal has lately been aid about putting 

 upon th land discharged soldiers, sailors, and some 

 of the Air Force. Do yon think it is right to fix 

 these men up in small holding* unlev* a po1'< v ..f >the 



is first inaugurated that will make those 

 holdings lairly and reasonably profitable to them?- 

 1 think it would be cruel to put them upon the land <( 

 we knew they could not live upon it. 



300. Something has been said by a previous speaker 

 as to, if you give a guarantee only to cereals, how 

 the feeding farmer and the dairy fanner is to com.' 

 off. Is it not pretty general that a feeding farmer 

 has also a good deal of land under the plough!' Yes, 

 I should say so. 



301. If he has not, it is from choice; all his land 

 would be capable of growing a good crop of cereals? 

 Yes, I think so, in most cases. It is only in certain 

 special cases he is not. 



302. Is it not also a fact that the people of England 

 are now beginning to appreciate/ home-fed meat at 

 it^ proper value!'- I should judge so from the demand 

 dining the- war to have it at any price. Meat i- 

 to be kept under control for another year, not BO 

 much because of any anticipated real scarcity, but 

 because it is feared the price of home-grown meat 

 would run away so tremendously. 



303. Then it is fair to assume that, in the future, 

 the same will operate, and a biggish difference will 

 be charged for home-grown meat beyond the price 

 obtainable for foreign meat in the same market? 

 I think the British farmer could always maintain a 

 considerable difference between his product and the 

 imported article. 



304. The dairy farmer also, as a rule,, grows a 

 good deal of cereals? Yes. 



305. Therefore, if he grew cereals, he would have 

 oa much advantage from guaranteed prices as the 

 strictly cereal grower would? We also believe, of 

 course, that if the dairy farmer is a buyer of oats, 

 if we have encouraged the growing of oats by our 

 guarantee, we are helping the supply and helping 

 the dairy farmer in that way. 



306. Something has been said with regard to the 

 constitution of the Wages Board, and that employers 

 of labour are represented upon it equally with repre- 

 sentatives of labour. That is so, I believe? Yes. 



307. Is it not also a fact that there are what is 

 known as independent members of that Board? 

 There are seven appointed members. 



308. And they have the power to sway the pendu- 

 lum, so to speak? They are in the position of 

 umpires. 



309. Would it be fair to assume that at least some 

 of those independent members know little or nothing 

 of agriculture? That is rather a personal question. 



Mr. Langford : I do not press it. 



310. Mr. Lennard : In your evidcnce-in-chief you 

 say: " Were not the State driven to ensure supply. 

 the State might abandon guarantees and view any 

 downward movement of prices with indifference. 

 Can you give us any opinion as to the probable 

 future of market prices? Has the Board any in- 

 formation, for example, as to recent agricultural 

 developments in countries from which agricultural 

 products have been or may be imported, which would 

 throw any light upon the probable future of market 

 prices? That is one of our very great difficulties, to 

 forecast the future trend of prices. The wisest fore- 

 casts nine months ago predicted a considerable fall in 

 cereal prices to take place this autumn ; and Sir 

 James Wilson talked about wheat at 40s. All those 

 promises have simply gone by tho board. It is very 

 difficult to foresee the course of prices; and my own 

 impression is, that we shall see a considerably higher 

 level of prices prevail. When one conside.rs that the 

 movement for the better payment of labour is not in 

 this country alone, but is world-wide, and the fact 

 that freights, however much shipping returns, are 

 hound to he higher because of labour, coal, and cost 

 of material, and that a great world-wide destruc- 

 tion which has been wrought in the war areas all 

 these conditions lead one to suppose that the- prices of 

 agricultural products are not going to fall at all 

 rapidly. V'w I am speaking really more from in- 

 tuition than from statistical knowledge. Then one 



