MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



13 



5 August, 1919.] 



SIR DANIEL HALT,, K.C.B., F.R.S. 



[Continued. 



farmers have a very bad year and we all admit they 

 do have a bad year why not deal with the 

 phenomenon of that year by itself instead of setting 

 up elaborate machinery? You cannot put the 

 farmer's years into watertight compartments. He 

 has to lay his plans for the future. 



256. It seems to -me that in normal years, when 

 industry is getting a fair return on the capital in- 

 vested, the ^effect of the guaranteed prices will cer- 

 tainly be to' increase purely economic rent. I do not 

 mean agricultural rent? It might bp. Of course, I am 

 bound to say, from a theoretical standpoint, that any- 

 thing that increases the safety of the industry in- 

 creases the economic rent. It must do; but I think 



that is a theoretical argument. 



257. Could you tell us what is the actual purpose 

 of this policy? Is it to be a war policy for the 

 future, or is it to increase the supply of men in the 

 country, or is it to increase our food supply? To 

 increase the user of the land, the production from the 

 land, and to encourage the better use of the land. 



258. That is really to increase the food supply of 

 the country? It will increase the food supply and 

 it will increase the man supply of the country. 



259. To put another theoretical question, is it 

 possible to conceive of an increase of food supply 

 and at the same time a diminution of the man supply 

 of the country? Of course, you could conceive those 

 two things going together under certain conditions 

 that by extreme efficiency you might reduce the actual 

 number of men employed upon a farm and increase 

 the output from it. 



260. I think you suggested, in answer to some ques- 

 tion that you hoped the effect would be that intensive 

 methods would be more likely to be adopted? Yes. 



261. Do these intensive methods really require 

 more men, or does it not mean they use the men 

 they have more efficiently? I think the two go hand 

 in hand. Wherever I see an intensively cultivated 

 farm I find more men upon it, because the man deal- 

 ing with the farm finds his profit both ways. He 

 may be doing one particular kind of operation with 

 less men, that is, less skilled men ; but he carries on 

 more operations. 



262. Is that general? I think I should say that is 

 almost generally true; that the high farmer is also 

 employing more men. 



263. The high farmer usually tends to employ moro 

 machinery? And more machinery; but he is follow- 

 ing the more intensive system altogether. 



264. With regard to the question of supplying 

 yourselves in time of war, you admit that the 

 guarantees did not come into operation ? Yes. 



265. That is to say, the ordinary economic lure 

 was sufficient to protect the farmer? Yes. Wli:it 

 did increase the cultivation during the war was tho 

 direct orders which were imposed upon men to plough 

 up their land without any question of price; and tho 

 thing which hindered even greater development of 

 these orders to plough was the lack of arable land. 



266. And the lack of labour? The lack of men 

 horses, ploughs and buildings. 



267. How far has the Board used its powers for 

 taking over inefficiently worked farms? I think I 

 would like to put in those statistics. Roughly speak- 

 ing, 70,000 acres of land i,ere taken over by executive 

 committees. 



268. Mr. Prosier Jones: You told us that you wore 

 desirous of getting back to 1872. What you mr-ai, 

 by that, I take it, is that you want to get to the 

 acreage you then had under plough?- That was the 

 ideal that we set before us when we started on the 

 plough programme in 1917. We want as much arable 

 and M we can t but when fnrmere obj 



said: ''This land is not fit to plough," it was a 



reasonable answer to them and to their counties to 



that at any rate it was ploughed in 1872, and 'you 



ran at least get back that far. I would not say 



7 AT" 1 ! 1 Sb t Uld b Y ntent "Mi the position 

 1872. I do not see why we should not have n 

 I ront deal moro arable land. 



269. In addition to the guaranteed price for the 

 farmers, what other factors are there that aT*e likely 

 to attract people back to the land? Housing con- 

 ditions have got to be improved throughout the 

 country, if you mean questions of that kind. The 

 man must have a decent wage or he will not come 

 back, that is certain ; and he must have reasonable 

 conditions of living, of which housing is perhaps the 

 biggest factor. 



270. Has the present minimum been some induce- 

 ment to get men to return to the land, or do they 

 still leave the land for the industrial centres? Con- 

 ditions are too disturbed. We really have no evidence 

 at the present time. I do not think we know whether 

 men are coming back to the land or not. 



271. We hear a great deal about guarantees to 

 the farmer as to security of tenure. Have you any 

 suggestions to make as to security to the farm 

 labourer as well, who lives alongside the farm? The 

 security of his employment? 



272. Yes, as well as security of a plot, say, of so 

 many acres? I do not quite follow. 



273. I want to put it in this way. A farmer has 

 100 acres, and he wants security of that 100 acres. 

 He wants to remain there for 10 or 20 years before 

 he feels satisfied to put out his money. He does not 

 feel at home. The labourer who lives alongside of 

 him has only a guarantee for one year. Have you 

 any suggestion to make as to how that man would 

 get more time in that particular area? I have no 

 official suggestion to make. I mean, does not this 

 lead us into a long discussion of what you might call 

 general social politics? 



274. I take it if it is the desire of the Government 

 to get more men on the land, then surely it is the 

 Government's duty to find means to attract those men 

 back to it? What we say is this : we are going 

 on a policy of housing and providing small holdings 

 of the most graded sizes, the house with one acre 

 and so on, which we believe is one of the great steps 

 towards rendering life in the country attractive to 

 the man working for wages. 



275. Mr. Langford : I almost hesitate to put a 

 . question after we have heard so much of the low 



intelligence of farmers; but I will venture one or 

 two. Is it your opinion that one of the reasons why 

 you find less intelligence in the country, both in the 

 farmer and the farm labourer, is that trade and 

 professions offer better advantages to the intelligent 

 boy both of the farmer and farm labourer than the 

 country does? Undoubtedly that has had a very 

 serious effect during the time of depression. There 

 were very much better openings offering in industry 

 and commerce. 



276. It is your opinion that better profits and 

 greater fortunes have been made during recent years 

 in trade and professions than could possibly have been 

 made in the business of agriculture? Certainly. 



211. .Mention has been made that from 1860 to 1870 

 farming was more profitable than it has been since. 

 Do you think that at that period a greater standard 

 of intellect was engaged in the industry than has been 

 subsequently? I really could not say. My memory 

 does not take me back. 



278. But it is an important point ; because we want 

 to clear up whether the industry is unprofitable in 

 consequence of the inability through lack of intellect 

 on the part of the farmer to conduct the business, or 

 whether there are other causes. Several other 

 questioners have tried to show it is because a man 

 is incapable of conducting his own business. I take 

 it you have had many business transactions with 

 farmers? Yes. 



279. Have you found them incapable of looking 

 after their own business when you have dealt with 

 them? No. As you know, I have a very high opinion 

 of a farmer. 



280. It has been suggested that if guaranteed prices 

 are given by the Government, there may be a con- 

 spiracy between the farm labourer and the farmer to 



