8 



AI ' .iMMI-M-iN t'N M.IMrl I.TI UK. 



6 Aoyut, 1919.] 



Sn: DVMI II - K i .H.. K.R.8. 



I Mf/. 



cruelly lx> paid by tho bad laud, the medium lan.i 

 and the (food land in the same way, can it? I think 

 to. I think the method of dealing with the bad 

 land and good land mutt be varied, but I do not 

 * that you can vary your rate of wages according 

 to the at vie of the land! It would be so if you were 

 forced to cultivate all the land alike. 



144. What I auggast t<> >.MI is that whore you 

 attamptod either a flat rate of wage* or one minimum 

 wag* fur all purU uf tho country, you would in- 

 variably have bad land which cannot afford to 



Cy it, and medium land which iimy or may not 

 able to, and the good land can pay it. Doe* 

 this guarantee make any provision for that? I 

 should not agree with you that it follows. 



146. I suppose you would agree, would you not 

 that very heavy clay land is lew productive- and 

 much more costly to work and produces lessP The 

 ktyle of land dictates the type of cultivation. It 

 we are to apply, aay, a four-course rotation to each 

 of these nlsssrri of f and the good, {he medium, and 

 the bad, then on the style of cultivation the wages 

 paid may render one unreraunerative and the other 

 remunerative. But there is another factor that 

 usually provides for these differences in quality and 

 that M the factor of rent. 



146. But you do not suggest that the rent makes 

 good the deficiency. Take the land, say, in the 

 Holbeaoh District of Lincolnshire, and compare that 

 with the yellow clays of Sussex : do yon suggest that 

 there is any comparison with the yield that can 

 be got from them in the difference of rent? No. 



147. Take that blowy, dusty land in Suffolk: do 

 yon suggest that could pay the minimum wages 

 with the present guarantees? It certainly can, I 

 think, if it is properly handled. 



148. You still think it can!-- I think so. I think 

 you have to devise a method of handling each of these 

 soils, taking it as your condition that you have to 

 pay a given rate of wage. 



149. I suggest to you that your system of gua- 

 rantees provided by the Act does not meet these wide 

 differences in the character of the land? 1 might 

 agree to that as regards the prices of the produce. 

 but I do not agree to it as regards the variation 

 in the minimum wage. 



160. I am speaking of the guaranty I am 



putting it to you that you cannot grow enough 

 on the bad land to pay the minimum wages even 

 as now fixed P It is quite true that there may be 

 land which we cannot keep under cultivation under 

 any system of farming that we adopt. 



I.M. That is what I am coming to. Have you con- 

 sidered at all if you go so far with me where that 

 line is to be drawn, and what land is to go out of 

 cultivation and what not? Yon mean, has cm- 

 drawn a map of the country!* 



169. Yes; or as to the character of the land. Put 

 it in this way: You have told me that a guarantee 

 of 46s. is a pure guess. That is what I understood 

 you to say? No, I do not think I would admit that 

 for a moment. I said that the -15s. was founded upon 

 the prices of wheat which had been made, say, for five 

 yean before the war. Take, it roughly as an average 

 of 86s. From the increased rates of expenditure that 

 we saw to be in sight, 45s. was put down a likely to 

 those increased costs. 



I do not think we do ourselves justice. The 



f 46s. was fixed in 1017 for the price of wheat in 



1990, so that it must have been pretty well a guess P 



>as guessing in a sense then, because we knew 



nothing about the trend of prices or what the con 



of the war Mould be. hut the general 



presumption which prevailed at that time was that 



- would begin to come don n again. You nnnlit 



say that all those prices which were put down \\en- 



rendered ridiculous hy the trend of events. All prices 



of production have been rendered ridiculous. 



164. If you object to my word " giu-Hs." I will say 

 if yon fixed the guarantee for the future, whether 

 it is to be the name as now or more, have you at all 

 considered what the datum line is of the land which' 

 is to be allowed to g.-i out of cultivation. You and 



I are a;- iced that it i, deMtahle to keep aj- much in 

 cultivation a we inn. hut to keep it all in cultiva- 

 tion 1 think u, time, whatever tin- pn< 

 will require sotnu guarantee to lie paid: NVc shall 

 have to keep that acreage or the n or 

 the 1872 acreage, we will say, and that would n-<|uire, 

 we will say, a certain level of prices. 



I ""i. To keep in cultivation the land that hiu* re- 

 cently been ploughed up would require a higher level 

 of prices P Yes. 



166. Have you considered at all what level we ought 

 to keep in the interests of the SUteP What level 

 of cultivation P 



167. Yes P Wo have always said we want to go back 

 at least to 1872. 



168. You have in mind 1872, but you let the other go 

 which has been ploughed up recently? 1872 would 

 mean more; the level is much higher; it would add 

 4,000,000 to the arable acreage of the year 1 



169. So yon take the view that we ought to get 

 back to that? Yes ; that ie what we are deliberately 

 hoping to try and do. 



159a. I suggest to you that even with the present 

 minimum wages that will mean a large guarantee 

 which would be an effective guarantee? Is jiot that 

 the question which this Commission is asked to sot tie :- 



1596. Yes, quite right; and I am asking you if you 

 have any information to give me? I cannot give 

 you any calculation on that point. As I say, the 

 Board have no figures which are really germane to 

 the point. 



160. Mr. Dallas: Just to follow the argument you 

 have been dealing with up to this moment; suppos- 

 ing a price was fixed that would make it profitable 

 to cultivate the bad lands; is it a reasonable assump- 

 tion that the profit would be a very large one on the 

 rich lands!' It is unless the rent were adjusted. 



161. You suggested that tho Agricultural Wages 

 Board was the first body that lias fixed a legal 

 minimum wage irrespective of prices or cost*. For 

 instance. I think it was fixed with regard to the 

 miners in 1911 ; the Government fixed a wage for 

 them irrespective of selling prices, cost, or anything 

 else? I knew of the existence of Trades Boards in 

 certain instances. 



162. You remember the big Miners' Strike ; follow- 

 ing that Miners' Strike the Government introduced 

 a Bill by which, I think, tho figure of 5s. and 2i>. "as 

 fixed. It fixed the datum wage for miners? Yes. 



163. Are you aware that it is the policy of the 

 Government at tho moment, apart from your Depart- 

 ment, to set up Trade Boards in as many trades as 

 possible? For instance, during the past three months 

 a large number of Trade Boards have been set up or 

 are in tho process of being set up? Do yon mean 

 Trade Boards in the technical sense, or Whitley 

 Councils P 



164. No. There are two policies. InWe is one 

 Government Department organising Whitley Coun- 

 cils and another Government Department at the 

 moment organising Trade Boards, which are 

 altogether distinct. The latter fix wages, and ha\e 

 legal sanction in the >ami> way exactly OH the wages 

 fixed by the Agricultural Wages Board? Yes; I 

 know the extent of the movement that is going on. 



166. I should like to go back to this question of 

 the 26s. The guaranteed prices were fixed and were 

 agreed upon by the representatives of the fai : 

 organisations. When the guaranteed prices wen- 

 put in tho Bill they were consulted. Here they not !- 



1 do not recall a'ny consultation on those figures, 

 liut I speak under correction. 



166. Would you be surprised -it the official .Journal 

 of the National Farmers' Union at "the time 



that the 26s. put in the Bill was a bargain hi-tw.-cn 

 tho farmers and the Government? I am surprised 

 to hear it. 



167. I understand also thai Sir F. K. Bmitl 

 he then was, stated in > !>,!.. it.- iu the .ll. 

 Commons that that was BO. I can .10511 re you that 

 in the " Mark Lane Express " of that period 'there 

 is a statement by one writer to the effect that the 



