KUYAI. COMMISSION <>N AGKII i i.n i;i . 



. I'.n'j i 



Si 



HA..... KAMI.. F.B.8. 



40. So that the Government would oiihure as far 

 possible that that could not recur r Yes; that is what 

 1 want to M*. 



41. That WM bad from every point of view, MM it 

 not?-- It depopulated the country, wasted capital, and 

 destroyed confidence. 



43. Would you agroa with me that wheat i* the 

 main crop which an arable farmrr niu-t look to 



the part of England that 1 know best south of the 

 Trent, I should say wheat u the mainstay of the 

 monetary return of a mixed farm ; but, of ooune, 

 that is not true of Scotland or Wales, for example. 



I.I I am speaking, and shall always apeak 

 land, because my experience does not go outside i 

 land. 1 take it that the - who question 



you wquld probably say that oats would be thrir 

 main crop. But apart altogether from the ques- 

 tion of its paying thp farmer best, it is not IM> much 

 that the win-lit crop directly pays the farmer best ns 

 that the cultivation which is necessary in order to 

 secure a good wheat crop lays the foundation of the 

 other crop* of Iwrley and ote, which usually follow 

 wheat crops. 1 mean that you must cultivate on a 

 higher scale for a good wheat crop than you would 

 for any other crop ; and, therefore, if you do not 

 cultivate on the high scale for wheat, vou would not 

 get as good a subsequent return for the crops 

 which, in the ordinary rotation of cropping, follow 

 tho wheat crop? At any rate. T would say this, that 

 if you are cropping arable land over the greater part 

 of "England, the wheat crop is the first principal itr-m 

 in the rotation, the one to which perhaps more than 

 anything else, you look for your money. I would not 

 say that it wa'nta higher or better cultivation than 

 any of the other crops. 



44. You were speaking just now about growing green 

 crops for fodder. As a matter of general pra. 

 those crops would be grown, would they not, nl 

 corn crop, rather than on land which had Ix-on 

 sufficiently prepared to grow wheat?- They wo.ild ' 

 part of the rotation. I mean you may look at your 

 rotation either a- starting with the wheat crop or 

 aa ending with it. 



r. You say you have never yet found any scale 

 n hich could be' laid down whereby wages, and pos- 

 fcihly rent, might be adjusted according to the \alue 

 <.f the produce:' I would certainly not s-ay that you 

 an adjust wages in accordance with prices. I do not 

 think that is possible. Rent is another story, 

 think vou could adjust rent, indeed we do see a great 

 number of rente adjusted according to the prices of 

 produce. 



46. Has there not always heen some sort of ratio as 

 between wages and the prices of produce? Of course, 

 the minimum wage was. as it were, a deliberate 

 mcnt that a ratio of that kind could not be allowed to 

 prevail, was it not : that there was a living wage to 

 he fixed which mwt be independent of tho fluctuations 

 r.f the industry. 



i I am with vou : I mean to sy. on a 

 broad point r.f policy. What T want to get from yon 

 is not so much point* of detail, but T want to be 

 sure of what is in your mind as to thfi kind of policy 

 that ought to be adopted in the future. Therefore, 

 T gather you would lay it down that the labourer 

 miut be secure of a wage which will enable him to 

 live in such a utate as he onght to live in, having 

 regard to the education which he gets and present- 



. conditions of life? Ye. 



48. And that if the market jirices of the world arc 

 insufficient to enable the agriculturist or the tiller 

 of the soil to pay that wage, then you would 

 advocate a policy whereby the State stepped in and 

 .lid : "Very well: we will guarantee you a price 

 that, at any rate, will pay your expenses and enable 

 vou to pay that wage "? Yes: T think that is what 



vou to pay 

 we would do. 



49. Would yon go further, and -.ay lliat that 

 xhould bo such a price as would afford the farmer n 

 fair business commercial return for his <-nj.ital and 

 for hi* own labour 9 If the time comes when none 

 of tin- Mp.-iati.ins of agriculture could pay at the 



rates of wages, and you had to offer to the farmer 

 State price* for )n product' to ket*j> him in uiiMneM, 

 then 1 tliink tin- .situation requires .1 fresh . 

 tion Altogether as to wha you will ^ 



and MI on. 1 have never contemplated that sta 

 affairs arriving, that the ii.nin.il play of prices should 

 bo absolutely uniemunerative to the fanner. 



30. To throw the net a great deal wid.-r 

 think it mil lx> possible to enter into a < 

 null ..in ( olonios, for example, the big wheat gr 

 ( 'iiluiiics and the big wool producing Colonies, an< 

 whether M-me mutual arrangement might be come to 

 so that the Knipirc, instead of only the United Kmi; 

 diun. < mild supply our want* on a basis which would 

 ..i lex* ensure a fair return for labour and 

 capital.- It would be a very complicated problem to 

 work out, would it i 



M It sounds so, perhaps. But what I have in my 

 mind is this: that the people might resent the - 

 'hiding a big sum aa a guarantee to the farmer if 

 th* operation were restricted entirely to the possi- 

 bilities of the United Kingdom; whereas. possibly 

 by a conference with our own Colonies, treating 

 matter on a much wider scale, it might be possible 

 for us to produce the food which we require in thu 

 country by some arrangement with the Colonies, so 

 as to avoid such a heavy charge falling upon the 

 I'nited Kingdom? Yes; I can quite imagine a 

 t .niadian representative committee i>f that kind meet- 

 ing in conference with us, saying: " Very good, you 

 in England can drop growing wheat: we will take 

 care of the wheat supply of the Empire"; and the 

 Australians equally would undertake the wool supply 

 of the Empire. But whether that sort of bargain 

 would entirely please us at home, I do not know. 

 1 should be very sorry to have to take part in a con- 

 .erence of the kind, and to press the claims of the 

 home country against our colonial friends as to what 

 -hare we should have in the pool of production. 



52. That is taking it rather far; because I think 

 you would agree, in face of the warning we ha\< 

 bad during this war and. I take it, no man imagines 

 we are never going to have another war you 

 would not favour a policy which would, be likely 

 to place thia country in danger of .starvation as re- 

 gard* ceieals. I mean, the policy you would advo- 



.lould be one whereby as much arable land as 

 possible was cultivated, not only because of the value 

 of the crop, but also because of the extra employment 

 of labour? Exactly. I want to see as much arable 

 land as possible. 



53. Therefore, you would admit that the interest* 

 of labour and the. interests of the farmer are prac- 

 tically identical? In that sense, yes. 



"il. Mr. On i limn : I HIM afraid I must go bock 

 10 this very controversial Act. the Corn Production 

 Vt. und ask you again what I believe Dr. Douglas 

 touched upon. In fixing the minimum prices of 

 cereals which were fixed under the Corn Production 

 Act at COB., 55s., and 45s. for wheat, and 38s. 6d.. 

 and iMs. for oats, was the figure fixed 

 a* the minimum wage, namely, L'.">s. arrived at by 

 taking into consideration the cost of production? -I 

 should say. looking back at my romembrai' 

 dealing with it at th time, that there was no attempt 

 to calculate, as it were, what relationship, if any. 

 they had with one another. The 'J."is. was at the 

 time the minimum rate which was fixed by the 

 then Head of the Ministry of National Service. They 

 hod laid down for men they reeruited thai 

 was tho minimum rote that should be paid, nnd that 

 L'". was a figure taken IH c.-m-o it was the one govern- 

 ing figure prevailing at the ti.no. If I rcmenilier 

 rightly the onU evidence that had been given on 

 tl. point of wliat a minimum wage for an ni;ri- 

 cultural labourer should be, was somo evidence before 

 the. Milner Committee, of which T was a member. 

 where a minimum wage of 1 a week was then 

 for: that wn.n in " 



V,. Then I ran take it that the figure., in the 

 Corn Production Ad have no relation at all to the 

 2-js fixed? No; they were not rr.lrulat-od on what 



