KOYAL COMMISSION ON AUR1CULTUBK. 



1919.] 



THE Box. EDWARD STKPTT, C.H. 



1960. It ha been stated that there has been a great 

 tendency to put land back to grass? That is tho view 

 i thi> farmer at the present time. He is worried over 

 labour troubles at prevent, and be is inclined to do it, 

 1 think. 



1361. la that because he is afraid of prices, or 

 because he wants to work his land in an easier way? 

 1 think it is both. 



1969. Do you think guarantees regarding prin - 

 would overcome the other difficulty, or that then- 

 would still be that tendency? I think it would help 

 very much to overcome it. 



1363. You say in paragraph (4) that land 1m- 

 pit into a very hod state of cultivation owing to pres- 

 sure <>f cropping and shortness of labour, and there 

 will be a large outlay to be made by nearly every 

 farmer to bring his land back into the state in which 

 it was in 1914 F That is very much the case; it will 

 take a very large sum to put it back in the condition 

 it was in 1014. 



1964. Is that shown in the condition of the crops 

 generally P Yes, I think it is. 



13G5. In the foulness of the land P Yes. 



1366. Of course, it is difficult as a matter of im- 

 mediate policy, but do you think there is a great 

 deal of land capable of cultivation which is kept out 

 of cultivation owing to the absence of adequate drain- 

 age? No doubt drainage would help land to be culti- 



: : there is a good deal of land at the present 

 moment that wants draining. 



1367. Part of it was cultivated in a mistaken way 

 during the war and part of it was not cultivated at 

 all? Yes; bat, of course, the cost of draining is very 

 heavy now compared with what it was. 



1368. The cost of the ordinary equipment of land 

 you put down also as baring increased very much?- 

 Yes, very much. Maintenance and repairs is probably 

 three times what it was. I h.tvo put it down as twice 

 myself, hut I think it is probably nearer three times. 



1369. Do you suppose these are considerably in ar- 

 rear? Yes, they are very much in arrear in my opi- 

 nion. 



1370. Landlords have not been able to spend the 

 money, even if they have been willing to do so, owing 

 to shortness of labour? Yes; I think they would have 

 spent their money on more productive things even if 

 they had had the money. 



1371. And also, of course, the cost was a deterrent? 

 Yea, the cost affected it of course. 



1372. Landlords had no increase in revenue to make 

 up for this additional cost of maintenance and farm 

 (Hjuipment? No, unless they raised renta. 



1373. On the whole, have they raised rente, do you 

 think? No, I should not say generally, but occasion- 

 ally where leases have run out, and so on, they have 

 done so. 



1374. Raton have increased slightly P Yes, but not 

 very seriously. 



l.'17">. Are you including in tho 10 to 20 per cent. 

 the probable incidence of tho new education r: 

 N"<>. I wan not, but they havi- in> i..i-..l MTV little 

 indeed during the war only a trifling SHIM. 



l:<7<>. Rates to a considerable extent depend upon 

 services and labour, the cost of which has all in- 

 creased? Yes, and it is sure to increase itill more, in 

 tho future. I hnvp put it at 10 to 20 per cent., hut 

 it in probably a good deal more. 



1377. As you are speaking of rat's, have you any 

 idea of the cost of the administration of the Educa- 

 tion Act? No, I should not be able to give you an 

 '.pinion that would be, worth having with regard to 

 that, I think. 



KIT". You have no idea of what effect it will have? 

 I have not. 



1379. Tt is an important point? Yes, it is a very 

 important point, and T am afraid T have treated it 

 too lightly. Road* aluo. T think, will bo greatly in- 

 in rout. 



1. 1-' i Would it surprise you if in some cases the 

 .ion rate will be doubled ? V> 



l:i-l I , an speak of cases in which it has been 

 doubled:- 1 have evidently not allowed enough ior 

 the increase in rate*. 



1382. You hubmit certain figures dealing with a 

 group of farms. What sort of conclusion with 



> tho cost of production of wheat do these i 



.ul you to? Taking it on the whole it produces an 



IM> of 126 per cent., and ii you tak. whout 

 alone, I suppose it would bo about the same. 



1383. You have given the 1918 figures as being 

 111 11s. 9d.? Yes, from another set of books alt.. 

 getht r. 



l:t-l. What sort of yield would that be? That 

 \\ould be 5 quarters to 'tho acre. Last year wo had 

 that; it was a very big crop last year. 



l:tv>. I am at some disadvantage in putting ques- 

 tions to you on your precis because we have only had 

 it, before us in the last few hours. I should. there- 

 fore, like you to bring out any ix>ints in connection 

 with wheat prices that soem to you to be rdc\ 

 Would you like me to go into the statement as to the 

 cost of growing wheat that I have put in? 



i :'.*>. Yes, I think so? I have explained to you how 

 these figures are arrived at in the statement. I do 

 not think I need go through that. We have a I 

 account against' each field, and the labour and horse 

 labour and manures, and any other expenses aro put 

 down every w-ok as tho amounta are expended. Of 

 course, certain things have to be more or less estima- 

 ted. We have to estimate, for example, what we 

 should charge for the use of a horse and the imple- 

 ments that are used. Tho price we have < harmed for 

 1918 was 8s. in the busy time and 4s. when .slack. We 

 used to charge about half that price, and I do not 

 think that the 8s. is really enough now. 



1387. As to these charges for horse labour, have 



you checked them, having regard to the cost of main- 

 tenance and the depreciation of horses, and so forth!" 

 I cannot tell you for 1919, but my impression is it 

 is too little for 1918. You see you have to fix those 

 prices at the beginning of the year. AVe had to fix 

 these prices for 1918 at Michaelmas. 1017. and al- 

 though they seemed sufficient then. 1 think it ought to 

 be rather higher now, because if a horse died, owing 

 to the high prices it is a much more serious loss to 

 \ ou . 



13S8. These prices were assessed before tho experi- 

 ence of 1918 was complete? Yes. 



1389. They were based on tho experience of 1917?- 

 Yes. 



1390. They are really 1!17 cost figures? Yes, but 

 probably one looked ahead a little and saw that 

 ). rices were going up, and put thorn in at a little 

 more. 



1391. But generally the experience on which they 

 are based is 1917 experience? Yes. There is another 

 item which I do not think I have put quite high 

 enough. That is for threshing and delivering. That 

 was fixed, too, at the .same time Michaelmas, 1!17 



.but, we found that the cost of threshing was a good 

 deal higher than wo expected. Them was a lot of 

 straw and the corn yield ,was very bad. The weather 

 was very bad, and it cost more than what 1 think I 

 put dow'n. I think at least another . r >s. an aoro ought 

 to be added on to that. 



1W2. Speaking of labour COM. a suggestion has 

 been made to us I do not, make it myself, nor does 

 it correspond with my own personal experience that 

 thorn has been a very general loss of efficiency in 

 labour. Have you anything to say about that? I 

 .im tho la*.t person who wants to find fault with the 

 agricultural labourer. I think the best of thorn are 

 the finest fellows that ever walked, but in the case 

 me of them I think there is less efficiency 



1393. Tt has been necessary during thn stress of 

 i h<> war to employ a great deal of labour which is 

 unskilled and inexperienced, and obviously less 

 efficient, but the suggestion is further mado that 

 there has been some decline ill the efficiency of the 

 skilled agricultural labourer himself- 1 am nfr.iul 



