KOTAL COMMISSION ON AGKlCl'LTl I(E. 



1919.] 



THE HON. EDWARD BTBOTT, C.H. 



[('tuitiniieil. 



141V. Ye, M minimum. Tho > in I'rodut IKUI 

 .it pnwent runs out in 1933, doe* it not - Yes. 



1420. Would you suggest that this OOs. should only 

 taka effect up nil then, or would you .suggest tlmt the 

 iin.-nt should intimate at an early-date whether 

 they mean to continue or not continue with the Com 

 I'n'xluction Act fcf I think it is very ini|M)rtnnt 

 thnt the guarantee should he for a OOOSadarftble 

 IIIIHI|N>I .if yearn. I do not think, for example, thnt 

 a (OWtttoS) for three years will be of much use now. 



ir.M. No; that in what I Ic.-l - My own view is 

 that it ought to be at least 8 years. 



1 122. With your recommendation of a fiOs. mini- 

 mum would yon couple a recommendation thnt the 

 guarantee should he for, say, 8 years? Yes. 



1433. That would naturally give the farmer much 

 greater security than he would have with a shorter 

 term? Certainly. 



11^4. In the figures you have put before us as to 

 farm results, I do not know that it applies in your 

 cfcse, but in many cases large figures have appeared 

 on paper of results for the war years without taking 

 into account the depreciation of the land which has 

 occurred. Have you allowed for that in your figures 

 or possibly you have kept up the condition of your 

 land': No;" these figures that I have given here have 

 not allowed for that nt all. hut no doubt land is in 

 a vory bad stato to-day. My land, and I know many 

 other people's land also, is in a bad state, and it will 

 require a considerable sum of money spent on it to 

 bring it hack into the condition in which it was in 

 1014. 



1425. Could you form an estimate, taking the 

 country generally, of what proportion of the to-called 

 profits* during the last four years would be required 

 to restore the land to its pre-war condition? A con 

 siderable sum. I think it would take at least !> an 

 acre to put it right. 



1426. So that what figures we really see are mis- 

 leading as to the farmer's actual profits? Yes, they 

 are very misleading. 



1427. Of course, you know we are faced in t he- 

 beginning of October with a shortage of the hours 

 of labour from 54 in the summer to 50? Yes. 



1428. I think it is contended on some hands that 

 the increased wage will produce increased efficiency in 

 the labour, and that we really shall not feel the 

 shortening of the hours in the output of work. Is ' 

 that your opinion? These figures which I have put 

 before you have not allowed at all for that shorten- 

 ing of hours; they are based on the existing number 

 of hours. 



1429. To put it in another way, do you think we 

 hall get the same output in tbo reduced number of 

 hours that we did in the larger numlier of hours?- 

 I am afraid not; I think we shall get a reduction 

 of output. As things are at present, we certainly 

 shall, but what may happen in the distant future is 

 uncertain. At present wo are certainly getting a 

 reduction. 



1430. So that you will require additional men to 

 keep your land in fertility;' Yes, except that yon 

 may be able to organise your labour better, but I 

 doubt whether that will )M> possible. 



14.31. So that the cost of production will he in 

 creased to that extent? Yea. 



1432. With regard to your Table No. 1, revenue ex- 

 peiMes, rent, interest on buildings, tithe and land 

 tax, you speak as an occupying owner? Yes, this is 

 in occupying owner's property I am referring to 

 here. 



1433. Does 20 per cent, represent the actual in- 

 crease on thosn items? On the whole I am inclined 

 to think it would be. more than 20 per cent., but I 

 rather wish to put it in a moderate way. 



1434. I ask because it struck me as being rather 

 small? I think, on the whole, it would be more. 

 because the cost of repairs is excessive just now 

 whether that will be permanent or not I do not 

 know, but nt present it is and also, of course, there 

 are the arrears to bo made up as well 



1435. Owing to the fact that no repairs have Keen 

 carried out during the last lew years, there are not 

 onl\ the usual running repairs to ! done, but the 

 aireii' .irs that haie to IM- made up- 



and for the future it will require to In- larger than 

 that. 



I l.'lli. In i. lie or two of these items you put the 



down an being less in pi'.tl than in P.M- 

 there any particular reason for that- The probable 

 cost for l!l|!l 20 is more or less an estimate, 

 figure tor the year l!'l is v. hat actually happened 

 to be in our hooks for that period It would look 

 as if the estimate for li'P.i 20 was not enough. I 

 did not intend giving you these P.lls figures at all, 

 but when .Mr. (ioddard saw the figures in the hooks 

 lie thought it would he interesting for the Com- 

 mission to see thorn, otherwise I should not have put 

 them in at all. 



1 137. 1919-20 would work out at a larger sum, you 

 think!' -Very likely it would. 



1438. Horses and horse fodder you have only put at 

 100 per cent, increase? Hat, of course, is not taking 

 into account the summer drought. I have taken the 

 season as a whole. I was considering the future year. 

 Of course, the price of hay will be a great deal more 

 than that. 



I 139. And the price of oat*? Yes, it must be. 



1440. You are not treating it on the basis of special 

 conditions in any one year, but looking forward to 

 what the- conditions will be in normal years- Yes. 

 I do not look upon that as a permanent circumstance 

 which will affect it. although you have to allow for 

 these occasional things, which do increase ex; 

 very often. 



1 111. In tho cost of production you find that labour 

 works out as tho most serious item of increase?. Yes. 

 Yon will see, in the first place, that labour conies to 

 53 per cent, of the whole cost. In 1912. 1!)I3 and 

 1914 rent was 16 per cent., and now it is 8J. Manure 

 was 9, and is now 8. 



1442. In view of tho cost of labour and of these 

 other items, do you think tho farmers would take an 

 unreasonable attitude if they strongly contended that 

 your figure of 60s. as a minimum is not a sufficient 

 figure? No. I do not think they would, although 

 1 have a sort of hope that by better organisation. 

 and perhaps \\ hen we get over this reaction of the 

 war. we may get a little more work done. 



1443. You do not take that into account in your 

 figures, hut that you think may he- the case in the 

 course, of a- year or two? Yes, when we get settle*! 

 down. 



II II. Do you think that this increase in the cost 

 of labour, tho increase in the e-ost of manure, and 

 cakes, and horse fodder, and implements, and one 

 thing and another will have a decided tendency to 

 induc- farmers to lay much land down to grass? 

 I'ndouhtedly. 



1445. And that, therefore-, we may expect only the 

 best class of land to be kept in cultivation? If 

 nothing is done, 1 think that is what ultimately wil! 

 happen. Tho best arable land that is tho land which 

 has made the most profit during the last few J 

 such as the South Lincolnshire land, and 



no doubt l>e kept in cultivation, but 1 think that is 

 what will happen with regard to other land. 



1446. What about the- housing question'- That 

 seems also to be a great factor in the e.*t of pro- 

 duction? That will be a difficulty. I think, he-cause 

 a good ele'.il of this land which lias bee-n ploughed up 

 has beon ploughed up in districts where the land 

 ue'iit down to grass 20 or .'*0 year- agei. and the 

 ci.ttageis were allowed te> fall down, and at the present 

 time- them are not the- cottages there' or suitable- farm 

 buildings. That will make it. very difficult to get it 



el again and to keep up permanently as arable 

 laml. 



1117. It would not be- reasonable tei expect tho 

 owners to build cottages unless thcV get some 

 guaranleo in rc-i"* -t ..f their outlay ? Tlint is so, no 

 doubt. 



