MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



127 



19 August, 1919.] 



SIR THOMAS H. MIDDLETON, K.B.E., C.B. 



[Continued. 



whereas our roadsides are bare and eur field sides are 

 filled with timber, their roads are lined with timber 

 and there hedgerows are non-existent. 



3088. Do you find they plough right up to the 

 roadway ? Yes. 



3089. There is no fence at all in many cases? No. 



3090. Mr. Lennard : There is a general statement 

 at the end of paragraph 14 of your evidence-in-chief 

 which I do not follow. You say that " improvers of 

 land, whether landlords or tenants, always benefit 

 the community." I suppose the improvement of land 

 generally costs something? Yes. it costs something. 



3091. And some improvements may only bring in 

 2 per cent, on the outlay, may they not ? That is so ; 

 but the loss falls on the improver himself and the 

 community generally benefits: the parish benefits 

 whon the man suffers. 



3092. But would you really maintain that when the 

 State needs money so badly that it is willing to pay 

 5 per cent, or more for it, it would benefit the 

 community to sink money in improvements which 

 only bring 2 per cent.? I was not thinking of present 

 conditions, but of past history. I was thinking of the 

 value to the nation of these improvements which had 

 been effected at 2 and 3 per cent, when the crisis 

 came, and it was necessary for us to get something 

 on the land. The land stores up its good treatment, 

 and it is there available when it is wanted. I was also 

 thinking of the fact that other classes of the com- 

 munity who do not put their earnings into the 

 improvement of land are very apt to put them into 

 other commodities which disappear altogether. 



3093. Let me take a case. I suppose you would 

 admit that an increased output of building stones 

 and bricks, let us say, would at this moment benefit 

 the, community very greatly? Yes, that is so. 



3094. But would you consider that a man would 

 benefit the community more by improving the land for 

 a return of 2 per cent., assuming it would only bring 

 him 2 per cent., than by putting his money into a 

 quarry or brickfield producing 5 per cent, or more? 

 NIL h<- would not at the present time ; but he would 

 do so more than a man who put it into, say, a motor- 

 car. 



3095. There is another point 1 would like you vo 

 explain. In paragraph 12 you say, " Better 

 prosperous grass farms than bankrupt tillage." By 

 " bankrupt tillage." do you mean tillage that does 

 not pay its own way? liv "bankrupt tillage" I 

 mean the class of tillage one saw a great deal of 25 

 years ago at the end of the depression, when farmers 

 scraped along without capital, with overdrafts from 

 the banks up to the maximum which it was possible 

 to get, and never knowing at one year's end where 

 they would be at the following Michaelmas. 



3096. But tillage could not be said to pay its own 

 way, and therefore in a sense could be said to be a 

 losing proposition, if it required help from the tax- 

 pavers to keep it going? In the case of bankrupt 

 tillage to which I referred the dole came from the 

 farmer's own savings. That is to say, he had to 

 cut down his expenditure in every possible way, and 

 the probability was that he may have been suffering 

 in h\\ own person and in his own family. 



3097. So that the difference would be if tillage was 

 maintained by grants from the Exchequer, not that 

 there would be a gain, but that the loss would be 

 borne, not by the farmer, but by the taxpayer? Yes ; 

 in certain cases that is so. 



3098. In paragraph Irt you suggest that in respect 

 of tillage land the farmer should be given certain 

 abatements in the payment of Income Tax. Am I 

 right in gathering from what you say at the end of 

 paragraph 17, when you speak of something apart 

 from the guarantee of corn prices which might be 

 done to alter the economic prospect of tillage farming, 

 that you suggest these abatements in addition to the 

 guarantee you propose? It was my intention to sug- 

 gest them as additions, because I do not think that 

 the prire in itself would be likely to bring about 

 the extension in the area of tillage which is at the 

 present time desirable. 



25125 



3099. I understand. I suppose if tillage farmers 

 paid less taxes, which they would under your system 

 of abatements, other people would have to pay more? 

 Presumably. 



3100. So that ultimately the gain to the tillage 

 farmer would come out of the pockets of ether tax- 

 payers, in just the same, or much th same, way that 

 any payments would which were made by the State in 

 the way of guaranteed prices for cereals which were 

 higher than the world price? Quite so. 



3101. Is not it the fact that this system of abate- 

 ments would involve extra bookkeeping for the Inland 

 Revenue Department? I do not think it would 

 involve any substantial difficulty. 



3102. But if it did involve any real increase in 

 bookkeeping, it would cost the State rather more than 

 it would to give higher guarantees and pay the farmer 

 his subsidy by one channel only ? Yes ; as a pure 

 business transaction I agree with the line of argument 

 you are taking. I am thinking, however, of the effect 

 on the farmer's attitude of securing an abatement. 



3103. You think that if he gets two payments made 

 in two different ways they seem to be bigger? If it 

 is possible to secure an abatement, he will try to 

 earn it. 



3104. Then you suggest the principle-of abatements 

 because it is improbable that any guarantee of prices 

 likelv to be obtained by the farmer would be sufficient? 

 Yes. 



3105. I suggest to you that it really comes to this, 

 that the farmer may get more out of the taxpayer, 

 if the taxpayer does not know how much he is 

 paying for the encouragement of tillage ; or, in other 

 words, if the subsidy is concealed from public criticism 

 in the form of abatements to farmers. Does not it 

 really come to that? No, I do not think it comes to 

 that. 1 think the public would quite understand the 

 nature of the transaction. 



3106. There is another general statement of yours 

 I find some difficulty with. In paragraph 7 you say: 

 " Every quarter we fail to grow adds to the nation's 

 heavy load of debt"? 1 should have qualified that 

 by saying, assuming that there were not more profit- 

 able employment; that is to say, assuming that labour 

 required employment. 



3107. Assuming that you could not find any more 

 profitable employment for the labour and capital 

 engaged in growing this quarter? Yes, that is so; 

 at the same time it is very difficult under present 

 circumstances to see how you can avoid the debt. 



3108. Your suggestion is only that if we fail to grow 

 quarters of corn we add to the debt, so long as the 

 growing of the quarter of corn would be the most 

 profitable thing we could do with the labour and 

 capital at our disposal? Yes. 



3109. Mr. Langfnrd: With regard to small hold- 

 ings, are you in favour of buying the best land in 

 which to cut up the small holdings ? Or let me put it 

 in another way. Is not it probable that the small 

 holder would make a better living and results be 

 better on good land than on inferior land? Yes. It 

 all depends what the intention is and what the size 

 of the small holding is; but for the small holdings 

 I had in view, which was in fact a small farm cap- 

 able of being worked by one pair of horses, I should 

 like the small man to get the average land of the 

 district. 



3110. Is not it the fact that in the pasrt very un- 

 suitable land has been acquired and equipped for 

 small holdings in many instances? It is certainly 

 the fact that in the past many small holders have 

 occupied very indifferent and very unsuitable land. 



3111. Is not it quite probable at the present 

 moment that some people's enthusiasm for purchas- 

 ing small holdings may lead them to purchase very 

 unsuitable land on which to put discharged soldiers 

 and sailors? It is always possible that if there is 

 enthusiasm one may go wrong. 



3112. Is not it the fact that it already has done? 

 I cannot answer the question, because I do not know 

 the properties purchased. 



3113. When a larger farm, say 300 acres, is cut up 

 into three or six farms, is it your opinion that) the 



