

<tM\nsMi>N ON AGRICULTURE. 



19 Augiut, 1919.] 



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



[Continued. 



3330. Having regard to t)< o of present 

 price*, doea it not seem to be rather a reflection on 

 the intelligence of the farmer to suggest a guarant. . .1 

 minimum of 60s., although 1 know you do not mean 

 to reflect consciously upon him. A farmer has the 

 full basis that every other business man has for think- 

 ing that prices will be high and will continue to be 

 so for a number of years, and does there not seem 

 to be something wanting from the point of view of 

 the farmer if existing prices are not sufficient for 

 him and the prospect is not sufficient for him, and 

 that he must have something else than the posit IM- 

 knowledge that his business will be profitable for a 

 number of years? I think that, without any reflec- 

 tion at all upon the farmer, one might say that he 

 does desire the guarantee. His attitude is that if 

 the State is not in a position to guarantee him tliis 

 sum he ought not to be asked to take any risk in his 

 cultivation. 



3331. The ordinary business man takes a risk, does 

 he not, in his business? He does. 



3332. Some very liig risks, too:' Yes, some very big. 



3333. We have no demand from these other in- 

 dustries or manufacturers for State guarantees in 

 their case? No, but as I have tried to explain, we 

 have two alternative industries in the, case of the 

 farmer. There is no dispute that grass farming is 

 much the most attractive industry to the farmer him- 

 self. He like working with live-stock. He likes to bo 

 independent of labour and to feel that his own exer- 

 tions in managing his" live-stock brings him in his own 

 reward. 



.'t.'UI. It has been described as lazy farming, has it 

 not? It may be lazy or it may not be lazy, but 

 there is no doubt it is attractive to the farmer, and 

 when he conies to sum up the advantages of grass 

 farming ad compared with tillage farming he comes 

 down on the side of the grass farming. That is what 

 he has been doing for the last 30 years, arid will 

 continue to do after the war unless some artificial 

 steps are taken to alter the position. 



3335. If the Government were to accept your figure 

 of a 60s. guarantee that means an advance of 15s. 

 upon the present guarantee under the Corn Produc- 

 tion Act? Yes. 



3336. In your opinion, do you think the result of 

 that would not be an immediate very large demand 

 on the part of the agricultural labourers for a large 

 increase in their wages? I cannot answer that. You 

 know the position very much better than I do, but 

 I should have supposed that there would not be 

 this immediate demand for an increase, because the 

 farmer's point as far as I understand it is that 

 the increase to the labourers has already been secured. 

 The first figures contemplated by this Corn Production 

 Act were 25e. and 60s., and the labourer, of course, 

 has got much above his 25s. 



3337. I do not agree with you there, but I do not 

 wish to ask any more questions? That U the position 

 as I understand it. 



3338. Mr. Cavtley: It has been suggested that 

 farmers have been compelled to purchase their own 

 improvements recently. Is it not the fact that tin- 

 Agricultural Holdings Act provides against it? It 

 does provide a remedy. 



3339. Does it not provide that he ought to be 

 compensated for any improvements as well as for 

 unexhausted manure.*, and that sort of thing? I 

 think that the working of tin- Act in different parts 

 of the. country is difficult, and in general when a 

 tenant comes to attempt to extrlict the full value of 

 hi* improvements it is very difficult for him to get it. 



33(0. Does not the Act also provide for compeii-a 

 tion for unlawful disturliam .- That is so, but there 

 again it is very difficult to get full value. 



3341. There has been. I think we know, a good deal 

 of disturbance caused by landlords selling out their 

 land and giving vacant possession'- ^ 



:(_' Have yon seen tin- Agrii iillnriil Land Sale 

 Bill which has IM-VII di-.iuss.-d in the House of Com 

 minis tod. N I have not examined it. 



;r.i;:t That Hill provides that all notices to quit 

 should be void on the sale of agricultural laud: I 

 have Men in the papers that it is being discussed, 

 but I have not examined the Hill. 



33-14. In your opinion you consider that the risk 

 of tillage farming is very much more than that of 

 grass farming? Very much more. 



334!). Have you taken into account the- risk of 

 drought and high prices of stores in grass farming? 

 Were those risks present to your mind? Yen, I had 

 taken those into consideration. 



.'tllii. Of course your experience is not as a practical 

 farmer? Do you mean that there are more risks in 



3347. No, not more, but the differences are not 

 anything like as much as you say certainly on good 

 land? If you choose your land for each type u i> 

 all right. 



3348. Really what 1 want to ask you about is \our 

 figures. -Take Appendix A. In the first plao- I 

 notice you adopt the plan of estimating the cost of 

 producing an acre of wheat by the average farming 

 opera'tioas and charge against them tho proper cost? 

 Yes, that is so. 



3349. If I may say so, I agree with you; I think 

 it is the only way. If you have tho actual figures of 

 actual cost are they apt to be misleading? I will put 

 it in this way : Snppomg you have the cost of growing 

 a single field, does not the crop that you get depend 

 in a great measure upon the weather ut the time tin- 

 various operations are done? Yes. 



3350. If you plough the land at a particularly 

 suitable time, will you not get a better crop than if 

 \oii plough it at an unsuitable timer Yes. estimates 

 with regard to single fields are subject to very great 

 variation. 



3351. Does not the same apply to the harvest: 1 You 

 can cut a field of wheat one day and carry it in tho 

 next in some cases? Yes, in some parts of the 

 country. 



3352. It has IM-I-H done lately ?_. Yes. 



.'Ut.Vi. In other cases you may cut the field next to 

 it two or three days after that, and tho corn may be 

 out for six weeks- Yes. 



9884. That is an extreme case, but it has happened 

 in my own experience? Oh. JTOB. 



3355. You agree that the estimates with regard to 

 single fields and single farms are very misleading? 

 Yea. 



:U">fi. t'nless you get the est.imato on the same 

 farm for a number of years can you arrive at any 

 conclusion at all that is worth anything?- Not for 

 that farm. You want to get the figures for a tic-rie,. 

 of years for a particular farm In-fore you can draw 

 any conclusion from it. 



.W)7. Supposing you were to take the accounts of 

 100 or your 1,000 farms in different parts of tlie 

 country, would not the land be so different that vou 

 could form no proper estimate? With the accxmnts 

 of 1 ,(KX) farms you could group thorn into classes and 

 level them out and get at something. 



:(.T>S. At any rate that would not IK- so reliable 

 as tho system you adopt?- I would not like i 

 that after the criticism it has met with this afternoon I 



3359. I do not agree with your figures and 1 do noi, 

 agree with your plan, hut to a man of experience is 

 not your system the best one of getting at the cost 

 of growing an acre of wheat? I think it is. 



). Coming to your own figures, the- first point 

 I would draw vour attention to is that \<u bring out 

 a result which makes the present cost of growing 

 H heat only 80 per cent, more than the pre-war cost f 



Ye-. 



:t:!(il. Does not that rather raise a question 

 whether you arc right or not in that? If my rates 

 of wages are right I am right. 



.'Ctitf. I am going to test that:- I ha\e been told 

 tliiit they are wrong, but if they are right this m'ist 

 In- the relationship. 



