MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



59 



21 October, 1919.] 



MR. E. M. NUITNELEY. 



[Continued. 



15.133. Unless the price was 5 a quarter? I will 

 say unless the prices were guaranteed higher than 1 

 can conceive them to he. 



15.134. You have mentioned the reduced hours of 

 agricultural labourers. You are aware, 'of course, that 

 hours of lahour have been reduced in other occupa- 

 tions; that, for example, railway men have an eight- 

 hour day? Yes. 



15.135. Do you not think that if long hours were 

 maintained in agriculture, it would be very difficult to 

 get a sufficient supply of able-bodied labourers? No, 

 I do not. You must remember there is such a differ- 

 ence in agriculture and these other things between 

 the working day and the actual hours of labour. 

 Out of a 10^-hour day. we used to have men who did 

 not spend in actual labour more than about 8 to 85 

 hours as a rule. Out of an 8^-hour day they will not 

 spend in actual labour on an average more than 6 

 to 7. 



15.136. You mean they do not spend this time in 

 actual hard work, but they are on duty all that time. 

 They cannot do as they like? Yes, that is one tBing. 

 They are partly on duty ; but you see in farming you 

 have to send the men, generally speaking, up to the 

 fields to their work. Then very frequently you have 

 to change them during the day from one job to 

 another. You can hardly say they are actually in 

 work, when they are walking a mile or half mile from 

 one field to another; but you cannot help it. 



15.137. They are not their own masters? No. 

 They are what are called working hours, but they are 

 not hours spent in actual labour. 



15.138. What I suggest is this: that if in other 

 occupations the hours of work are reduced in such a 

 way that the man working in those occupations has a 

 larger proportion of the day to himself to upend as he 

 pleases, will not those other occupations become so 

 much more attractive to labour than agriculture, that 

 it will be difficult to get a sufficient supply of able- 

 bodied men for farm work?- Of course there would 

 have to be some correlation between the two; but 1 

 honestly think that men would prefer, say, 9 hours 

 a day on the farm to an 8-hour day in the factory, 

 and they would not do as much work in the time. 

 They would not lie at work so long. A man goes into 

 a factory and site down at his l>ench. and is at it the 

 whole of the time until the bell rings for him to .;o 

 out again; but on a farm the man is never like that. 

 !) ^oen from one job to another; and apart from that 

 tin-;, always have time to stretch their backs and have 

 a little chat when they like, and smoke a pipe, and 

 so on. 



15.139. Yes; but do you not find that with the 

 younger men especially, there is a tendency for them 

 to leave agriculture for other employments? There 

 always ha-. Keen. 



15.1 10. And is not one of the reasons they show that 

 preference because they can get more leisure and more 

 time to themselves:^ That is one of the reasons, no 

 doubt, and town life attracts an active young follow 

 of course. 



15.141. Y<iii si><>ke of the difficulty of men reckoning 

 that their working day started when they left their 

 homes. Might not the Government regulations pro- 

 vide that the day should start at the farm, and so 

 help to tighten up things a bit? It would be no uso 

 if they <lid. It would be impo.ssihle. The farm 

 houses a mile away from the village would not get 

 any labour at all if you insisted on that. They would 

 not go to them. I perhaps ought rather to qualify 

 ..in thing I have said as to the men coming at that 

 time. If I I 1 . id an odd man or two. which I some- 

 times do, who came from the village a mile away, 

 they would come at the same time R.S the men who 

 lived in the village close to, about 5 to 10 minutes 

 past the hour. 



15.142. But your suggestion is if the working day 

 had to Ktait at the farm and not at the home, the 

 men would leave? They would at the lodge housis 

 a mile away. Th" farm I have now bought is a mile 

 from any village, and the men from that village will 

 not start before the men who are working at the 

 farms in the village. 



15.14.1. Doe, not that rather confirm what I was 

 suggesting just now, that a very small difference in 



hours will make a great difference in the preference 

 of the workmen for farm work as compared with 

 other occupations. You say you would lose your men? 

 They would not go to the lodge houses, as we call 

 them ; that is the outlying farms. 



15.144. They would not live at those? They would 

 not go there to work if they were obliged to walk 

 half an hour or three-quarters of an hour in order 

 to get there about when the other men do, without 

 some very strong attraction. I do not say they could 

 not be attracted by, say, another 5s. a week, or 

 something of that sort. 



15.145. I understood your complaint was that all 

 the men started together? Yes, they do where they 

 live in the same village and it is only about 5 minutes 

 away. They come in about 5 or 6 minutes past the 

 hour. I have never said much about that, but 

 it is the same in coming home. If they are at work 

 on that land 2 miles away, they leave off work very 

 nearly an hour before those who live in the home 

 yards, and they all get homo at the same time or 

 within 5 minutes of each other. 



15.146. Speaking with regard to leases and security 

 of tenure, I think I understood you to say it would 

 be unfair to the landlord if the tenant's rent re- 

 mained at the low level of the early 'nineties now 

 that the prices are somewhat high? Yes. 



Is"), 147. But you consider that security of tenure 

 may cause the farmer to pay higher rents on his own 

 improvements or have the farm taken from him. 

 That is the real problem? Ye?. 



15.148. It just struck me, would you consider it 

 satisfactory if the farmer had security of tenure under 

 a system by which a Land Court might raise his rent 

 if prices rose? Yes, to a certain extent; but I, like 

 everybody, dislike the idea of a Land Court, and do 

 not want a Land Court to interfere where the. rela- 

 tions between landlord and tenant are all right. I 

 have never advocated a Land Court that had the 

 right to go round every so many years and fix the rent. 

 All I say is that if a landlord wishes to keep on a 

 tenant, and the tenant wishes to keep on, and they 

 cannot agree as to the rent, I want some Court that 

 they could cither or both appeal to, whose decision 

 they would abide by. 



15.149. You do not mean by security of tenure that 

 it should be impossible for the rent to be raised on 

 a sitting tenant? No, I do not want that. I do not 

 think that would bo at all fair to the. landlord. 



15.150. Mr. Langford: You have been asked by 

 several Commissioners what you would suggest should 

 happen to help agriculture. With your long and 

 varied experience, I think the Commission would like 

 to know what you do suggest? Honestly, I really 

 think that if it could be done, and the whole thing 

 put on a fair and proper footing, it would be better 

 if we went back almost to the old way of leaving us 

 entirely alone; only for that we want security of 

 tenure, and we want a drastic revision of local taxa- 

 tion. I am quite prepared to go into that if it is 

 necessary, as it is a subject I have given a good deal 

 of attention to. Then we want fairer railway rates 

 and other things of that sort; and of course that 

 would involve the sweeping away of the Wages Board 

 and any fixing of wages by any outside authority. 

 If you have part of your costs of production fixed by 

 law, it seems to me you must have the price of the 

 produce fixed so as to pay those costs of production. 

 11 you have the costs of production fixed by law, you 

 must in justice guarantee us such a price for the pro- 

 duce as will enable us to pay those fixed costs. 



15.151. I am afraid, although some of us may wish 

 to go back to those time of extreme freedom, there 

 is not much likelihood of our getting back there? 

 1 quite agree. 



15.152. With regard to the wages paid to the work- 

 men, I cannot help thinking that there is no hope of 

 getting that, anyhow? I do not wish to get back to 

 the old wages. I have said all through, my objection 

 is not to the wages but to the hours, if you leave us 

 alone on that. 



15.153. Then do I understand you would not be 

 adverse to a minimum wage for a certain definite 

 number of hours to complete a week, but you would 



