MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



75 



28 October, 1919.] 



MR. THOMAS WILLIAMS. 



[Continued. 



coming, and it would not be much trouble for an 

 arrangement to be made to have the jugs all ready 

 which belong to the people, and for the maid in. 5 

 minutes to put what is necessary into them and leave, 

 them in a row. It is not like having to take coppers 

 or something like that. It is a deduction every week ; 

 and is not like children coming for a pennyworth or 

 threehalfpennies' worth of milk? It is a weekly 

 arrangement w-hich sounds very well in theory, but I 

 am afraid it would not work out so comfortably as 

 you suggest. 



15.629. Why not?- First of all, if you want these 

 little details, the women will come to" the house one 

 after the other, and somebody has to attend to the 

 door all the time. You will never get them to come 

 all at the same time to attend to these little things. 



15.630. I quite agree, unless you have a definite 

 rule, a table or a signboard, and you make them 

 produce their own jugs, and they bring them in turn, 

 and you say " Your milk will be ready at a certain 

 time," and let it stand there. I should not have 

 anybody waiting for them. It is the same amount 

 every time they come, and it is paid for at the end of 

 the week.. There are lots of people, even in the case 

 of the milk carrier that comes round, who are not up 

 when the milkman comes, and they leave the jug out 

 and the milkman puts the milk in? But he does not 

 do that if he is only getting wholesale prices for it. 



15.631. No, but this is on the premises. The milk 

 is there, and it is an advantage both ways? I do not 

 agree with you, at all, that it is an advantage both 

 ways. 



15.632. You do not agree that it is an advantage 

 for the farmer to see that the whole of his people on 

 the farm are well fed and are kept fit? I do not 

 dispute that part of the matter, but it does not 

 appear to be material. The men should be well fed, 

 of course; but it is not up to the farmer to feed them 

 not the men who receive what is due to them in 

 money. It is not due to the farmer to feed them. 



].">.<i33. But you would not really suggest that the 

 people who fetch the milk from the back door of the 

 farmhouse ought to pay more than the wholesale 

 price if they are living and working on the farm? 

 No, I do not say so. 



15.634. Then, in that case, it is no advantage to the 

 man, further than the advantage of being well fed, 

 that he should have the milk or other things in kind. 

 It seems to me the sensible thing is to say^ " Your 

 wages are so much a week, and you have either milk or 

 potatoes or something else at wholesale price, and you 

 pay for what you have." I cannot see that beyond 

 that it is any advantage either to the farmer or to 

 the labourer that a portion of his wages should bo 

 paid in kind. That is really the only advantage, and 

 it is an advantage on both sides? It is no advantage 

 to the farmer, as I said before, hut it is an advantage 

 to the labourer. If the labourer was not working on 

 the farm, of course, he would not get it. It is worth 

 so much money by having the thing at wholesale 

 prices. I do not say there is any objection on the 

 farmer's part to supplying the man with it, but it is 

 a consideration. 



15.635. I quite agree ; but surely it is an advantage 

 to the farmer that that man should bo working on 

 his farm. If he worked on somebody else's land he 

 would not get it, and the reason he does get it is 

 because he is on that particular farm, and it is an 

 advantage that ho is on that farm? Yes, and it is a 

 consideration in tho wages paid to the men, and that 

 in tho main point. 



15.636. Then, that also applies to the cottage. I 

 want to know whether you really think it is an ad- 

 vantage all round for a man to live in a cottage that 

 is tied to the farm? You say an advantage all 

 rou ml. Would yon please say what you mean by an 

 advantage all round? 



I"j.'>.'t7 Some of these cottages you referred to are 

 n>]'] at a very high price, and then you say they can 

 only rhnrge so much rent for them because that 

 amount is fixed: 1 -Tho farmer can only charge that. 



1 ">.';.'. No matter what he gives for the cottage, he 

 can only ehargo that rent. Surely, if it is not an 

 advantage, to him to have the cottage on his farm, 

 and the man who lives in it tied to him, he would 



not go and pay the price the house is worth. I 

 mean he would let it go? The agricultural labourer 

 as a rule does not buy the cottages. 



15.639. I quite agree, but the farmer does? If he 

 buys the farm, he usually buys the cottage with it. 



15.640. Do you not think it is far better to let a 

 man live in a house and pay him his wages and let 

 him pay rent for the house without making a deduc- 

 tion from his wages at all, and say, "You have so 

 much wages; you have to pay for what you have." 

 The principle that you suggest here is the advantage 

 that he should be paid part in kind, which would 

 include the cottage, potatoes, milk, and those sort 

 of things? Of course there is a fixed figure on 

 cottages now, and that I understand is usually de- 

 ducted out of the wages when paid to the men. There 

 is very little difference in principle whether the man 

 receives the whole amount and pays the 3s. or what- 

 ever it is back to the farmer. 1 do not see much in 

 that point at all. 



15.641. I should not have raised it, only you say 

 it is an advantage? It is an advantage for the 

 farmer of course to have his cottages on the farm. 



15.642. Then with regard to the sleeping accommo- 

 dation. Have you any of this particular kind which 

 you mention in the last paragraph on your own 

 farm? No. I would like to qualify that. I do not 

 think it is the general rule that men sleep over 

 stables. They are mostly crowded in the small farm- 

 houses with tho family. 



15.643. You also intimate that there have not been 

 any repairs done lately? Yes, that has been im- 

 possible. It has been useless expecting repairs during 

 the years of the war. 



15.644. Is that because they could not get them 

 done or because of the prices? Partly both; but 

 there were no men of that class available for repair- 

 ing buildings. 



15.645. Mr. Bobbins : In paragraph 4 you say : 

 " Insecurity of tenure is a prime factor in those 

 cases of bad farming which are sometimes met with." 

 Have you given sufficient thought to this subject to 

 be able to indicate to us any scheme whereby this evil 

 could be removed, having regard to the just claims 

 of all parties concerned? No. 



15.646. It seems to be a burning question in Wales? 

 It is, and outside Wales too. 1 have not gone into 

 the matter really sufficiently to put anything before 

 you. I have never thought of it in that way; but, as 

 I said before, the best security of tenure is some 

 system whereby the farmer can hold his own land. 

 There is a distinct tendency in that direction with us. 

 Land is going into the hands of the farmer at a very 

 rapid rate. During the last twelve months enormous 

 quantities of land have come under the hammer, and 

 in the majority of cases the farmer has bought his own 

 land. I do think we must agree that that will be 

 a tendency, if the farmer can manage it, towards 

 better cultivation; and the farm should be looked 

 after better generally in the majority of cases if it 

 can be had at a reasonable figure. 



15.647. You think that the majority of Welsh 

 farmers favour the system of occupying ownership as 

 opposed to tenancy with reasonable security? Of 

 course, if we could get a reasonable system of security 

 to satisfy tho farmer, tho farmer on most estates 

 would be quite satisfied ; but that has been the diffi- 

 culty. There has been nothing suggested to meet our 

 views so far, and I am afraid we shall have to fall 

 back on something else. 



15.648. Does leasing obtain to any extent in Wales? 

 No, leasing has been done to a very small extent. 



15.649. They are principally yearly agreements? 

 Yes, quite ; or half yearly. 



15,650; You do not consider that under a system of 

 occupying ownership the farmer might be crippled 

 for capital? There is that difficulty, unless some 

 provision is made to meet it. 



15.651. To give him credit? Yes. 



15.652. Are you able to say from your knowledge of 

 Welsh farmers, whether on the whole they would prefer 

 to be left to work out their own salvation, or would 

 prefer to have a system of Government guarantees 

 coupled, as it would have to be, with a system of 

 control and interference with the method of con- 

 ducting their business? Generally, I should say the 



