THE WORKER'S SHARE IN AGRICULTURE. 147 



But if it is true that the services of farmers are apt to be over- 

 looked, it is equally true that recognition has never been ade- 

 quately accorded to the labourers, without whose help all effort 

 would have been in vain. The invaluable assistance rendered 

 by women and others who had not previously been accustomed 

 to agricultural service has been appreciated by the public, 

 but the steady hard work of the native sons of the soil, which 

 was the basis of all, is apt to be forgotten. The share of the 

 worker in Agriculture during the war is undeniable, and he 

 became conscious, perhaps for the first time, that he is, equally 

 with the farmer, a producer of the nation's food. 



Of course, the very real influence which the agricultural 

 labourer often has in the cultivation of the land and the manage- 

 ment of stock is well known, and is by many farmers freely 

 acknowledged. His advice is often sought, and frequently 

 taken, for it is based on close observation and intimate knowledge 

 of the land on which probably he and his forebears have been 

 rooted for centuries. 



Kipling's lines on the hereditary worker on the land express 

 a fundamental fact on English country life : 



" His dead are in the churchyard thirty generations laid, 

 Their names went down in Domesday Book when Domesday 



Book was made, 



And the passion and the piety and prowess of his line, 

 Have seeded, rooted, fruited in some land the Law calls mine. 



Not for any beast that burrows, not for any bird that flies, 

 Would I lose his large sound counsel, miss his keen amending 

 eyes." 



The worker's share in Agriculture, therefore, consists not 

 only of the supply of labour and skill in the actual performance 

 of farming operations, but oftentimes includes the contribution 

 of knowledge and experience to the management of the farm. 

 In such cases there is a real co-operation between employer and 

 worker to wrest from nature the utmost of which the land is 

 capable. 



It may be said that such co-operation, such mutuality of 

 interest, is rare, or at any rate is becoming less common. 

 Whether this is so or not, it will be generally admitted that this 

 kind of relationship between master and man is desirable, and 

 that all possible means should be adopted to encourage it. 

 If the worker has a real share in agricultural production, he is 

 obviously entitled to a fair share in the results. So far every- 

 one agrees, but the trouble comes in the attempt to define that 

 share, and to determine the method of ascertaining it. In 

 the past, the conception of labour as a mere commodity for 

 purchase and sale has been too crudely expressed. Of course, 



