no DEPENDENCE OF ARABLE FARMING 



Another plan which is free from some of the 

 objections to a bounty on wheat or cereals generally 

 would be to pay a certain sum annually on the 

 land brought under arable cultivation over and 

 above that which was so used at the close of the 

 war. This plan has the advantage of paying only 

 for what was obtained — the extension of the arable 

 area. It would be more of the nature of a bargain 

 between the State and the f aimers to secure a system 

 of cultivation which the State desires, but which the 

 farmer might otherwise not consider profitable to him- 

 self. The amount to be paid could be adjusted to an 

 equivalence with the other proposal of a guaranteed 

 price for wheat. For example, if the State guarantees 

 a minimum of 40s. a quarter for wheat, this would 

 amount to a bounty of £2 per acre when the price of 

 wheat fell 10 30s. As wheat would not on the whole be 

 grown more often than one year in four, a bounty of 10s. 

 per acre on the extra arable land obtained would then 

 be equivalent to the guaranteed price of 40s. for wheat. 

 It would even be possible to fix a sliding scale of pay- 

 ment varying with the declared price of cereals. This 

 proposal would require rather more administration 

 than a guaranteed price for wheat, as it would involve 

 a more exact record of each farmer's cropping than at 

 present exists ; but the difficulties can be overcome, and 

 more exact statistics of the cropping of the land in the 

 country are themselves worth paying something for. 

 Arrangements could be made whereby the farmer could 

 anticipate the payments for some years by obtaining 

 them in the form of a loan which would give him the capi- 

 tal he needs for the extension of his arable cultivation. 

 This plan has the great advantage of fixing within small 



