400 THE WAR AND AGRICULTURE 



Matthews (Secretary of the Central Chamber of Agriculture 

 attended by invitation and gave an address. 



After some remarks on the legislation of the past session 

 which concerned agriculture, and having dealt with current 

 farming topics, Mr. Matthews turned to that aspect of the war 

 which chiefly concerns farmers, namely, the Home-Grown Food 

 Supply. He said : 



I must preface the following remarks by stating that I am 

 speaking, not as Secretary of the Central Chamber of Agriculture, 

 but as a private individual. The Central Chamber has held 110 

 meeting since the war began, and I have therefore no means of 

 knowing what official view they might express. 



Agriculturists have received an immense amount of gratuitous 

 advice during the last two months, advice which has even had 

 a certain command about it, and which is summed up in the view 

 that it is your duty to increase the area under wheat as much 

 as possible. In my opinion, this is very bad advice to farmers, 

 and I have come to this conclusion only after careful thought 

 and inquiry. I would advise farmers not to plant a single acre 

 more of wheat this autumn than they would have done had there 

 been no war. I have arrived at this conclusion after much con- 

 sideration of the Government's replies (quoted above), and after 

 consulting various people. 



On the other hand, it is no secret, that if the price of wheat 

 should go up to any extent owing to the war, the Government 

 have taken legislative power and have got their scheme of organis- 

 ation all cut and dried, to commandeer all wheat or any other 

 foodstuffs at any time and at their own price. I am not com- 

 plaining of this. I think the Government would be neglecting 

 an obvious duty if they did not prepare such a scheme, and 

 in fact I sketched out and submitted the outlines of a scheme 

 myself to the Board of Agriculture in the early days of the war. 

 I *do, however, object strongly to such an entirely one-sided 

 arrangement, for if you carefully examine the two replies given 

 by the Government you will see that they think " that they 

 would not be justified in holding out financial inducements." 

 Why not ? I cannot imagine, unless indeed they anticipate a fall 

 in price, and fear lest, having given an inducement in the shape 

 of guaranteeing a minimum price, they might be called on to 

 make their promise good. The minimum price that has been 

 generally suggested is 40s. per quarter, and their refusal means 

 that if the price falls below that figure the loss must be borne 

 by the farmers. This attitude may be most reassuring to the 

 public, but it is no reason why farmers should be expected to 

 speculate in a one-sided gamble in wheat. 



At what point the Government propose to step in I do not 

 know, but it is rumoured that they will not allow wheat to reach 

 a high figure before they take action. 



In the first reply, the Board of Agriculture express the opinion 

 that wheat is likely to be a profitable crop for next year. There 



