HOME GROWN CORN — INHERENT CAPABILITIES 20I 



it on to another, as is done now. The onus of proof 

 must be on the claiming tenant, he must keep books to 

 show what became of his produce, and substantiate his 

 claim by this evidence, and the evidence of his men and 

 his tradesmen. 



The book containing the entries of home-grown produce 

 used should be signed each day, and falsification made 

 a criminal offence. 



Mr Guild thinks the principle of compensation should 

 be extended also to hay and other produce. 



On the other hand, Mr Forster strongly opposes the 

 proposal as leading to fraud, and Mr Middleton and the 

 Cleveland Chamber think it unworkable. Mr Looker, 

 a Hunts land agent, takes the same view. So does Mr 

 Peile, a Scottish agent. I can see no insurmountable 

 difficulty in granting this form of compensation with the 

 checks suggested by Mr Read and others. And it is 

 obviously illogical that two farmers should be able, by 

 continually selling corn to each other, to obtain com- 

 pensation, while the use of the same corn by the pro- 

 ducer on his own farm brings no compensation. 



A still more vexed question is whether there should 

 be compensation for feeding stuffs and corn consumed 

 by horses. It would seem, on the whole, fair that they 

 should be granted on the conditions laid down by the 

 Central Chamber that such compensation should be 

 restricted to horses " exclusively engaged or kept on the 

 holding." 



The Central Chamber and most of the witnesses wish 

 to strike out the proviso in section i of the Act, as to the 

 " inherent capabilities of the soil." The argument is that 

 whatever these capabilities may be, they are paid for 

 already by the tenant in the rent, and that it cannot be 

 just that'they should be taken into account in reduction 

 of the tenant's claim for the value of his improvements. 

 Others think it wholly inoperative, and had there- 

 fore better go. 



Mr Bowen Jones, on the other hand, thinks that "if 

 there are any inherent capabilities they should belong 

 to the landlord," and Sir John Lawes thinks that 



