1920.] 



Fa]oi Labourer's Wage. 



219 



and all of the classes interested in agriculture. He was 

 specially interested in the general question of the relations 

 between employers and employed in agriculture, because it 

 reacted on the prosperity and output of the industry, and he 

 was always glad to hear the views of all sides. He had no 

 power to intervene, however,, in local disputes, or to override 

 in any way the considered decisions of the Agricultural Wages 

 Board. 



The deputation emphasised strongly that the wages of agricul- 

 tural labourers were totally inadequate to meet the present cost 

 of living. Agricultural labourers were a most patient and law- 

 abiding class, but the situation was becoming more serious 

 every day. Ex-soldiers who had returned to work on the 

 land were, not unnaturally, comparing their lot with that of 

 railwaymen, who were living perhaps in the next cottage and 

 receiving £3 a week in addition to many privileges in the way 

 of passes, uniform, etc. 



It was urged that the cost of living was greater in the villages 

 than in the towns, and a sample budget was submitted gi^■ing 

 the bare necessities for a man, his wife, and four children, 

 which worked out to 47s. 6d. a week. It was clear that an 

 agricultural labourer could not bring up a family on the present 

 minimum wage of 42s. 6d., and if the present position were not 

 remedied the agricultural labourer would " down tools." It was 

 sincerely hoped that a strike would be avoided, but if one took 

 place, it would be a serious thing for the whole communit\-. 



Lord Lee, in reply, reminded the deputation that a proposal 

 to increase the minimum wage to 50s. was at present before 

 the Wages Board and would be considered at its next meeting. 

 It was to that Board that their arguments should be addressed. 

 He deplored the existing feeling of distrust between employers 

 and employees, and urged the necessity of a spirit of concihation 

 on both sides. He had never hesitated to say that the conditions 

 of agricultural labourers must be bettered, and that they should 

 be paid a wage comparable with that of men working inider 

 the same rural conditions in other industries. Political pressure 

 was in the direction of putting up wages in all industries, but 

 unfortunately, so far as agriculture was concerned, that same 

 political pressure was demanding cheaper food. It was 

 difficult to render the labour of an industry more expensive 

 and at the same time to cheapen its produce. At present the 

 farmer had two alternative ways of using his land, and if he 

 chose the perfectly legitimate form of grass-farming, with 

 a consequent reduction of the labour he employed, there was 



