1922.] 



Labour on the Farm. 



805 



Farms, however, are not run on philanthropic Hnes, and the 

 final decision as to what each individual farmer is justified in 

 paying as wages to his men will be decided by what his men 

 are enabled to do for him. 



In other words the wages bill on each farm will finally be 

 justified by the " gross income " or better still the " net out- 

 put " which the labour employed on the farm obtained. 



When w^e put the actual labour bill per acre against the income 

 received for every pound spent in labour, or the net output 

 obtained from the farm for every £5 spent in labour, we can 

 readily judge whether the labour bill on any particular farm was 

 justified or not, and can certainly form an opinion as to the 

 efficiency of its labour organisation. On the average last year 

 on the whole of the 26 farms the gross income was roughly four 

 and a half times the labour bill, and for every £5 spent in labour, 

 the average net output amounted to £6 5s. ; in other words last 

 year labour took approximately 80 per cent, of the output. 



In the case of farm H.W.C. the labour bill was decidedly high, 

 though not so unreasonably high as might at first have been 

 imagined. The gross income from this holding amounted to 

 £68 per acre. Had the labour bill borne the ratio to the gross 

 income that has been found to obtain on the 26 farms quoted, 

 either the gross income should have amounted to £80 per acre 

 instead of £6S, or the income actually obtained would have jus- 

 tified an expenditure not of £18, but of just under £14 per acre. 

 The net output from this holding amounted to £21 8s. per 

 acre, which should have sufficed to satisfy the reasonable 

 demands of farmer, labour and landlord. As the land was 

 rented at ;£3 5s. per acre, and as the labour bill absorbed just 

 over £18. it will be seen that little more than half-a-crown per 

 acre would be left as profit for the farmer. If we distribute this 

 net output, not according to what might be looked upon as a fair 

 proportion for each claimant to take, but according to the raverage 

 proportion actually determined last year, it will be found that 

 of a net output of ;£21 8s. per acre, laboiir might have been 

 expected last year to claim ^£17 5s. instead of over £18 as actually 

 received. The labour bill on this farm may therefore be con- 

 sidered as approximately £4 5s. per acre too high when judged 

 by the gross income obtained from the farm, and about 15s. per 

 acre too high when judged by the net output. 



On farm R.S.F., a small holding of 32 acres where the labour 

 bill amounted to £18 8s. 8d. per acre, the gi'oss income to 

 £48 123. 4d. and the net output to £8 18s. lOd. per acre, the 



