LAND & WATER 
November iG, 191O 
reserves may be released next autumn, and he refuses 
therefore not only to respond to the State's appeul. to 
fjrow more wheat, but he aetually reduces his area under 
wheat. Shorta,i<e of labour has something to do with it, 
but the question of price much more. 
Give the Farmer a Guarantee 
How is this renmnerative price to be secured to the 
farmer ? The^e are two means of securing it — 1)\ im- 
jjosing a tariff and by guaranteeing the price. A high 
tariff is out of the question. It would jness most )k .i\ ily 
on the poorest section of the conumu'iit}' whose bn ad bill 
it larger in proportion to its income than is the ca>e with 
those who are better off. Further, a high tarift \\ i>uld 
tend to confirm the bad farmer in his bad methods. A 
small tariff, on the other hand, may prove advi>ahk' for 
revenue purposes, and to secure preferential treat luent 
for our l)oniini(uis. But the i'ssential measure i^ lliat 
the State shall give the farmer a guarantee that wheat 
shall not fall below a certain price. 
This guarantee of price, particularly if with it is cnupled 
a bonus for breaking uj) grass land, is a direct inn ntive 
to increasing the production of wheat, and, as a corollary, 
of oats and barley as well. Secondly, the guarantee 
falls ujjon the general taxpayer — it is the State's insurance 
against an interrupted food supply. The premium would 
not be a heavy one : one day's "war exi>enditurt" would 
jjrobably represent the maximum premium. But it is 
more than an insurance against starvation, for no single 
factor would do more to guarantee the world i)eace 
than the knowledge that Great Britain was for all practical 
purposes self-supporting. 
The question what price should be guaranteed is liard 
to answer at this moment, when we are necessarily 
ignorant of the paramount factor : the cost of production 
alter the war. But it may be some guide to recall that 
Lord Milner's Committee, reporting in the summer of 
1015 suggested 45s. per quarter as the guarantee. 
The first object of the guarantee should be to secure 
the farmer, who grows wheat as it should be grown, 
against financial loss. Its second object is to encourage 
the farmer to grow a heavy crop. Of course, the question 
of the ifoason comes in here ; but the full and proper use 
of artihcial manures goes a long way towards counter- 
acting the effects of an unfavourable season. 
Many people object to the word guarantee or bonus, 
so let ns put it in another way. The nation requires 
more home-grown wheat ; the 'farmer is the one man 
M-ho can grow it. This is a simple business process which 
can be dealt with by contract. But it differs from ordi- 
nary business transactions in this respect, that a large 
production of home-grown wheat is vital to the State's 
existence, and that the State may find itself obliged to 
ordain that certain definite areas are given up to grow ing 
wheat in England and Wales. 
In the United Kingdom we have about 11,000,000 
acres under the plough. Under a strict four-year rotation 
2i' million acres ought to be under wheat, but for years 
we have had under 2,000,000 acres. We have in the 
I'nited Kingdom 50,000,000 acres of cultivated land, 
(^f this 75 per cent, is grass, 25 per cent, arable. In 
Germany the proportion is reversed. 
Parts of Britain are too wet for a great extension 
of the arable area, but we could at least have equal pro- 
portions of arable and grass. That would give us some 
25,000,000 acres under the plough, and this on the four- 
year rotation would give 6J million acres for wheat Many 
authorities agree that it would be quite possible to allot 
this area to wheat. 
I belie\e that in Napoleonic days wheat was grown on 
t),ooo,ooo acres. But the exact area is hard to ascertain. 
In the middle of the iqth century we certainly had over 
4.000,000 acres under wheat. But to put it at a con- 
servative figure, let "5,000,000 acres under wheat',' 
be our objective. Our total consumption of wheat ^now is 
35,000,000 cpiarters. Of this we produce at present or»ly 
7,000,000 quarters. With new varieties of wheat 
and scientilic cultivation the average should b,c five 
quarters of wheat per acre, or a total of 25,^00,000 
nuarters. This supply would remove all danger of >sHarva- 
tion in thee\ent of an enemy holding up our tradq <.Voutes, 
If the (iuvernnunt agreed with the farmer that he'!?honld 
be secured, sav. xss. a quarter for his wheat and the world 
price averaged 44s. throughout any gi\ en year, then the 
gjiarajitec wopld cost the country £1,250,000, and so on'' 
jyro rata. 
In our reconstruction of agriculture State demon- 
stration farms must play an important part. Such 
demonstration farms have done much in the development 
of agriculture in other countries. Here they arc con- 
spicuous by their absence. If the State decrees certain 
changes in our methods, it must show that the changes 
rightly effected are economic and practical — hence the 
need of the demonstration farm. On it every measure 
for cheapening production would be tried under the 
guidance of the best brains. 
The Prfce of Bread 
Now, how would this guarantee affect the price of 
bread ? At juesent we produce only one-fifth of our 
requirements in wheat, we therefore cannot influence 
world prices. Our position would be very different if wc 
were producing 80 per cent, of our supply. In time of 
crisis the (lovcrnment could commandeer this supply, 
for it would be under its control ; but it cannot com- 
mandeer wheat grown outside the United Kingdom, and 
we may this year see the Government forced to buy 
oversea wheat at a high price and sell if at a loss simply 
to keep down the price of bread. 
The guarantee could only be responsible for the price 
of the loaf when wheat stood at 45s. per quarter or less, 
and at 45s. the sixpenny 4 lb. loaf is quite possible. And 
if after the war the standard of wages is considerably 
higher than before the war, this price will not be un- 
reasonable. 
It is now time to discuss the farmers' attitude towards 
the guarantee. Here we find a curious state of affairs : 
there is no doubt that the majority of farmers are ■ 
against it. There are several reasons for this : 
farmers think it will mean more interference, and 
they would rather have low prices and be entirely free 
than ha\e fair prices with any conditions attached. 
Again farmers who do not farm wheat land do not 
realise that a fair steady price for wheat must benefit the 
whole industry. Further, the large majority of farmers 
do not wish to change their methods of farming. To 
change methods requires a mental effort, and most farmers 
would rather not make the necessary effort. They have 
not yet realised as a class that the \ital needs of the 
nation will require not only changed methods, 'but a 
changed attitude on the part of the farming class. 
No want of patriotism is being imputed. If the 
farmer is not to-day producing as much food as the 
nation expects, it's the nation's fault, not the farmers. 
F"or decades past our Government not only neglected the 
interests of the cuhivators of the soil— they have actually 
penalised them in \arious ways, and this during a period 
when other States with a sounder policy were protecting 
the agriculturist and concerning themselves directly in 
, the development of the industry. 
Now the State's attitude is 'changing : it is beginning 
to realise that the culti\ator of the soil is the most im- 
portant section of the communitv. Iij spite of this im- 
proving attitude e\-er since the war began, the State so 
far from doing its utmost to encourage the agriculturists 
has i^layed them many mean tricks. I only need to 
mention labour, wool, hay, and straw. But we must 
be patient. Our rulers know nothing about agriculture 
and therefore will have to learn— and the first step in the 
right direction is to realise that tlie land is of vital national 
importance. Therefore it behoves the agriculturists 
to meet the State half way and to say : " If you, the 
State, will give us the means to do so, we shall accept the 
nevv order of things, and do our utmost to increase the 
yie d of the land. Much may run counter to our private 
inclmation>;, but the security of the Empire demands 
this sacrifice and we will make it with good heart " 
If the farmer will meet the situation in this spirit, if he 
will co-operate with the State in securing the full develop- 
ment of the land, his reward will be great. We shall see 
the industry flourish as it does in Denmark ; we shall 
see the condition of the averaoc farmer comparable with 
that of the DHUish farmer. And not only the farmer— but 
the landowner also must enter into tlie movement 
I hoix; next week to deal with the need of a lixing 
wage for agricultural workers- 
