88

[j. TALBOT.

I.—9a.

John Talbot examined. (No. 24.) 13. The. Chairman .l What are you?—l am a farmer, of South Canterbury. 14. Do you wish to"supplement what Mr. Jones has said? —Yes. I quite concur in the statements that have been made to you by Mr. Jones, and I would like to particularly emphasize this point: the great difficulty there would be to work under the hard-and-fast regulations laid down by the Arbitration Act. As you are all aware, we are under great disabilities with regard to the weather-conditions For instance, in the early part of this year we had no rain and could do little or nothing, and then when the weather did change—about August—we had too much ram, and consequently could not do much then, so that we were driven into a period of very few weeks during which to get the bulk of our work done. There is not only the question of the short length of time we have in which to do our work, but there are also the wet days to consider, and also partially wet days. When we start work in the morning often a thunderstorm or some other change will stop work", and the weather will be too bad for us to do anything throughout the rest of the day; and if we had these hard-and-fast conditions under the Act to follow, we should not be able to make up the time lost for fear of a prosecution. The conditions will also do great injury to farming generally and dairying. I am not able to say much about dairying, because there is not much carried on in South Canterbury. What there is is languishing, because it is carried on under great difficulties. If we were brought under the Act I think it would probably be closed up altogether so far as South Canterbury is concerned. With regard to gram-growing, we have to compete against the whole world in a distant market. Australia has come to the front, and is apparently going to be a very formidable rival to us indeed. I think that in past years not more than 3s. a bushel has been netted by the farmer, and in many cases only 2s. 6d., and it has been as low as 2s. Id. to 2s. 3d. The sheep industry has greatly improved, and has become our staple product; and although lam a grain-grower working my land mainly by the aid of my family I think we should seriously consider whether, .under the restrictions of the Arbitration Act it was worth our while to go on with it. I might point out to the Committee that the margin of profit on wheat-growing is very small indeed. Land that will produce, say, 30 bushels per acre is not obtainable for less than 15s. per acre to rent, and as it takes nearly two yearssay from now to February or March, 1909—and being besides an exhaustive crop, two years rent must be charged against it. No one having land worth 15s. a year to rent would give the right to take off a crop of wheat for less than £1 10s. per acre. Take the rent, then, at £1 10s., ploughing 125., discing and harrowing 65., drilling and rolling 35., seed 65., harvesting 125,, threshing 7s 6d., carting ss. (that would be 2d. per bushel from the mill to the store, and is below the average cost), rates, &c, 2s. 6d.—l think you will find these figures work out at £4 4s. for expenses against the 30 bushels at 35., or £4 10s. And this is for land that is clean If it is not clean it would require, perhaps, double as much work. It also involves getting 30 bushels to the acre, which is above the average. I farm 3,000 acres with my family, and I should say that undoubtedly we should drop grain-growing to a large extent if we had to work under this Act—that is, we should not employ any -outside labour at all. I have six sons working on the farm and three or four more going to school. . . ■ 15 It has been a fertile farm, then?— Yes, fairly so. I am just pointing out the very precarious nature of grain-growing, and if these labour restrictions are forced on us—seeing the uncertainty of how we may be dealt with even to the men being called out m harvest-time—it is very doubtful whether we should trouble about wheat-growing. It is not a matter of wages, because a good man is worth from £1 ss. to £1 10s. a week and his board—that is probably one out of ten; but it is"the other nine-tenths, whose main object is to get through the day anyhow It is quite different with the man who takes your interests into consideration, lo the great maioritv of the labourers I am sure we could not afford to pay higher wages than is now usually done I myself pay £1 ss. a week for a ploughman, with, of course, £8 or £10 extra for harvesttime' lam paying one man 6s. 6d. per day, with the use of 10 acres of land and a cottage of five rooms for which he pays me 9s. a week. He keeps his cows on the land, and with those and his garden largely helps to" keep his family. I am inclined to think the labour union would get no advantage from any fixing of wages, for if the minimum were fixed even as low as £1 a week, a great number would, I think, be unemployed; yet we are paying more than that now to good men If we had to ask inferior men to go for a permit we would not do so Ido not think one man'in ten would dream of sending a man for a permit, and consequently the man would have to go without getting work. We are thinking of what is best for both sides. 1 represent probably nine-tenths of the farmers of Canterbury, who landed here without money, and went to work, and in time got on to a piece of land, and in time became employers, and every one of those we employed in those days is or could be in the same position as T am—that is to say, they are now farmers and employers of labour The closest connection exists between the good farm hand and the tarmertheir interests are identical. Ido not think there is one farmer in ten who has not been a worker himself and he is iust as wishful that his men should do the same as he has done. I arm-work does not require to be brought under regulations like town work, because it is not unhealthy, nor is it laborious The ordinary farm hand has only to walk or ride on his implement when working Nor should we be able to get in more than eight hours' work if we wanted to—the horses do not work eight hours a day—and the man is not required to get up very much, earlier than the city man He gets up about 6 o'clock and feeds his horse, and then after breakfast goes to work. It usually takes to a quarter past Bto get to the work; it will take an hour or an hour and a quarter for the feeding and they are not often expected to work after o o'clock, except to feed and put covers on the horses. The man who has to walk after a team ploughing will walk about twelve miles a day to plough 3 acres, which is four miles for the acre. The weakly individual who would die if you were'to put him in an office will live all right on a farm. You would not want to bring