17421-1 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 B 2 flME b3T 
 
 
^ /!r^/A^ a^^./^^ 
 
 Ittngj^cott Agricultural Ajsjafociattom 
 
 THE AGRICULTURAL DEPRESSION, 
 
 AND 
 
 SOME PRACTICAL MEASURES THAT WOULD 
 HELP THE BRITISH FARMER. 
 
 A LECTURE 
 
 BY 
 
 Mr. W^ALTER J. HENMAN, 
 
 II 
 
 OF CAVERSHAM, READING, 
 
 DELIVERED TO THE ABOVE ASSOCIATION, 
 
 AT TETBURY, 
 
 On FRIDAY, the 23rd of FEBRUARY, 1894. 
 
 i>jaiCE sixi>EisrcE. 
 
 CIRENCESTER 
 
 PBIVTED BT O. H. HARHEB, WILTS AND OLOUCBSTEBSHIBB 
 8TANDABD OFFICE." 
 
LOAN STACf 
 
 GIFT 
 
KINGSCOTE AaRICULTUEAL ASSOCIATION. 
 
 A well-attended meeting of the members of the 
 Kingscote Agricultural Association was held at the 
 Ormond's Head Hotel, Tetbury, on Friday, Feb. 23rd, 
 when Mr. Walter J. Henman, of Caversham, Reading, 
 read a paper on " The agricultural depression, and some 
 practical measures that would help the British farmer." 
 The President, Sir Nigel Kingscote, K.C.B., presided. 
 Mr. Henman was accompanied from Cirencester by 
 Professor E. Blundell (professor of practical agriculture 
 at the Royal Agricultural College), and Mr. Charles 
 Bathurst, Lydney Park, and Mr. Coode (students of the 
 College), and among others present were Colonel Henry, 
 Colonel Tumor (Pinkney Park), Messrs. P. Raymond 
 Barker, E. Henry, C. Harding, C. Hardmg, jun., W. L. 
 Stanton (Kemble), Wood, C. F. Moore (Cirencester), W. 
 Warn, Clissold (Nailsworth), Hatherall, J. Peter (Kings- 
 cote), J. White, Barber, Comley (Lasborough), Rattery 
 (Weston Birt), Holloway, Gardner, Appleby, Hitchings, 
 Cook, Thomas Daniell (honorary secretary), &c. 
 
 THE AGRICULTURAL DEPRESSION, 
 
 AND SOME 
 
 PRACTICAL MEASURES THAT WOULD HELP 
 THE BRITISH FARMER. 
 
 Mr. Henman said : There is no need to-night to waste 
 time over the cruel severity of the present season to the 
 farmers in the south, south-eastern, and south-midland 
 portion of England. This is well known to all of us ; 
 some have been slightly more favoured than others ; but, 
 speaking generally, in these districts there has not been 
 more thaa half a yield of any crop of corn, of one-fourth 
 of a crop of hay, of half a crop of roots, and these sown 
 twice with all attendant expenses. Excepting hay and 
 straw, an infinitesimal amount of which the farmer has 
 to sell, the diminished yield of the land realises an 
 excessively low figure, under present circumstances far 
 too small to meet the necessary outgoings. Ruin stares 
 thousands of honest and honourable men and women in 
 the face — ruin produced by causes over which they have 
 no control. We can only hope that a merciful Providence 
 will send next summer a fruitful and abundant harvest, 
 and that all landowners and traders will help as far as 
 lies in their power to avert the dread calamity, and will 
 give a helping hand to their suffering fellow countrymen 
 
 153 
 
and women. I do wish to impress this fact upon the 
 minds of all who may hear, or read this discussion, that 
 in the districts of England affected by the drought of 
 last summer a crisis has been reached such as has not 
 been known in the lifetime of the present generation. 
 This can only be met now by landlords and tenants 
 pulling together. I would urge upon all landlords and 
 agents, for the sake of all that is merciful and just, for 
 their own sake and for that of our common country, if 
 they have an honest and industrious tenant, to stick to 
 him, help him, and if it can be avoided, don't take his 
 capital in the form of rent. Remember, if the present 
 race of fanners be ruined, men equally good will not be 
 founl. I would say to all tenants, If you have a good 
 landlord, who meets you as far as he can, stick to him, 
 keep the farm up, there is no surer road to ruin than 
 letting a farm down, never let the charge of ingratitude 
 be made against you. If you have a bad landlord, get 
 away from him as soon as you can. The distress this 
 year is abnormal because of the drought, and consequent 
 deficient harvest of last summer, but to-night it will be 
 better to lead the discussion to some practical measures 
 that will help the British farmer, with average seasons, 
 to farm, and live, with the range of prices for his 
 produce that may be expected in the future. There is 
 no doubt the severity of the depression now has been 
 heightened by the great coal struggle, which it is 
 estimated has lost the country no less a sum than 
 30 millions this past year. The leading railways are 
 paying a dividend for the last half-year to divide 
 amongst their shareholders of £2,500,000 less than the 
 preceding one. To this is added the workmen of so 
 many trades thrown out of employ, with consequent 
 diminished profits of employers. These evils are pro- 
 ducing a greatly diminished purchasing power, which is 
 reacting upon the prices of some kinds of meat, and 
 causing slackness of trade generally. It is glibly said 
 by many that what the farmer wants is higher prices. 
 We grant at once this would help him out of many of 
 his difficulties. But as thinking men we have to face 
 the question that it is impossible ever again to put an 
 import duty upon either the wheat or the meat that 
 comes into this country. The voting power by which 
 alone such a measure could be carried is in the hands of 
 the million, and I cannot imagine the masses of our 
 large towns, the artisans and miners, allowing their food 
 to be taxed. The late Mr. James Howard, M.P., in a 
 pithy article that he published in 1885 on this subject, 
 said: " Any Government which should forget that one 
 of its chief functions is to see that the people are able to 
 provide themselves with the first necessaries of life, food 
 and clothing, without artificial restrictions, and should 
 venture to propose import duties on these articles of 
 necessitv, would assuredly be driven from power, or very 
 soon be brought face to face with civil commotion." It 
 is instructive, I think, to look back and see 
 
THE STATE OF THE COUNTRY DURING THE DAYS OP 
 PROTECTION. 
 
 In 1884 Mr. T. W. Medley issued a pamphlet, the stem 
 facts of which have never been gainsaid. From 1804 to 
 1846, says he, " The Com Laws were in fuU force, and 
 the nation groaned under the infamous system. The 
 people starved ; they went mad with misery." Some 
 rioters in the eastern counties went about with a flag 
 with the words "Bread or blood" upon it. Eight of 
 them were hanged, and nineteen sentenced to transporta- 
 tion or long terms of imprisonment. During these years 
 the state of the country was simply awful ; at one time 
 one out of every eleven of the population was a pauper. 
 In 1816, at Hinckley, in Leicestershire, the poor rate 
 was 52s. in the £. In 1817, at Langdon, Dorsetshire, 
 409 out of 575 inhabitants were receiving relief ; while 
 in Ely three-fourths of the population were in the same 
 plight. During the time these laws were in force there 
 were no fewer than five Parliamentary Committees to 
 inquire into the cause of the distress. Farmers were 
 ruined by thousands. One newspaper in Norwich 
 advertised 120 sales of stock in one day. Sheffield had 
 20,000, and Leeds had 30,000 people dependant on the 
 rates. In 1839-42, in Stockport, one-half the factories 
 were closed, 3,000 dwellings unoccupied, the poor rate 
 was then 10s. in the £. At Leeds the pauper stone-heap 
 amounted to 150,000 tons. In 1840, Lord John Russell 
 told the House of Commons that the people were in a 
 worse condition than the negroes in the West Indies. 
 In Glasgow 12,000 people were on the relief funds. In 
 Accrington, out of a population of 9,000, only 100 were 
 fully employed. Mr. Cobden stated in answer to Sir 
 Robert Peel that " The stocking frames of Nottingham 
 were as idle as the looms of Stockport ; the glass-cutters 
 of Stourbridge and the glovers of Yeovil were under- 
 going the same privations as the potters of Stoke and 
 the miners of Staffordshire, where 25,000 men were 
 destitute of employment." In the year 1835 the poor 
 rate averaged 30s. per head of the population in whole 
 districts of Wiltshire; in some parishes 40s. per head. 
 In parts of Oxfordshire it exceeded 253. per cultivated 
 acre. In Bedfordshire the poor rate amounted in 1834 
 to 16s. 4d. per head of the population, and in 1836, 
 according to the annual report of the Poor Law Com- 
 missioners, " pauperism had nearly crushed the tenantry 
 and swamped the landlords." In those days the 
 population of Great Britain was under 20 millions, it is 
 now over 38 millions. But let us turn a little from our 
 own and see 
 
 WHAT PROTECTION 18 DOING FOR OTHER COUNTRIES 
 
 to-day. There is hardly a country in Europe where the 
 peasantry consume but scarcely any meat, and but 
 where the standard of living is far below that of our own 
 working population. But to come to our own race in 
 
America, which has been one of the most strongly 
 Protectionist countries, and hedged itself round with 
 import duties in every way, with a vast area of virgin 
 soil only waiting, as one writer puts it, " to be scratched 
 and tickled to yield an abundant harvest," with every- 
 thing in its favour. How is America faring to-day? 
 From a local paper, the Reading Observer, I take the 
 following. It says: *'We recommend our friends who 
 look to Protection as the panacea for restoring prosperity 
 to trade and agriculture to read what the Philadelphia 
 JPublic Ledger has to say regarding the business outlook 
 in the United States, where notwithstanding the Protec- 
 tion tariffs, distress is wide spread. Even the United 
 States Treasury is confronted with a deficit, and its 
 balance of gold the smallest on record. The failures are 
 50 per cent, more numerous than they were last year, 
 and the liabilities 400 per cent, greater. Two-hundred- 
 and-forty banks have suspended. Seventy-five railroad 
 systems have gone into the hands of receivers, comprising 
 nearly 33,000 miles of road. Twenty-four per cent, of 
 the entire railroad mileage of the country is now in 
 charge of receivers. Bank clearances were over 12 per 
 cent, less than in 1892. In the field of regular business 
 and manufactures there have been even severer losses. 
 The output of iron decreased 40 per cent., of wool 35 
 to 50 per cent., of cotton goods 25 per cent., and of 
 leather and shoes 30 per cent. Sales of textile goods 
 were 37 per cent, less, of jewellery 29 per cent, less, of 
 furniture 26 per cent, less, of clothing 10 per cent, less, 
 and it is said the only increase was in groceries, and that 
 was very small. The number of wage-earners out of 
 employment is estimated at two millions, with five times 
 as many depending on them for support, and thus 
 suffering with them." All the leaders of public thought 
 in this country. Liberals and Conservatives, are convinced 
 that Protection, as commonly understood, is dead, dead 
 as Queen Anne. I will now speak of some practical 
 measures that would help the British farmer. First, 
 
 A DUTY ON FLOUR 
 
 of Is. a bag of 140 lbs., and this for the following 
 reasons. Revenue must be collected to meet the 
 country's needs. From Whitaker I gather that articles 
 of daily use, such as chicory, cocoa, coffee, currants, 
 figs, plums and prunes, raisins, and tea are now charged 
 with duty, and yield about five millions a year. These 
 articles of luxury, or almost necessaries, cannot be pro- 
 duced in this country. Increased revenue is wanted. 
 Raise it by a duty on flour, which can and should be 
 produced here. The higher grades of flour would still 
 be imported, but the great mass of the importation 
 would come then as wheat. I say let the wheat come as 
 it will to feed the million, but let us grind it here. Some 
 years ago I remember reading a speech by an American 
 who said, " We are sending our wheat to England, and 
 we are great fools ; we should grind it here, send them 
 
the flour ; rear pigs and cattle with the ofEals, and send 
 them the meat." This advice of the American is now 
 acted upon, and is one of the most serious blows that has 
 struck the farmer in this country. This year for the 
 first time the acreage of wheat sinks below two millions, 
 being less than half what it was in the fifties. As Mr. 
 W. R. Mallett, of Exeter, points out, the wheat harvests 
 
 From 1852 to 60 were sold for an average per year of 
 
 £36,500,000 
 „ 1861 „ 70 „ „ „ £32,031,000 
 
 „ 1871 „ 80 „ „ „ £24,137,000 
 
 „ 1881 „ 90 „ „ „ £15,180,000 
 
 In 1892 it realised £9,400,000 
 
 ,, 1893 not more than £7,000,000 
 
 Our farmers will receive for their wheat this year less 
 than half they did in 1890, less than one -third than they 
 did in 1880, less than one-fourth than they did in 1870, 
 less than one-fifth they did in 1860. The nation requires 
 to import this year about 25 million quarters to feed the 
 people, but about seven million quarters is coming to us 
 as flour. The value of the flour coming to us is very 
 nearly half that of the imported wheat, and it is an 
 increasing quantity. In addition to America, larce 
 mills are being erected and worked in India, with its 
 cheap labour, to send this flour here. At the present 
 time the imported flour, if ground here, would employ 
 20,000 men ; would revive a village industry now being 
 swamped. In the Hampshire and Wiltshire vales, it is 
 well known in this room, mill after mill is being closed 
 for everything excepting gristing purposes. But to the 
 agriculturists the serious matter is that we cannot get 
 the offals excepting at a price above their intrinsic value, 
 and we cannot rear young animals without them. Last 
 week hard Taganrog, a Russian wheat, was sold in 
 London at £1 a quarter, under £5 a ton. The average 
 run of foreign wheat, I suppose, would be about 26s. to 
 27s. per quarter, or about £6 a ton. The present 
 average price of home-grown wheat is about £6 5s. a 
 ton. But the price of the offals, the residue that man 
 does not eat, is about the same, in some cases more, viz., 
 pollard about £5 10s., bran about £6 10s., and toppings 
 about £5 2s. 6d. a ton. In looking at the Agricultural 
 Returns for 1893, I find there is a reduction from 1892 of 
 224,000 cattle, of 1,189,000 sheep, and 35,000 pigs, and 
 the returns for next June will doubtless come out worse 
 still. The cause of this is not because we have too much 
 stock, but because the food is too dear that we have to 
 purchase to rear them. If the imported flour was 
 ground here, these offals, because of their quantity, 
 would be one-third the price. This is not only an 
 important matter to the farmers, but to the labourers 
 also. The pig is the poor man's friend. Of what use is 
 it to give him allotments and small holdings if the food 
 he must buy to feed his pig or his cow is too dear to 
 make his manure profitably. These foods are not only 
 
8 
 
 the best to rear pigs, but to produce milk and butter. 
 In my opinion, the greater part of the farmer's corn in 
 the future, barring his best oats and barley, will have to 
 walk to market in the form of meat or milk products, 
 and it is a serious question of profit or loss to him the 
 price at which he can buy these wheat offals, without 
 which he cannot properly rear much of his young stock. 
 I have been asked why are not these articles imported ? 
 for a simple reason, they soon get tainted unless very 
 carefully kept, and then they are very dangerous food. 
 My next measure of relief is 
 
 PURE BEER. 
 
 Beer is already taxed, and I contend it is a fair subject 
 for revision, providing that no injury is done to the 
 honest and honourable brewers, of whom there are 
 many. Let the barley and hops come from where is 
 wished to brew it, but beer won its good name as the 
 product of malt and hops, let that be beer to-day, and 
 subject to a less duty of one shilling per barrel than that 
 charged for what is brewed from other substances. I 
 would suggest a duty as at present for that beer brewed 
 from hops, malt, and not more than one-third saccharine 
 in any of its varied forms other than malt. But for the 
 so-called beer, produced from anything else, I would 
 increase the duty by one shilling the barrel. In fact, I 
 would grade the beer for duty. In a leading article in 
 the Mark Lane Express I read, "The demand of the 
 public for pure beer free from sophistication is absolutely 
 proved by the fact that the two greatest breweries use 
 less nostrums and substitutes than any others. They are 
 not compelled to use barley malt, but they do so. 
 The public approve their beers, and their trades grow 
 faster than any others. But the Brewers' Journal 
 states that rice and maize produce better beer at a 
 cheaper price. We know it is cheaper, but better we 
 deny; because it is cheaper the brewer makes extra 
 profit. Of the extra profit so secured let the Exchequer 
 receive its quota, and let the honest user of malt and 
 hops have some of the benefit. A number of brewers 
 now brew from malt and hops only ; more would do so 
 were it not for the unfair competition of users of sub- 
 stitutes. Let the public know what they are drinking." 
 In an article in a paper called Food and Sanitation I 
 read, " Within ten years, since the repeal of the Malt 
 Tax, land under barley crops has decreased by 500,000 
 acres, throwing many thousands of labourers out of 
 employment, whilst sugar, which we do not grow, has 
 increased in breweries and distilleries by 500,000 cwts. 
 within the same period." One Public Analyst says, 
 " There is no legal definition of beer, and this article may 
 be made of almost any material the manufacturer may 
 deem fit. The Inland Revenue allows beer to be brewed 
 without malt or without hops, and even the slight res- 
 triction which was formerly placed upon the use of salt 
 in brewing is now done away with, so that the brewer is 
 
absolutely at liberty to brew beer in any way he may 
 please and of any strength, and it is a waste of energy 
 and money to analyse beer under the Food Acts." The 
 Brewers* Journal states the use of sugar as a brew- 
 ing material in 1892 has again increased by 71,062 cwts., 
 the exact proportion being 33^ lbs. to each quarter of 
 malt and com, whilst in the preceding year it was only 
 32 J lbs., and in 1890 only 32 lbs. The very largest and 
 the smallest brewers use the least sugar. One large firm 
 used as much as 160 lbs. of sugar to each quarter of 
 malt and corn. Sugar appears to be used most exten- 
 sively by the Metropolitan and Northern brewers, and 
 least by the Burton, Scotch, and Irish firms. On January 
 29th, the Mark Lane Express (to whom I consider our 
 thanks are due) published a list, copied from the ^ret^;^*' 
 Journal, of about 150 various substitutes for genuine 
 barley, malt, and hops ; still by no means a full list, 
 because certain traders do not advertise their goods, 
 although they are admittedly freely used by brewers. 
 Some malt substitutes : Laevo saccharum, sacchrosite, 
 gelatinised rice malt, gelatinised maize malt, flaked 
 golden maize, flaked silver maize, granulated silver maize, 
 granulated golden maize, terrified maize malt, brewers' 
 saccharum, sago and maize saccharum, patent grist made 
 from rice only, &c., &c. As hop substitutes: Hop 
 equivalent, Premier hop extract, L. H. liquid hops, 
 aroma of hops, artificial hops, H. S. hop supplement. 
 On April Uth last, speaking at the Central Chamber of 
 Agriculture, Mr. Lewey, a hop grower and brewer, said, 
 " If persons knew what half of the stufE sometimes put 
 into beer was made of, they would not drink it, and they 
 would very soon have better beer brewed, and there 
 would be a larger consumption of the national beverage." 
 Another gentleman said, " Good-brewed beer would 
 never make a man quarrelsome ; it might make him 
 lively, but he never knew a man who drank good -brewed 
 beer go home and kick his wife." This is a national 
 question, because not only are labourers displaced by 
 the large area of barley ceasing to be grown, but it is 
 estimated that every acre of hops costs in labour alone 
 £30 an acre. I go further. I know that many medical 
 men agree that these hop and barley malt substitutes are 
 the cause of much of the dyspepsia, liver, and kidney 
 troubles that afflict our poor suffering humanity. I want 
 also to urge that we as farmers are sufEering from the 
 reduced demand for our barley, and that there are fewer 
 graius to dispose of, and they are consequently dear. It 
 is well known that grains in their wet state are good 
 milk producers, but pale ale grains, when dried or 
 dessicated, are second to none as a food for milch cows. 
 Last year I used them largely, in fact scarcely anything 
 else in the shape of artificial food, and I never had better 
 results, my cows in better condition or more healthy. I 
 say let the Legislature make it answer a brewer's purpose 
 to use more malt, and we farmers shall gain in the 
 increased demand for our barley, and the decreased price 
 
10 
 
 of grains because of their quantity. Another help to the 
 farmer would be 
 
 MORE HONEST TRADING 
 
 with meat. The House of Lords' Committee have 
 reported on this question, and I saw the other day that 
 the President of the Board of Agriculture thinks the 
 Foreign Merchandise Marks Act safB.cient to deal with 
 it. In my opinion the best way to deal with this ques- 
 tion would be to compel under penalty all foreign meat 
 that is handed to or sent home to a customer to be 
 accompanied by a ticket bearing in large letters, " This is 
 foreign meat," unless the shop is advertised as a foreign 
 meat shop only. A friend of mine related to me the 
 following fact, told to him by a butcher whom I will call 
 Butcher No. 1. He said to Butcher No. 2, who had 
 made a large fortune by hanging fine carcases of English 
 meat in front of the shop, and foreign behind, which was 
 largely sent to customers at the top price of the best 
 English, " How shall you get on if they make you stick 
 up in the shop * foreign meat sold here ! ' " " Oh," 
 said he, ''I don't mind that; if I was bowled over it 
 would be a mistake, you know, and shouldn't occur again. 
 But if they make me ticket it home, I am done, I shall 
 sell my business and retire, I have enough to live on." 
 Just now I think the greatest injury to the farmer is the 
 unfair trading in foreign bacon. I am indebted to the 
 kindness of Messrs. C. and T. Harris, of Calne, for the 
 evidence given by them before the House of Lords' Com- 
 mittee. Mr. Hams there gave some glaring instances of 
 American being sold as the best Wiltshire or the best 
 Waterf ord. This naturally reduces the price of the best ; 
 anyone buying the inferior at the price of the best is con- 
 sequently disgusted. Good bacon is not only a question 
 of good curing, but good feeding. The best English is 
 largely fed with barley meal aud wheat offals, whilst the 
 foreign is largely fed with maize and sometimes 
 some linseed or with lentils, etc. ; any way that bacon is 
 either hard or flabby or oily in taste, not the mellow 
 taste of the home fed. The public are willing to pay a 
 good price for really prime bacon or ham for breakfast. 
 Now, this cannot be produced at the price the foreign 
 can be. I find the home supply of pig meat for 1892 was 
 227,000 tons, but the imports of dead pig meat were 
 275,000 tons, or 50,000 tons more than was produced in the 
 British Isles. The money value paid for this foreign 
 bacon and ham was in 1892 over 11 J millions. A farmer 
 with reduced capital can soon get up a stock of pigs, and 
 I maintain that if our farms are to be kept up in condi- 
 tion it must be by more pigs being kept and fed. My 
 father, who was no mean authority on farming subjects, 
 always said no animal paid better to eat poor grass than 
 sows and small pigs, of course with some corn. At the 
 large bacon factories now pigs can be killed and cured all 
 the year round. The sheet anchor of the British farmer 
 must be meat, milk, butter, and cheese. Let him be 
 
11 
 
 determined to produce whatever he does of these of the 
 highest quality and in the way the consumer 
 reqviires. The total home production for 1892 of butter 
 and cheese is estimated at £16,673,000, but the imported 
 foreign exceeds this, amounting to £17,383,000. Much 
 of this ought to be produced at home. The importation of 
 margarine in 1892 amounted to about 3f millions. Un- 
 doubtedly much of this is still sold as butter, and will be 
 until it is coloured differently. It is ak'eady artificially 
 coloured, and I contend it is only fair to ask the Legis- 
 lature to prohibit its being given the recognised butter 
 colour. Another help to the British farmer would be 
 
 LOCAL RATES BEING PUT UPON A MORE EQUITABLE 
 BASIS. 
 
 To begin with, I think it is not desirable to assess personal 
 property to the rates ; it would be very unpopular and 
 inquisitorial, as Mr. James Howard, late M.P. for Bed- 
 fordshire, pointed out in a paper he read before the 
 Farmers' Club in 1882 on this subject, what is wanted is 
 *' That agricultural land may pay on a lower scale than 
 the residences of rich men towards poor relief and school 
 board rates, and on a lower scale than mines, quarries, 
 factories or breweries, towards road repair." I know a 
 parish in which there are five very rich men whose hoiises 
 and grounds are assessed at £200 gross, or £160 a year 
 rateable value. In that same parish a tenant farmer with 
 400 acres of land pays to the district rate £20 10s. a year, 
 against their £16 ; but to the poor rate he pays over £42 
 a year, against their £12 odd. Altogether he pays about 
 £35 a year compulsorily more than these richer men. 
 Fortunately there is not a school board, or he would be 
 hit harder still. A friend of mine in Bedfordshire with 
 a farm of 387 acres paid in one year for school board rate 
 only £52 13s. I contend it is not the occupiers or owners 
 of land who should pay so much towards these local 
 charges, but the better class houses should pay an 
 increased share. In these days of low prices the land 
 cannot stand it. In 1883 Sir Thomas Dyke Acland 
 published a very interesting abridged report by Mr. W. 
 C. Little, the Assistant Commissioner to the Royal Com- 
 mission on Agriculture. Mr. Little suggests that 
 
 COURTS OF ARBITRATION 
 
 or conciliation should be established to mediate by con- 
 sent between landlords and tenants as to compensation 
 for improvements. At a meeting of the Abingdon Board 
 of Guardians, the chairman, Mr. J. G. Bowles, suggested 
 that local courts of arbitration might be formed to settle 
 matters between landlords and tenants whenever they 
 could not agree as to compensation. I am strongly of 
 opinion the time has come when these courts should be 
 formed by every County Council to settle matters of fact, 
 and in which lawyers should not plead. The difference 
 between the Irish system of land tenure and the English 
 is so great that I do not think the court of arbitration. 
 
12 
 
 should have anything to do with settling rents in the 
 first instance. It is only right this should be settled be- 
 tween landlord and tenant. But in cases of dispute, on 
 appeal of either landlord or tenant, this court should 
 settle finally if there was a case to go to arbitration. I 
 believe this would give in practice security of tenure to 
 an improving tenant without which a go-a-head man in 
 some situations cannot feel quite safe. This is especially 
 needed in some districts, because of the growing system 
 of letting the shooting, and the present almost insane 
 mania for tame game. From this mania, also, some of 
 the richer landlords are not free. The question of 
 increased 
 
 RAILWAY CHARGES 
 
 and through rates at a reduced price to foreign produce 
 is being dealt with by abler heads than mine. Suffice it 
 to say that any quarter of foreign com that is carried by 
 a through rate at even only 6d. a quarter less than the 
 home grown is moved locally causes a loss to the home 
 producer of that amount. It must be remembered that 
 whilst the whole country benefits by railroads, the farmers 
 suffer more inconvenience in the cutting of the fields into 
 awkward shapes for cultivation, the frightening and 
 disturbing of cattle and horses. I contend the State 
 shovdd see that all home grown farm produce should be 
 moved locally at no greater cost per mile than the foreign. 
 
 RESPECTING BIMETALISM, 
 
 I do not think we shall hear much more of it. Supposing 
 that England or the world decided to give an artificial 
 value to silver, it is a metal so plentiful and so easily 
 worked in the mines, that capital would fly to its pro- 
 duction. Within a few years it would become such a 
 drug upon the markets that it would be impossible to 
 prevent illicit coining, and the country beiug flooded 
 with silver money that had never passed through the 
 National Mint. England will never be so foolish as to 
 part with the high position her stable gold standard has 
 given her as the financial centre of the world's trade. 
 
 THE LIVE STOCK INDUSTRY 
 
 is vastly more important to the farmers of the United 
 Kingdom than the production of bread. I have shewn 
 how the value of the wheat crop for 1892 was under 9| 
 millions, and its value this year is only about 7 millions. 
 Messrs. Mansell and Co., of Shrewsbury, published a very 
 able circular in which they estimated the value of live 
 stock on farms in the United Kingdom on the 4th of 
 June, 1890, as about 248^ millions, in 1891 as 226^ 
 millions, and in 1893 as 179^ millions. A reduction in 
 the value of our live stock of about 68 millions in the two 
 years ending June 4th, 1893. With these facts before us, 
 we have a right to insist that our Government shall not 
 allow any risk to be run of the importation of foreign 
 diseases ; that our Government should so legislate, that 
 
13 
 
 the food we require to rear and feed our animals is made 
 as cheap to us as possible ; that we are helped and not 
 handicapped in competition with the foreigner. The 
 refonns that I have sketched would enable the farmer to 
 produce in increasing quantity the best meat, milk, 
 butter, and cheese: the labouring population will be 
 kept in the villages, and attracted back to the land, and 
 able to live in far greater comfort than it is possible if 
 they flock into the towns : cheap feeding stuff wiU mean 
 more work, and better quality and quantity of meat and 
 milk products for the masses, with a profit to the farmer : 
 pure beer will mean that arable land will not go so much 
 out of cultivation, with its consequent displacement of 
 labour, and the public will have a better and more 
 healthy beverage : the prevention of unfair trading in 
 meat, margarine, etc., will enable the public to buy what 
 they ask for, and will give the farmer an increased 
 demand for his products: fair and moderate railway 
 charges is a measure of justice that has been far too long 
 delayed : local burdens press unduly upon the land, and 
 in equity it is necessary they should be levied as between 
 man and man : whilst a court of arbitration will give 
 that feeling of security of tenure, or of compensation for 
 unfair disburbance, that is necessary for good farming. 
 The old Scotch proverb says " Many a mickle makes a 
 muckle," and it is in my opinion through the multitude 
 of small things, combined with moderate rents, that help 
 is alone possible to the distressed agriculturist. (Loud 
 applause.) 
 
 DISCUSSION. 
 Professor Blundell, who was asked to open the dis- 
 cussion, said he had not risen with a view of criticising 
 Mr. Henman's paper, but of hoping that there would be 
 a free discussion upon those points he had raised. There 
 was the question respecting the flour. It seemed on the 
 face of it that if the wheat were brought into this country 
 instead of the flour that they should have the offals to 
 make use of for feeding young stock. Those of them 
 who had raised young stock knew what an advantage it 
 was to have suitable food, such as the offals Mr. Henman 
 had mentioned. To a large extent farmers were deprived 
 of the use of those offals owing to their being dearer in 
 proportion to other foods. That was a point well worthy 
 of consideration. The point with regard to the railway 
 rates of coiu:se was one that required a great deal of 
 consideration. The railway people bid high for traflic, 
 and consequently, in order to increase the amoimt of 
 traffic, they offered special rates to foreigners and large 
 producers for carrying their particular goods on our lines 
 of railways, and of course sometimes it was to the detri- 
 ment of the farmer, because as a matter of fact they 
 found that foreign corn was often carried cheaper than 
 the corn grown by the English producer. That seemed 
 to be a disadvantage. With regard to labelling foreign 
 meat, there was a great deal in what Mr. Henman said ; 
 
14 
 
 they were at a disadvantage oftentimes. There was not 
 the least doubt about it that the English public were 
 often victimised by having inferior meat sold to them as 
 the very highest quality meat. It was difficult to obviate 
 that, because the great bulk of the English people did 
 not buy their own meat, but had it sent to them, and it 
 was not possible to most of them to know whether the 
 leg of mutton was of the highest quality or second-rate 
 imtil they sat down to eat it, and then they were not always 
 very good judges upon that point. If they labelled 
 foreign meat, New Zealand meat for instance, if it was 
 a dishonest tradesman he might put a New Zealand 
 label upon the very inferior English mutton, and then he 
 would be cheating the consumer. It would be much 
 better, he believed, for most of them, that they should 
 enjoy a really good New Zealand leg of mutton than 
 have inferior ewe mutton, and they might be cheated in 
 that way. It certainly seemed as though it would be an 
 advantage if they could be sure when purchasing meat 
 that they were buying the genuine English article instead 
 of being taken in to some extent by having second-rate 
 foreign produce foisted upon them. He should like to 
 hear gentlemen present, farmers who were directly 
 interested in the business, make some remarks upon Mr. 
 Henman's paper. He knew from his own experience 
 that it was not the easiest matter to prepare a paper ; it 
 required a great deal of thought ; and it was patent to 
 all of them that Mr. Henman had spent a great deal over 
 the paper he had read to them that evening. He was 
 sure it was Mr. Henman's desire that his remarks should 
 be freely commented upon, and he hoped they would be 
 commented upon by some who were present that evening. 
 (Applause.) 
 
 The President said he had not come there that night 
 to give his own opinions. He had almost got agricul- 
 tural depression upon the brain. (Laughter.) As they 
 were aware, he was sitting upon the Royal Commission 
 to inquire into it, and after four hours and a half 
 yesterday, and to the time he left London that day, 
 about two hours and a quarter, he had been listening to 
 the evidence given. He wanted very much to re-echo 
 what Professor Blundell had just said ; he hoped they 
 would discuss the subject which had been so very ably 
 put before them. He was sure it must have caused 
 Mr. Henman a great deal of pains and trouble to give 
 them the paper he had ; his many researches must have 
 taken a good deal of his time and trouble. As he said 
 before, he did not want to give his opinions, but he 
 would just make two or three remarks. The first thing 
 he thought they must all agree with was that they could 
 not return to Protection, but it certainly did seem very 
 hard upon thorn, as producers of com here, that wheat 
 should come over to this country manufactured, and so 
 not only did they lose the very valuable product to rear 
 cattle with, the grand offal of the wheat, but the 
 actual labour of it was lost to this country. Of course it 
 
16 
 
 was rather a difficult distinction to draw as regards a 
 protective duty between wheat and flour. There was 
 another very formidable antagonist against the flour 
 being taxed, and that would be the large carrying 
 steamers. They could bring over flour much easier than 
 they could wheat, at least it packed easier than wheat, 
 and they could bring it over at those cheap rates which 
 were really killing them in England, because they 
 brought it over almost at a nominal rate, and had done 
 so for many years. He thought he told them at the 
 time that when he went in 1883 over to America he went 
 in the " Servia," one of the largest steamers of that 
 time, and they were bringing over flour in thousands of 
 tons at almost nothing, quite a nominal rate, from 
 America. They said " It pays us so well ; if we did not 
 bring this, we should have to put ballast on board, which 
 would have cost us a large sum of money." It certainly 
 seemed a very hard case that there should not be some 
 tax put upon the manufactured article. As to the 
 capabilities of America for wheat-growing, the previous 
 day the Royal Commission had evidence from a Scotch- 
 man by birth, who had been 20 years in America. He 
 only spoke of the Western States and not the Eastern, 
 and he was firmly convinced that they could not grow 
 wheat at a profit at the price it was now to bring it into 
 the market there. But again they were handicapped, 
 because from India and Russia they certainly could 
 bring it, and in India, especially, the trade was develop- 
 ing very fast indeed. The low price of labour in both 
 those countries would, he thought, allow wheat to come 
 here still at the low price it was, and a very ruinous 
 price it was. They must remember that in America the 
 farmer was handicapped, because the straw was of no 
 use there. They burnt the straw now, but they were 
 making a change. In many of the wheat-growing dis- 
 tricts they had begun to lay some of it down to grass 
 and breed cattle, and in fact they looked upon it that 
 they could supply the market here especially with 
 mutton and beef, and hogs and bacon and pigmeat to a 
 very large extent. They must try and circumvent them 
 by, as Mr. Henman said, growing the very best beef and 
 pork and mutton. They could only compete by growing 
 the best com, and fattening the very best beef and 
 mutton and pigs. The question of foreign products 
 being sold as English was a very hard one, he thought, 
 upon agriculturists here. Although the Legislature had 
 passed some measures to try and check adulteration, yet 
 it was no use disguising it, as the House of Lords Com- 
 mittee as regards meat and other Commissions had 
 proved, that foreign produce was sold as English to an 
 extent which was hardly believed by people who did not 
 go thoroughly into the question. With regard to meat, 
 it was a most difficult thing to mark it. Nobody should 
 be allowed to sell foreign meat without a license. That 
 would help to check it. Cattle marking was a great 
 diJG&culty. They could mark the carcase, but when 
 
16 
 
 they came to cut it up there would be a good deal of 
 manipulation of it. He was very sorry that the Com- 
 mittee came to such an impotent conclusion. He very 
 thoroughly agreed with Mr. Henman that the land was 
 unfairly burdened with the rates. They certainly had 
 had some help lately from the State, and he trusted they 
 might have more help. The anomaly of the highway 
 rate was very great, because they all knew that a farmer, 
 say of 500 acres, did not use the roads nearly as much as 
 a large miller. The farmer was rated upon his 500 
 acres ; the miller was rated, perhaps, upon premises that 
 were not £100 a year, and he was using the roads every 
 day, and the agriculturist was not. His friend whom 
 he saw sitting there, a brewer, did the same, and 
 got off very cheap. (Laughter.) He should like to 
 ask him how much he saved since the turnpikes were 
 taken off. He (Sir Nigel) did not want the turnpikes 
 to be put on again ; they were nther an expensive 
 collection, and rather a nuisance when one was in a 
 hurry, but still they did this — those who used the roads 
 had to pay for them. Mr. Henman alluded to the 
 relationship between landlord and tenant. He was more 
 and more impressed every day that there must be a 
 pulling together between the two, or else both would go 
 to the wall ; and the more the landlords tried to help 
 their tenants, and the more the tenants put confidence in 
 their landlords, he thought the better. As regards any 
 restrictions of cropping, they had discussed that, he 
 thought, there before. As long as the farm was fairly 
 treated, and at the end of the tenancy was left in a 
 proper state of cultivation, the more a man was left to 
 cultivate it as he liked and do what he liked with it, the 
 better it would be, and more money would be put into 
 the land by the tenants. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Henman 
 had touched upon the question of land courts. It was 
 very strongly his opinion that the settlement of rents 
 should be entirely between landlord and tenant, and no 
 court ought to interfere with them. He would rather 
 not enter into a discussion upon the Agricultural Holdings 
 Act at that moment, because he did not know what might 
 be the upshot of the opinions of the gentlemen who were 
 his brother commissioners. He thought that Act was 
 not thoroughly understood, and would work easier than 
 was thought by a very great many at the present moment. 
 If a court was necessary to go before to settle disputes 
 as to compensation, &c., let it be rather a local one, and 
 let it be one composed of somebody who knew something 
 about it, and he did not think either the landlord or 
 tenant need fear. As to a land court, he hoped he should 
 not live to see that in England at all events. The Irish 
 land courts were a thoroughly different system altogether ; 
 he was not talking about them. He hoped some of the 
 gentlemen present would get up and give their opinions 
 as to what Mr, Henman had said upon the different 
 points. (Applause.) 
 Mr. Warn thought they had hit the brewer rather 
 
17 
 
 hard. He thought they ought to put a tax on wheels. 
 With reference to bimetalism, he thought it was not a 
 thing of the past. He had a friend who had £80,000 
 employed in the metal trade who had agreed to write a 
 paper on bimetalism as it affected agriculture. It was a 
 very complicated thing — (hear, hear, and laughter) — and 
 he should be very glad to have a paper read. He 
 thought the public were too good judges of beer to drink 
 anything they did not like. (Applause.) Personally, 
 he wished the beer was only allowed to be brewed from 
 malt and hops, but he knew his neighbours put nothing 
 deleterious into their beer. Mr. Gladstone was going to 
 put the beer duty up again, because he knew the brewers 
 were the easiest jeopleto get it out of. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. Clissold next spoke, though remarking that they 
 did not want to mwke that into a brewers' discussion 
 entirely. The brewing industry in an agricultural 
 district was dependant upon the agricultural industry. 
 They were so bound up together that he did not think 
 there should be any misunderstanding between them. 
 The agricultural interest were extremely anxious to get 
 rid of the malt duty, though most of them knew that it 
 would lower the character of the barley used by brewers. 
 With a heavy malt duty, it paid them to buy the best 
 barley, and to use none of an inferior character. There 
 was a possibility ot doing themselves harm by insisting 
 too much on the subject of the use of substitutes for 
 English barley or English malt. Last year — his two 
 friends would both bear him out — they could not have 
 made good beer from English barley unless they had been 
 able to use with it a little substitute in the way of 
 sacchariun. He thought the lecturer might have made 
 out a worse list of substitutes than he did. He would 
 find that they were only made from malts made from 
 different substances, he owned not made from barley, all 
 of them. He did not think there was any article he 
 mentioned said to have been used by brewers that was 
 detrimental to health. He quite agreed with what Mr. 
 Warn had said, that if people could not get good beer 
 they would not drink it, and they all of them would very 
 cordially invite any of their friends to investigate all the 
 articles used in the manufacture of bepr. All of them 
 would feel that the pure beer theory as to beer being 
 made only with malt and hops was a fiction altogether. 
 They could make as bad beer with good malt and good 
 hops as they could with, a proper selection of saccharum 
 used in it. It was not a matter alone from which it was 
 made ; it was the care and attention bestowed upon its 
 manufacture. He quite agreed as to the incidence of 
 highway expenses. He was very satisfied indeed with 
 the change, but the incidence now certainly was very 
 unfair. He did not agree with his friend, Mr. Warn, 
 that the matter should be met with a tax on wheels ; he 
 thought that was a tax on another industry. He had 
 always believed it should be met by a tax on horses, but 
 that was a matter in which he supposed they should have 
 
18 
 
 no opportunity of moving just at once. It was not a 
 matter just at the present time of practical politics, but 
 that it was an unfair incidence on the land he certainly 
 agreed. (Applause.) 
 
 Mr. Comley (Lasborough) said if a man's holding 
 was improved when he left it, he ought to get the benefit 
 of the improvement. As to offals, nothing was better for 
 the manufacture of dairy goods than offals. (Applause.) 
 
 Colonel Henry said he was sure they would join with 
 him when he^proposed a very hearty vote of thanks to the 
 lecturer, Mr. Henman, for the excellent lecture he had 
 given them. (Applause.) Anyone who had heard it 
 must be fully aware that he must have given a great deal 
 of time and thought, and the result had been, he thought, 
 a most satisfactory lecture. (Applause.) He thought 
 he had been right in pointing out many different ways of 
 assisting the depression in agriculture instead of sticking 
 to one particular line. In that town they suffered per- 
 haps more from railway rates than anything else of the 
 subjects Mr. Henman had touched upon. The Midland 
 Railway, which was some distance from them, gave 
 farmers what facilities it could by issuing cheap market 
 tickets to Gloucester, Stroud, and other places. The 
 Great Western Railway absolutely refused to give market 
 tickets. When he had pointed out to them that they 
 should look upon Gloucester as the capital of the county 
 and give every facility to farmers, they said " Oh ! yes, 
 they certainly ought," but they did not do it. (Laughter.) 
 If he wanted to send a horse to Gloucester, the Great 
 Western Railway would not take it there for less than 
 10s. 6d. If he sent it as far as Nallsworth, the Midland 
 would take it for 5s. He had heard several farmers 
 complain of the rates. He thought in a case of that sort 
 legislation might step in and compel railway companies to 
 carry things at proper rates. In that foxhunting country 
 Mr. Henman deserveri still more thanks, because he was 
 at heart a fox hunter, and in his own country took great 
 trouble in looking after the farmers' fund, poultry fund, 
 and subscriptions generally. (Applause.) 
 
 Colonel Tumor seconded, remarking that if they sent 
 the paper to their new director, Mr. Long, they should get 
 the rates reduced. (Applause.) 
 
 Mr. Henman, in reply, said Colonel Henry had 
 spoken of his duties as honorary secretary of the South 
 Berks Hounds. That was certainly a labour of love, and 
 if his voice could reach any farmer, he would say, 
 " Never sink so low as to put a bit of wire in your fence." 
 (Hear, hear.) Whatever the times might be let English- 
 men be true to the last. Respecting the railway rates, 
 the through rate was a great injury and also a 
 great injustice. The railway companies said it was 
 right, because they were going to convey the stuff a long 
 distance, but the stuff was put on by their own men. 
 When English producers sent their stuff, their men had 
 to load it and get it out of the trucks. If the railway 
 companies did not send men to load it, they ought to 
 
19 
 
 carry it at the same price as the foreign. Notwith- 
 standing what had been said, the rates for agricultural 
 produce were raised five per ceut. since the agitation. 
 He had a wordy war with the Great Western Railway. 
 He bought some desiccated grains from Burton, and 
 they sent him in a bill of 25 per cent, increase. He said 
 he would send them a cheque for the old rate. They 
 refused to take his cheque, an'l stuck to th'dr bill. He 
 wanted another lot, and had it sent by the South 
 Western. He had a go at that Company. The South 
 Western knocked ofE 20 per cent., so he paid that, 
 subject to protest that they would give him five per 
 cent, back when it was settled. The Great Western 
 Railway demanded to know liis authority for stating 
 that the South Western charged less, but of course his 
 authority was their own letters, and there the matter 
 ended. The railway companies were charging five per 
 cent, more for ordinary produce, and more than that for 
 hay and straw. That was a price which came out 
 of the farmers' pockets, and which the farmers could 
 not afford to lose. Sir Nigel Kingscote spoke of wheat 
 growing in India. He had two or three years back 
 a conversation with Professor Wallace, who had just 
 come home from India, and he had left an impression 
 upon his mind that wheat from India would never be an 
 increasing quantity. The Hindoos were beginning to eat 
 it themselves, and being 270 millions of them, if they 
 did take to eat it, they would eat the increased quantity 
 that they grew, and would find it a nice change from an 
 all rice diet. The country they had to fear was the 
 Argentine, which as the Americans would say would 
 lick all creation in wheat growing. With regard to a 
 court of arbitration, he thought it would be a gross in- 
 justice for anybody to come between the farmer and the 
 landlord in settling rent in the first instance. The man's 
 brains ought to be good enough for that. He knew an 
 instance where a man was being smothered with 
 pheasants that came out into his barley. (Mr. Warn : I 
 should have them. Laughter.) They could not touch 
 those pheasants in August and September, and he was 
 far too good a sportsman to wish to see the pheasants 
 injured in an unsportsmanlike way ; but he did think 
 the man who professed to own the pheasants should be 
 bound to pay the damage they did. There was a case 
 that should go to arbitration, and the arbitrators should 
 say how much he should receive. With regard to bi- 
 metalism, there was no doubt that the discovery of fresh 
 gold mines, or the cheaper working of gold mines, would 
 help them far better than bimetalism. He numbered 
 some of his best and truest friends amongst the brewers, 
 and he was not likely to say or think anything adverse 
 to a good brewer. He was speaking as a farmer, and he 
 knew there were brewers and brewers. If the brewers 
 used more barley malt, they should get a better demand 
 for their barley, and get the grains back. (Applause.) 
 The meeting then terminated.