The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-12-12 00:00:00

THE FUTURE OF FARMING.

In London, on Monday evening, the usual December
meeting of the Farmers' Club was held at the Salisbury
Hotel, Salisbury-square; Mr. E. M. Majoribanks in
the chair. The attendance was large, as is generally
the case during the Cattle Show week. The subject
Sued for consideration was "The Future of Farming,'
the subject being introduced by Mr. Herbert J. Little,
of Coldham hall, Wishech. After a few introductory
remarks by the Chairman, in which he disclaimed
on behalf of farmers generally any ill-feeling towards
labourers on account of recent differences, Mr.
Little proceeded to glance at the various theories
for the improvement of farming, and went on
to say, that they had now come upon eventful
days in the history of English agriculture, and
to some outside observers the emancipation of the
labourer, as it was termed, was the most important
object. However much they might regret it, the
old relations between farmers and labourers could
not be restored ; and the future of labour was the
most interesting topic of the present day. Unionism
had long been such a material part of the creed of the
town labourer that it was no wonder it had reached
the rural labourer. The want of self-reliance and in-
dependence rendered the labourer peculiarly sus-
ceptible to the influence of others. There was ample
scope for all the efforts of philanthropic men in the
improvement of benefit societies, and in that of the
administration of the Poor Law, so that relief should
be limited to those for whom it was designed; and he
believed that most of the evils of the labouring
classes might be removed by such means. The
present policy of the Labourers' Union seemed
to be wholesale deportation to foreign lands, and
a worse one could not be conceived. It involved
danger of a reaction against emigration which would
produce bad consequences. rue contingency of
a return of labourers seemed to have been over-
looked. What if the limits of successful cultivation
in America had already been reached? Having quoted
statistics in favour of this view, and spoken of the
deep responsibility of urging_ labourers generally to
emigrate, he remarked that Unionism on the part of
the labourers must be met with combination on the
part of the farmers. The sobering influences of time
might lead labourers to turn their attention to domestic
improvement; but if Unionism were persisted iu,
force would be met by force. The amount of wages
was a matter of little importance to farmers so long
as they could obtain the means of paying them out
of profits. There were only three sources from which
higher wages could be paid—increae.l production,
diminished rent and economy in labour. Low-
prized labour had injured the labouriug classes,
and prevented the introduction of piecework. (Hear,
hear.) Under the piecework system the labourer would
gain in wages, and the community in the setting
free of labour which was now wasted. The general
adoption of piecework was one ot the first necessities
of the future, and the increased employment of the
best machinery another. By-and-by the lighting of
a fire for steam operations might be as common on
farms as in mills. At this moment there were 80,000
reaping machines in use, and these were equal to
the reaping of the harvest of the whole kingdom
In twelve days. With better wages a superior class
of labourers would be attracted to agriculture.
He protested against Mr. Fawcett's recent ad-
vocacy of an artificial rate of wages as inconsistent
with economic laws. Turning next to the failure
of production, Mr. Little alluded to the hindrances
of the past and the demands of the future.
Lord Derby had asserted that their corn pro-
duction might be doubled. Corn and meat could
only be produced in proportion as it paid to produce
them. English agriculture hail not yet attracted half
the amount of capital which might be employed under
favourable circumstances. Farmers, as a rule, were
not poor; landlords, as a rule, were not rich, anil many
of them hail may a limited interest in the land; and
both these causes checked production. The laws re-
lating to laud required amendment. The tenant
farmers of England had too often witnessed the appro.
prhstion by others of the fruits of their capital and
efforts. (Cheers.) Such things ought not to be pos-
sible, and as long as they were capital would look shyly
on agriculture. Supposing Lord Derby's assertion to
he correct, which might be doubtful, farmers must
first double the meat production, and then they might
double the corn crops. Every fresh impetus given to
scientific farming would tend to increase the mipply
of meat; and he deprecated England's becoming more ,
dependent on foreign supplies than she is at present.
(Cheers.) In concluding, he congratulated the meet-
ing on the election of an eminent scientific man (Dr.
Voelcker) as the chairman of the club for the ensuing
year.

A discussion followed, in which Mr. Mechi, Mr. C.
S. Read, MP., Dr. Voelcker, and other gentlemen
took part, and the proceedings terminated with votes
of tkutaks to Mr. Little and the chairman.