The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-12-11 00:00:00

THE POSITION OF THE TENANT-
FARMER.

Mr. C. S. Read opened a discussion on Monday
evening " On the Position of the Tenant-Farmer,"
at the Farmers' Club, Mr. W. C. Little in the chair.
Mr. Read said that there was a large body of men
in the country who thought that the tenant-farmer
was altogether a mistake, and that he was simply
called into existence to bolster up a landed aris-
tocracy. He said that if the tenant-farmer was not
an absolute necessity his position was economically
and socially justified. He maintained that, whether
it was in England or anywhere else in the civilised
world, they could not get rid of three distinct
interests in agriculture—of the proprietor, tenant-
farmer, and agricultural labourer, altogether they
might all be rolled up ;to one person; The present
condition of the tenant-farmer he desciibed in two
words—disaster and ruin, fin d said that if the
tenant-farmers were going to lose as much in the
next 10 years as they had lost in the last 10 years,
there would hardly be one left in England. The chief
causes of the distress were bad seasons and foreign
competition. They trusted that good seasons would
come again, but he believed that the tenant-farmers
were so poor, and that the land cf England was so
poverty-stricken and foul in many districts, that when
the seasons did improve the farmers would hardly be
able to cultivate the fruits of the earth as they bad
done before, and that for a certain period the fertility
of the country must be most seriously diminished.
The present tenant-farmer enjoyed certain advantages
over the farmer of 50 years ago, and derived certain
benefits from chemistry, geology, veterinary science,
and mechanics, although in some instances they were
very much obliged to science, but could not coneeut to
follow her blindly. Who was to blame for the pre.eent
condition of things? He feared that Parliament and
the nation were rather outside the limits of their
criticisms. The intention of the Legislature in agricul-
tural matters had been good during the last ten years.
He thought that all classes in agriculture should take
some blame upon themselves. The landlords had, by
the unwarrantable rise in rents in 1836, and by the
short-sighted action of some of the grasping game-
preserving men of their class, done an infinite
injury to themselves. The tenant-farmers had acted
foolishly in competing for land, thus inducing the
landlords to take advantage of them. He thought
that the banks had been exceedingly to blame for
the stupid advances they made to farmers in the
time of their prosperity, thus tempting men to take
more land than they could possibly farm without
borrowed capital, and directly the times were
bad and the money was really wanted the screw
as put on. As to the labourer, he was of opinion
that the average young labourer of the present day
eoncentrated all his energies in extracting from his
employer the largest possible amount of wage for the
least possible amount of the worst work. He was
afraid that a good many of the labourers looked upon
the distress and ruin of the landlor& aud farmer as
their opportunity. When they came to consider the
various remedies for the present disastrous state of
things they heard a good many farmers say that they
must have Protection. He did not think that Pro-
tection, when advocated by farmers and landowners,
would go very far; but if the cry was taken up by the
labouring classes, if these really felt the competition
of foreign labour, and demanded Protection, they
were bound to have it—(hear, hear—but it might be
of a nature that the farmer would hardly like. Then
there was to be the consolidation of the Mother
Country with her Dependencies and Colonies, and
the establishment of a sort of Zollverein between
them. Remedial legislative action must take the
form of a reform of local taxation, the simplification
of land transfer, and an investigation into railway
rates. (Hear, hear.) But they must also do some-
thing for themselves. Where there had been no re-
duction of rent—and he hardly knew where that was
—there must be a considerable reduction, and rent
ought to go back at least to what it was 50 years ago.
They must also demand better buildings, and the
landlords must make permanent imArtivements in the
way of draining. He was almost inclined to think
that they had reached the lowest depths of the
present distress, and yet if he were asked for his
reason for saying so he hardly knew that
he had one. Be had heard of the depres-
sion in the years from 1822 to 1826; he remem-
bered those of 1836, and in the first &vs of

Free Trade. In each of these cases tne recovery had
come, and there seemed a possibility that the present
state of things would improve. He believed that the
discovery of a large quantity of gold would do more to
revive agriculture in this country than anything. 6.s
the British sailor, always fought so long as there was a
shot in the locker, and the British soldier never knew
when be wa beaten, so he advised the British tenant-
farmer not to give up this struggle against the whole
world until his capital was entirely exhausted. He did
not believe that this great country would allow its
agriculture to drift into ruin, or its rural population
to further diminish and deen,. (Applause.)
A discussion ensued, and a hearty vote of thanks
was accorded to Mr. Read.

On Tuesday the annual dinner of the London
Farmers' Club was held at the Salisbury Hotsl--Mr.
W. C. Little, the president of the club, being in the
chair, and the vice-chairs being taken by Mr. G. M.
Allender (president elect) and Mr. S. B. L. Druce
(secretary). Among the members present were
Messrs. J. J. Colman, M.P., A. Pell, C. S. Read,
Pickering Phipps, Jacob Wilson, Faunce de Laune,
Dawson, T. Duckhans, J. Thornton, Rowlandson, G.
Gibbons, Craigie, H. F. Moore, Wood, and Barham.
In response to the toast of the club, end of thanks to
the readers of papers during the yea,.', Mr. C. S. Read
devoted some time in explaining what he had meant
to say on Monday evening. He was a believer in the
great helps given by chemistry, machinery, and high
feeding to agriculture, and did not intend to declare
that any of these things were either a delusion or a
snare. In response to the toast of his health, the
Chairman (who was one of the sub-commissioners
Who reported to the Duke of Richmond's Commis-ion)
stated that he had devoted a good deal of time
recently to an investigation of the losses on farming
during the last 10 years, and he found that if they
took wheat, barley, oats, beef, mutton, and wool—the
principal products of agriculture—and compared their
value during the past 10 years with their value during
the 10 years which ended with 1875, they would find
their production had been .C 19,000,000 less per year
for the 10 years ending with 1885. During the latter
years the losses were greatersand in 1885 the value of
our produce was worth less than in 1875, by
no less than £35,000,000. He believed that
in 1886 the value of our produce would be
£1,000,000 less than that year. Thus in 10 years their
loses had been no less than £79,000,000, and that sum
represented the lessened power of expenditure by
British farmers. (Hear, hear.) Did they think that
that had nothing to do with the present depression in
trade? (Hear, hear.) In response to the toast of the
Royal Agricultural Society and other kindred societies,
Mr. Jacob Wilson pointed out the new departure made
by our leading society. This was an attempt to im-
prove the half-bred homes of the country by the use
of stallions that had hitherto been beyond the reach of
the tenant farmer. Five prizes of £2OO each would
be given at Newcastle on January 25 next for such
stallions. The stallions they aimed at securing were
those a little below those used for the best race
horses, but far above the scum which now travelled
the country. (Cheers.) At present these were
bought for India and Germany, but it was hoped
that by these handsome prizes they might be kept in
this country. (Cheers.) Mr. P. Phipps, in an able
speech, proposed the toast of the president elect, Mr.
Allender, and in doing so said that it had been truly
said that evening that thero was no single proposal
that would act as a cure for the present state of
agriculture. (Hear, hear.) 'tie thought that perhaps
the only remedy that would be really effectual would
be that the depression should become more severe.
(Oh, oh.) By that be meant that it should become
so severe as to be really recognised by the people.
(Hear, hear.) He believed that it would be the
duty of the rising statesmen, if some remedy
was not found quickly, to find out how to
do in the future by other means what the tenant
farmer of :England had done in the past—viz.,
to feed the people at their own expense. (Cheers.)
The question was one that did not interest the tenant
farmer alone, but the entire nation—(cheers)—and
he thought that if protection had the evil of increas-
ing the price of food to the people there was still
another way of making the cultivietion of wheat pro-
fitable without the addition of any price to the food
of the people, and that was by the giving of a bounty
on wheat. This had been done by swiss foreign
nations, and be thought successfully. He was sure
that this would have to be done in some way, even if
present notions on the subject were somewhat crude.
Mr. Allender, in reply, alluded to the great import-
ance of the figures quoted by the chairman, and
pointed out that the annual losses during the past 10
years represented the interest on the national debt of
the country. Put in another way, it was equal to one-
third of the annual revenue of the country. (Hear,
hear.) These annual losses on our agriculture could
not be otherwise than most serious, and he was con-
vinced that their importance was not realised. Mr.
J. J. Colman, M.P., Mr. Dawson, Mr. Rowlandson,
and Mr. Druce were among the other speakers.