c* ? Cornell University Library HD 1955.G7 The recent development of German agricul 3 1924 013 813 849 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES. THE RECENT DEVELOPMENT OF GERMAN AGRICULTURE. BY T. H. MIDDLETON, C.B., Assistant Secretary, Board of Agriculture and Fislieries. Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of His majesty. LONDON : PRINTED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE By DARLING and SON, Limited, Bacon Street, E. To be purchased, either directly or through any Bookseller, from WYMAN and SONSj Limited, 29, Breams Buildings, Fetter Lane, E.C. 28 Abingdon Street, S.W., and 54, St. Mary Street, Cardiff; or H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE (Scottish Branch), 23, Forth Street, Edinburgh; or E. PONSONBY, Limited, 116, Grafton Street, Dublin; or from the Agencies in the British Colonies and Dependencies, the United States of America and other Foreign Countries of T. FISHER UNWIN, Limited, London, W.C. li)L6. [Cd. 8305.] Price 4d. GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS (with the under-mentioned exceptions) can be purchased in the manner indicated on the first page of this wrapper. Booksellers, and the accredited agents%>f Free Public Libraries, are entitled to a discount of 25 per cent, from published prices. Hydrographical Publications of the Admiralty are sold by— J. D. Potter, 145, Minories, London, E.C. Patent Office Publications are sold at — The Patent Office, 25, Southampton Buildings, Chancery Lane, London, W.C. (N.B.— Classified Abridgments of Patent Specifications are sold also by Wyman and Sons, Ltd.) Ordnance Survey and Geolog-ical Survey Publications can -be purchased from — The Director General of the Ordnance Survey, Southampton ; or The Superintendent, Ordnance Survey, Dublin ; or Agents in most of the chief towns in the United Kingdom. (N.B.— Small Scale Maps are, as a rule, procurable at Railway Bookstalls in England and Wales.) The London Gazette is published on Tuesday and Friday evenings by Wyman and Sons, Ltd. Price Is. The following is a list of some recent Parliamentary and Official Publications emanating from the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries : — Annual Reports. Agricultural Statistics, 1915 : — Part I. (1915). Acreage and Live Stock. [Cd. 8240] of Session 1916. Price 4d., post free bd. Part II. (1915). Produce of Crops. [Cd. 8300] of Session 1916. Price 2d., post free 3d. Agricultural Statistics, 1914 : — Part III. (1914). Prices and Supplies of Corn, Live Stock, and other Agricultural Produce. [Cd. 8112] of Session 1915. Price bd., post free 6id. Part IV. (1914). Imports and Exports of Agricultural Produce. [Cd. 8152] of Session 1916. Price bd., post free Id. Distribution of Grants for Agricultural Education and Research in Great Britain in 1914-15. [Cd. 8066] of Session 1915. Price 8Jd., post free lid. Proceedings under the : — Diseases of Animals Acts, the Markets and Fairs (Weighing of Cattle) Acts, &c, for the year 1915. Report by Assistant Secretary (Animals Division) of Session 1916. Price 3d., post free id. Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Acts, &c. [Cd. 8072] of Session 1915. Price 9Jd., post free lid. Tithe, Copyhold, Inclosure, Commons, Land Drainage, and other Acts, for the year 1914. [Cd. 7916] of Session 1914. Price 2d., post free 3d. Progress of the Ordnance Survey, 1913-14. [Cd. 7424] of Session 1914. Price 10id., post free Is. Report of the Commercial Control Branch for the year 1914. [Cd. 7935] of Session 1915. Price 3d., post free 4Jd. Report on the Administration of the Grant for Light Horse Breeding for 1913-14. [Cd. 7818] of Session 1915. Price 3d., post free 4d. Report on the Administration of the Grant for Live-Stock Breeding Industry for 1914-1915. [Cd. 8017] of Session 1915. Price 3jd., post free 4id. 8390 BOARD OP AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES. THE RECENT DEVELOPMENT OF GERMAN AGRICULTURE. BY T. H. MIDDLETON, C.B., Assistant Secretary, Board of Agriculture and Fisheries. Presented lo both Houses of Parliament by Command of His majesty. LONDON: PRINTED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE By DARLING and SON, Limited, Bacon Street, E. To be purchased, either directly or through any Bookseller, from WYMAN and SONS, Limited, 29, Beeams Buildings, Fetter Lane, E.C., 28 Abingdon Street, S.W., and 54, St. Mart Street, Cardiff; or H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE (Scottish Branch), 23, Forth Street, Edinburgh; or E. PONSONBY, Limited, 116, Grafton Street, Dublin; or from the Agencies in the British Colonies and Dependencies, the United States of America and other Foreign Countries of T. FISHER UNWIN, Limited, London, W.C. 1916. [Cd. 8305.] Price id. PEEFATOEY NOTE. It has been part of my duty at the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to make a study of the agriculture of Germany, and in the course of my work it became apparent to me that, if agricul- ture had made no more progress in Germany than it has in the United Kingdom during the period 1895 to 1915, the German Empire would have been at the end of its food resources long before the end of the second year of the war, and that, as a matter of fact, the war was being fought by it just as much on an agricultural as on a military organisation of the nation. Accordingly, I asked Mr. T. H. Middleton, C.B., of this Department, to prepare a paper showing what had been the development of German Agriculture in the last thirty to forty years and how that development had been accomplished. This admirable memorandum is the result. I respectfully commend it to the attention of Parliament, the press, and the public. SELBOENE. Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, 1st June, 1916. CONTENTS. Prefatory Note by the Rt. Hon. The Earl of Selborne, KG., G.C.M.G., President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries 2 INTRODUCTION. The Challenge to British Agriculture 5 Production on the Average 100-acre Farm of Britain and Germany ... 6 Objects of the Memorandum 6 I. INCREASE OF FOOD PRODUCTION IN GERMANY. Farm Crops 6 Cereals and Potatoes, 1879-1913 8 Meadows and Pastures ... ... ... « ... ... ... 8 Livestock 9 Meat and Milk Production 9 Proportion of Foodstuffs Home Grown in Germany 11 II. STATISTICS OF THE AVERAGE FARM OF THIS COUNTRY AND GERMANY. Tenure and Size of Holdings 12 The Uses to which the Land is put 13 The Cropping of Cultivated Land 14 Numbers of Live Stock Kept ... ... 15 Labour Employed in Agriculture ... 15 Wages of Agricultural Labourers ... ... ... 17 Value of Land ... ... ... 20 III. THE ORGANISATION OF GERMAN AGRICULTURE. Credit 22 Co-operation ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 23 Education ... ... ... ... 23 Chambers of Agriculture ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 26 IV. GERMAN ECONOMIC POLICY. The Rise of the Agrarian Party ... ... The Attitude of German Economists to Agriculture The State's Agricultural Policy The Effect of the Tariffs General Influence of Industrial Progress on Agriculture The Virtues of the Agrarian ,(9091r— 9.) Wt. 24228—365. 2000, 90 & 50. 9/16. D & S. G. 3. 28 29 30 32 34 34 V. IMPROVEMENT IN THE TECHNICAL METHODS OF THE GERMAN FARMER. PAGE. Increased Use of Manures 36 The Beet Sugar Industry ■-. 37 The Potato Crop and Related Industries ... 40 The Assistance given by Forests 41 VI. SOME LESSONS. Summary... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..., ... 41 The British and the German Farmer ... 42 The Plough Policy 43 Safeguarding the Farmer's Capital ... 44 The Labour Supply ... ... 45 Factors in the Success of German Farming ... 46 Appendix I. — Translation of a chapter on German Agriculture, con- tributed by Count von Schwerin-Lowitz, President of the German Agricultural Council, to the work Deutschland unter Kaiser Wilhelm II. 49 Appendix II. — German Agricultural Statistics 63 Table I. — Area of Land in Germany used for various purposes in the years 1878, 1883, 1893, 1900 and 1913 63 „ II. — -Area under Cultivation of the principal field crops in 1878, 1883, 1893, 1900 and 1913 64 „ III. — Proportion of the Arable Land occupied by Corn Crops and Potatoes in various parts of Germany, 1906-1910 65 „ IV. — Number and Area of Farms of various sizes in Germany in the year 1907 66 „ V. — Number of Persons on Farms in Germany in the year 1907 66 „ VI. — The Agricultural Population engaged on small, medium and large Farms in Germany, 12th June, 1907 ... 67 „ VII. — The Use to which Land was put on small, medium and large Farms in Germany in 1907 ... 68 „ VIII. — Uses of Arable Land on small, medium and large Farms in Germany in 1 907 ... 69 „ IX. — Number of Animals per 100 hectares of Agricultural Land on small, medium and large Farms in Germany in the year 1907 69 „ X. — Average Prices of Wheat and Oats in England and Wales and in Berlin in the years 1881-1913 70 „ XT. — Average Prices of Potatoes in various parts of Germany in the five-year periods 1881-85 to 1906-10 71 ,, XII. — Cultivation of Sugar Beet and yield of Sugar in Germany during 25 years, 1886-87 to 1911-12 ... 72 „ XIII.— Consumption of Foods and Fodders in the German Empire— Average, 1912-1913 73 „ XIV. — Area under Forests in various parts of Germany in 1907 74 THE RECENT DEVELOPMENT OF GERMAN AGRICULTURE. INTEODUCTION. The Challenge to British Agriculture. Several references have recently been made in the proceedings of departmental committees and in the newspapers to a little book " Germany's Economic Progress and National Wealth," published in Berlin about a year before the outbreak of war. The merits of the brochure, no less than the prominence of the writer, Dr. Karl Helfferich, made this characteristically Prussian counterpart of our own " Porter's Progress of the Nation " very popular in Germany during the first year of the war; six editions had been called for by April, 1915. Both for what it says and for what it omits to say in comparing the progress of German agriculture with that of the agriculture of other countries, Helfferich's account of the wonderful advance recently made by the German agriculturist challenges a comparison with the British farmer and his recent practice. In the following memorandum an attempt is made to explain why it is that in recent years German agriculture has made such a rapid advance, while in England the production of food from the soil has decreased. It is frequently stated and commonly believed in this country that British farming is the best in the world. It is certain that throughout the XlXth century we led other nations. An in- teresting communication to the old Board of Agriculture contrasts the backward state of German agriculture with the condition cf our own at the end of the XVIIIth century ; and at the dawn of the XlXth, the first work published by Von Thaer, who initiated the development of German agriculture, was entitled " An Intro- duction to the Knowledge of English Agriculture ; containing the latest Practical and Theoretical Intelligence with a view to the Improvement of German Agriculture." The criterion of good farming in this country at the end of the XVIIIth century was success in food production. During the XlXth century, since we were not dependent on the products of our own soil, the agriculturist's ideals have been modified, and if it be agreed that our claim that British farming is the best means that at the present time we can show very fine cultivation and a high yield per acre of certain crops, that we can produce the best specimens of a large assortment of breeds of live stock and secure for them higher prices than any other country, and that the ordinary machines and implements which we employ are, as a rule, better constructed than those used by farmers in other countries, then British farming undoubtedly still takes a very high place and is probably second to none; but if we return fb the criterion of success accepted by our own old improvers of husbandry, from whom Von Thaer learned — the amount of the production of food from our soil — then it must be admitted that our position is no longer satisfactory. Production on the Average 100-acre Farm of Britain and Germany. From an examination of figures relating to production, most of which are given below, the following statements would appear to be justified : — On each hundred acres of cultivated land* : — (1) The British farmer feeds from 45 to 50 persons, the Ger- man farmer feeds from 70 to 75 persons.! (2) The British farmer grows 15 tons of corn, the German farmer grows 33 tons. (3) The British farmer grows 11 tons of potatoes, the German farmer grows 55 tons. (4) The British farmer produces 4 tons of meat, the German farmer produces 4£ tons. (5) The British farmer produces 17£ tons of milk, the Ger- man farmer produces 28 tons. (6) The British farmer produces a negligible quantity of sugar, the German farmer produces 2| tons. Objects oe the Memorandum. I propose in the following pages (1) to examine some figures bearing on production in Germany in the past 40 years; (2) to contrast the main conditions under which German agricul- turists and our own farmers work ; (3) to refer to the organisation of German agriculture; (4) to discuss the effects of German economic policy on the progress of German agriculture; (5) to indicate the methods by which the German farmer has succeeded in providing food for the rapidly growing population of the Fatherland; and (6) to note some lessons to be learned from Germany. I. INCREASE OF FOOD PRODUCTION IN GERMANY. Farm Crops. The following figures taken from the sixth edition of Helffe- rich's book show the yield per acre of certain crops in two periods, 1883-87 and 1909-13. J For comparison with the German figures, the yields in England and Wales for the periods 1885-89 and 1909-13 have been given (the yields for 1883-87 are not available). * Cultivated land includes arable and grass land, but excludes the " Mountain and Heath Land used for Grazing " of Britain and the corresponding " Gering- ere Weiden und Hutungen " (poor pastures) of Germany. f These figures are based on the estimate that, of the total " energy value " of food consumed, Great Britain imports on the average about 60 per cent., and that Germany importB 10 per cent. For the detailed German estimate see p. 73. % It should be noted that in 1899 a change in the method of securing estimates of yield was introduced in Germany, and that figures before and after the change are not strictly comparable. It is probable that about % bushels per acre should be added to the figures for cereals in the earlier period. 1. — Comparison of Yield of Certc in Crops in Tiro P eriods. Yield per acre per annum. England and Wales. Germany. 1885-89. 1909-13. 1883-87. 1909-13. Wheat (bushels) Barley „ Oats „ Potatoes (tons) Meadow Hay (cwt.) 29-5 32-4 38-8 5-9 1886-89. 26-1 31-2 32-7 39-0 6-2 23-1 19-8 22-7 25-7 3-4 22-5 31-6 36-7 44-6 5-4 33-7 It will be observed that, as compared with a very large increase in Germany, the yield per acre of the crops in England has been practically stationary. Wheat shows some advance, but in the interval between the two periods the area of wheat in England and Wales fell from 2,361,000 acres to 1,787,000 acres. There was also a decrease in the area under barley. As inferior land is the first to be diverted to other crops, a substantial increase in yield per acre in both cereals in this country might have been expected. During the period of 25 years the acreage under wheat in Ger- many was constant ; there was a small decrease in the area under barley, which was more than compensated for by an increase in that under oats. On the assumption that the soil and climate of Germany are, on the average, equal to those of Britain, an obvious explanation of the recent increase in German yield per acre would be that in 1883-87 the yield was so low as to be capable of easy increase, whereas in Britain the yield was already so high thirty years ago that further economic increase was diffiralt because of the opera- tion of the Law of Diminishing Returns. It is not possible to discuss within the limits of this Memo- randum the yield that might be expected under the average conditions of the soil and climate of Britain and Germany, respectively; if a full discussion were possible, it could probably be shown that the production of the two countries in the 'eighties of last century is a closer index to the natural advantages enjoyed by cultivators in each than the production in the period immediately before the war. There is much very poor land in Germany. Only one-fifth of the soil of Prussia, for example, can be classed as good ; two-fifths consists of indifferent loams ; and two-fifths is very poor. The climate of Germany may on the whole be better adapted for the ripening and ingathering of corn than the British climate ; but it is certainly not so well suited for the growing of large crops of grain, potatoes, roots, and hay as our own. My own opportunities of studying the agriculture of Germany locally have been slight, but have led me to conclude that the British farmer is much the more favoured b3" nature, and the view of leading German agriculturists is that their soils and climate are distinctly inferior to those of Britain. Increase in Cereals and Potatoes, 1879-1913. Helfferich's summary of German progress referred to the reign of William II. It will be desirable for our present purpose to take a longer view, and in the following statement I have set out the yield of the chief cereal crops and of potatoes for five-year periods from 1879-83 to 1909-13. The figures show both the total yield and the yield per acre. (Since the four grain crops differ in bushel weight, the yield per acre is stated in centals.) A new method of compiling German statistics* came into force in 1899, and it will be observed that there was a sharp rise in the period 1899-1903. II. — Annual Total Production, and Average Production -per Acre, of certain Crops in Germany in the periods 1879-83 to 1909-13. Average total production. Average production per acre. Pive-year period. Rye, wheat, oats and barley. Potatoes. Rye, wheat, oats and barley. Potatoes. Million tons. Million tons. Centals (100 lb.). Tons. 1879-83 ... 1884-88 ... 1889-93 ... 1894-98 ... 1899-1903 1904-08 ... 1909-13 ... 13-2 15-0 15-2 17-4 22-5 24-2 26-9 21-1 24-5 25-3 29-9 42-1 43-2 45-0 10-24 10-82 10-87 12-21 15-53 16-34 17-86 3-05 3-40 3-48 3-95 5-28 5-30 5-46 It would appear from these figures that the total yield of cereals and potatoes in 1909-13 was about twice as great as it had been 30 years previously. The figures in the two last columns of the table prove, moreover, that the increase in total production is chiefly accounted for by an increase in the yield per acre. The somewhat greater area under the chief food crops was not, as is often supposed, due to the reclamation of fresh land — there was indeed a shrinkage in the area of arable land of about 290,000 acres between 1883 and 1913 — -but to the replacement, by more valuable products, of inferior grain crops (buckwheat, millets, field peas, lentils), green crops (turnips, rape) and industrial crops (flax, hemp and tobacco) . Meadows and Pastures. It should be observed that the increase in cereals and potatoes was not brought about at the expense of the natural food of farm live stock. The area under meadows increased by 218,000 acres, and the area under good pastures by 1,237,000 acres between 1883 and 1913. These gains were chiefly due to the improve- ment of poor pastures. There was a further large decrease in the area under poor pastures, but the land was not brought under the plough. From the returns for 1913 it would appear that the total reduction in the area of poor p asture land between 1883 and * See footnote p. 6. 9 1913 amounted to 3,197,000 acres; during this period there was a shrinkage in the total agricultural land of Germany of 2,069,000 acres. The main explanation of the shrinkage and of the reduc- tion in poor pasture is that sheep walks, found to be unprofitable as grazings, have been omitted from the area classed as "Agri- cultural Land " in the 1913 returns.* Live Stock. With the single exception of sheep there was a large increase in the actual numbers of all classes of farm live stock between 1883 and 1913. Details are shown in the statement below. III. — Live Stock in Germany.^ Class of Stock. 1883. 1913. Thousands. Increase or Decrease ( — ). Thousands. Thousands. Horses ... Cattle Sheep and Goats Pigs 3,522 15,787 21,839 H,206 4,516 20,154 9,172 21,885 994 4,367 — 12,667 12,679 The striking changes shown in the statement are the great reduction in the number of sheep (goats increased by 700,000), the large increase in cattle and the very large increase in the number of pigs. These changes are accounted for partly because the pig is much more productive than the sheep as a source of meat; but they are also due to the German's love of pork and to the increase of co-operative dairy farming among the smallholders of Germany which make extensive pig-keeping profitable. Meat and Milk Production. A comparison of meat and milk production in Great Britain and Germany serves to emphasise the progress made by agricul- ture in the latter country. It is frequently remarked in com- menting on changes in British agriculture that the alterations in our farming during the past 40 years represent not a diminu- tion in our food supply but a change in production, grass having replaced tillage, and meat and milk having replaced wheat. It is sometimes inferred that, from the standpoint of food production, these changes are immaterial, and that since the profits from stock farming have been greater than from corn growing, meat and milk production from grass land represent a type of farming practice in no way inferior to that followed by our corn-growing forefathers. Since German y has been increasing the production of grain, potatoes and sugar, while Britain has concentrated on meat and milk, it is usually supposed that in the yield from our flocks and herds we are much ahead of Germany. With the object of testing this conclusion I have prepared the estimate of the total production of meat and milk per 100 acres of culti- vated land in each country contained in the following statement. The figures in the case of Britain come chiefly from the Keport ~~*~See Table I, p. 63. ■f The figures for 1883 are those of the census taken on 10th January of that year, the figures for 1913 are from the census of 2nd December, 1912. 10 on the Agricultural Output of Great Britain in 1908, for Germany from the Eeport of Dr. Eltzbacher's Committee (Berlin, 1914).* IV. — Production of Meat (including eggs) and Milk per 100' Acres of Cultivated Land in Great Britain in 1908, and in Germany on the average of the two years 1912 and) 1913. Great Britain. 31,900,000 acres of cultivated land. Germany. 82,274,000 acres of cultivated land. Description of produce. Home production. Production per 100 acres o£ cultivated land. Home production. Production per 100 acres of cultivated. land. Beef Mutton Pork, Hams and Bacon . . . Other butcher meatf Poultry and Eggs Tons. 474,650 260,950 315,550 100,000 114,000 Tons. 1-49 ■82 •99 ■31 ■36 Tons. 1,058,700 77,260 1,994,300 383,000 Tons. 1-29 ■09 2-42 ■47 Total Meat MilkJ 1,265,150 5,555,000 3-97 17-4 3,513,260 23,160,000 4-27 28-1 In the ease of German manufactured dairy produce, the figures for butter and cheese have been converted into terms of milk oni the basis of 10i lb. milk for 1 lb. cheese and 27 lb. milk for 1 lb. butter. As regards meat, though it varies widely in description, the total production is very similar, whereas in milk production the German yield exceeds the British by about 50 per cent. The- detailed figures for meat production show how largely the pig accounts for the German meat supply. In Britain the production of mutton and pig meat does not differ much ; the German farmer produces twenty-seven times as much pork as mutton. Of beef the British production slightly exceeds the German; of poultry and eggs, the British yield is about three-fourths of the German, but the figures for this class of produce must be regarded as rough estimates. The figures for meat and milk in the above statement are much less favourable to Britain than would have been expected from a casual comparison of the stock farming of the two countries, but they do not understate the case for the British farmer : in fact, they rather overstate his case. Before estimating the net amount of meat and milk produced it is necessary to ascertain the quantity of purchased feeding stuffs used on the farm. By making allowance for the offals of imported grain and subtracting the_ feeding stuffs used in Ireland from the net imports of the United King dom, it may be shown that in the period just before * This report used the official figures of the Statistisches Jahrbuch fur das Deutsche Reich, supplementing them by estimates in the case of certain products- for which figures are not given. f "Other butcher meat" includes Heads, Hearts, Liver, Tripe, Sweetbreads, etc., also loose fat used in making margarine and other foods. These by-products are included under the respective kinds of meat in the German figures. t The specific gravity of milk has been taken as 1-03 ; thus a ton of milk has. a volume of about 217£ gallons 11 the war the British farmer purchased annually about 11'5 tons of oilcake, grain and milling offals per 100 acres of cultivated land. The corresponding purchase by the German farmer was 8 - 7 tons. The British farmer has, therefore, had the advantage of 2 - 8 tons of imported feeding stuffs per 100 acres. This quantity should be enough to produce about 0-15 tons of beef* or 0'47 tons of pork, or 2- 75 tons of milk. If these extra feeding stuffs are assumed to be given to dairy cattle then it might be stated that while the British farmer produces nearly as much meat, he produces only about half as much milk as his German competitor from the crops raised on 100 acres of cultivated land. Again, in comparing meat production per 100 acres of culti- vated land, it must be remembered that a certain amount of the beef and a considerable proportion of the mutton are produced on mountain land not classed as " cultivated." The average British 100-acre farm would have about forty acres of hill grazing; the average German farm would have about three acres. Proportion of Foodstuffs Home Grown in Germany. One convincing proof of the productiveness of German agri- culture remains to be noticed. In spite of the rapid increase in the population, from 48 millions in 1888 and 51 millions in 1895 to 67 millions in 1913, the percentage of the total food supply grown within the country has not altered materially in recent years. This is indicated by the following statement, which in the case of four principal productst compares the percentage of the total food supply of Germany which was grown within the country in the three-year periods 1893-4 to 1895-6 and 1910-11 to 1912-13. The harvest year 1911-12 was a poor one and the potato crop especially suffered from drought. Germany pro- duces not only potatoes for human consumption but has a large surplus for feeding animals and for spirit and starch manufacture. V. — Proportion of the total German requirements of the follow- ing Foodstuffs produced within the Country in certain Harvest Years (1st July to 30th June). Average of years. Rye. Wheat. Oats. Potatoes. 1893-4—1895-6 1910-11—1912-13 ... Per cent. 93-4 100-0 Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. 72-6 94-6 99-8 67-7 j 97-0 98-6 The success of the German farmer in feeding 70 to 75 persons per 100 acres where the British farmer feeds 45 to 50 is partly explained by the large extent to which pork and potatoes enter into German dietaries ; but it must not be supposed that the average German is poorly nourished. From the studies of Professor Thompson^ on British diets and the figures given by * If skilfully used as an addition to a maintenance diet of home-grown roots, hay, and straw, 2 - 8 tons of concentrated feeding stuffs should produce about 04 tons of beef. f The total supplies of these four staples used in recent years were : — Rye 9 million. Wheat 5 to 5i million, Oats 7 to 8 million, and Potatoes 30 to 40 million tons. J The Food Value of Great Britain's Food Supply, by Professor W. H. Thompson, M.D., Sc.D., of Trinity College, Dublin, in the "Economic Proceed- ings of the Royal Dublin Society," March, 1916." 12 Dr. Eltzbacher's Committee it would appear that the energy- producing capacity of the average German's diet is represented by 4,100 calories per man per day, the corresponding British figure being about 3,900 calories. Helfferich draws attention to the fact that the German consumption of meat is now almost as great per head as that of the United Kingdom, while the con- sumption of cereals and potatoes is greater. II. STATISTICS OF THE AVEEAGE FARM OF THIS COUNTRY AND GERMANY. If the British farmer of the XlXth century had more technical skill, a better soil and a more favourable climate, why is it that the German now contrives to feed 50 per cent, more persons on the land he tills? Before an attempt is made to deal with the reasons it will be desirable to examine in greater detail the general conditions under which the farmers of the two countries carry on their business. The statistical notes which follow relating to the tenure of land, the arrangement of crops, the extent of the live stock industry, labour, wages, and the value of estates, are intended to bring out the main features of the farming of each country. With the exception of the figures relating to labour,' the statistics for this country are for England and Wales.* Tenure and Size of Holdings. About 93 per cent, of the agriculturists of Germany own the land they cultivate ; in England and Wales only 11 per cent, of the occupiers are owners. The following statement compares the size of holdings in England and Wales and Germany : — VI. — Sizes of Agricultural Holdings in England and Wales and in Germany . England and Wales (1914). Germany (1907). Size. Acreage. Per cent. Size. Acreage. Per cent. 1- 5 acres 5-20 „ 20-50 „ 282,980 1,366,990 2,636,094 1-1 5-0 9-7 Under 1\ acres l|-5 „ 5-124 „ 121-50 „ 898,882 3,429,395 8,262,195 26,053,910 1-1 4-3 ■10-4 32-7 Total under 50 acres 4,286,064 15-8 Total under 50 acres 38,644,382 48-5 50-100 acres 100-150 „ 150-300 „ Above 300 „ 4,340,952 3,940,343 7,848,424 6,698,221 16-0 14-5 29-0 24-7 50-125 acres 125-250 „ 250-500 „ 500-1,250 1,250-2,500 „ 2,500 acres and over 17,053,248 6,252,010 3,748,062 7,509.845 5,1341705 1,244,933 21-4 7-9 4-7 9-4 6-5 1*6 Total over 50 acres 22,827,940 84-2 Total over 50 acres 40,942,803 51-5 Total 27,114,004 100 Total 79,587,185 100 * The very large area of hill land used for grazing, which the average Scotch farm of 100 acres of cultivated land has "attached" to it, makes it desirable to •exclude Scotland from the general comparison. 13 As contrasted with this country Germany is a land of small and of large holdings. About 48 per cent, of the cultivated soil of Germany is laid out in holdings of less than 50 acres, as com- pared with 16 per cent, in England and Wales. About 60 per cent, of our land is sub-divided into holdings of from 50—300 acres. Germany, on the other hand, has less than 30 per cent, of the land in holdings of from 50 to 250 acres. In England and Wales 25 per cent, of the land forms holdings of over 300 acres ; in Germany 22 per cent, is divided into holdings of more than 250 acres. It has recently been stated that England has too many farms too big for men prepared to use their hands and too small for men prepared to use their heads. If we include all holdings of less than 125 acres of cultivated land as being suited for the farmer who uses his hands and all holdings of over 250 acres as being adapted for the man who. tries to use his head, then it would appear that TO per cent, of the soil of Germany is at the disposal of the former and 22 per cent, available for the latter; thus leaving only 8 per cent, in holdings which are too large for working cultivators and too small for well-educated farmers. In England and Wales, on the other hand, only 32 per cent, of the land is divided into holdings of less than 100 acres, while no less than 43 per cent, is found in holdings of from 100 to 300 acres. Thus it would appear that the proportion of the soil of this country in holdings of a doubtfully desirable size must be about four times as great as in Germany. The Uses to which the Land is put. The following figures give the total area of the land of England and Wales and of Germany, and the main purposes for which the land is used : — VII. — Uses of Land in England and Wales and in Germany. Cultivated Land Mountain or Poor Grazing Forest and Woodland Not used for Agriculture or Forestry Total Area England and Wales, 1914. Thousand acres. 27,114 3,782 1,884 4,360 37,139 Per cent. 73-0 10-2 5-1 11-7 100 Germany, 1913. Thousand acres. 82,274 3,751 35,146 12,535 133,706 Per cent. 61-5 2-8 26-3 9-4 100 The outstanding differences are the larger proportion of culti- vated land and of poor grazings in this country and the much larger area under forests in Germany. The area under forests is accounted for by the forestry policy of the German Governments, who plant up poor land if it can be shown that the gross returns from timber are likely greatly to exceed those from grazing. 14 The Cropping of Cultivated Land. Statement VIII. contrasts the uses to which cultivated land is put in this country and in Germany. Special attention is directed to the details, which largely explain why it is that German agri- culture feeds so many persons per 100 acres of cultivated land. VIII. Cropping of Cultivated Land in England and Wales and in Germany. England and Wales, Average of 1905-1914.* Germany, 1913* Crop. Thousand acres. Per cent. Thousand acres. Per cent. Permanent Grass for Hay Pasture ... Rotation Grasses and Clovers, Hay... „ Pasture Green Fodders, Vetches, Maize, &c. 4,786 11,138 1,747 1,005 158 17-55 40-83 6-40 3-68 •58 14,806 2,655 | 6,230 2,788 18-00 3-23 7-57 3-39 Total Grasses, Clovers, &c. Cereal Crops Beans and Peas Potatoes Root Crops, Cabbages, and Rape Gardens, Fruit, and Vineyards Miscellaneous Crops Fallow •• 18,834 5,320 451 435 1,701 121$ 102 317 69-04 19-50 1-66 1-59 6-24 •44 ■37 1-16 26,479 37,822 1,299 8,586 3,838f 2,064$ 292 1,894 32-19 45-97 1-58 10-44 4-66 2-51 •35 2-30 Total Area 27,281 100- 82,274 100- The notable differences in these figures are those relating to corn crops and grass. The average German 100-acre farm has 32 acres under grass and clover, the average English farm has 69 acres. The German grows 46 acres of corn, the Englishman 19'5 acres. The German grows 10'4 acres of potatoes, the English- man 1'6 acres. It may be noted, however, that the German potato crop is largely used for pig feeding and to a less extent for spirit and starch manufacture, while the saleable portion of the English crop is used for human food. Our home grown potato crop is at present about large enough to meet the English demand. Sugar beet, of which England grows practically none, takes an important place on the German farm, accounting for over one- third of the total area under roots. Reference will be made to * The areas occupied by the various crops in England and Wales in 1913 differed but slightly from the average for the 10-year period. Average figures are not available in the case of Germany, but comparison of 1913 with 1900 shows that the changes in area were relatively small. The areas occupied by the chief groups of crops in Germany in 1900 were : — Grasses and Clovers 30'5 per cent., Cereals 46-4 per cent., Potatoes 10 - 1 per cent., Root Crops, &c, 3'7 per cent. There has been some increase in Rye, Oats, Potatoes, Sugar Beet, and Mangolds. t Including sugar beet, 1,441,591 acres, or 1'75 per cent, of total area. $ Areas under one acre not included in England and Wales. Gardens of less than one acre account for a large part of the German area. The total area under "House-gardens" is returned as 1,314,000 acres. 15 tthis crop in a later section, but it may be stated here that it is chiefly grown by the larger farmers of certain districts and that its influence on the progress of German agriculture is in fact much greater than the above figures suggest. This country has some advantage over Germany in that the average area under bare fallow is less ; the reason is that the poorer types of English land, which would normally be fallowed, have now been laid down to .grass. Taken as a whole, it will be seen that the average German farmer devotes much more space than the English farmer to crops like potatoes, which produce large quantities of human food. An acre under potatoes would usually produce ten times as much human food as an acre under good pasture, and an acre under sugar beet may produce from one and $ half times to twice as much food as an acre under potatoes. Numbers of Live Stock kept. On the other hand, as has already been indicated, the German iarmer does not neglect to provide for his live stock; this the following statement comparing the numbers of live stock main- tained on the average 100-acre farm of each country will show. IX. — Numbers of Horses, Cattle, Sheep, Pigs and Goats' kept per 100 acres of Cultivated Land in England and Wales and in Germany. England and Wales (27,114,000 acres), 1914. Germany (82,274,000 acres), 1913* Total Xo. of animals. No. per 100 acres. Total No. of animals. No. per 100 acres. Horses... ■Cattle Sheep ... Pigs ■Goats ... 1,399,500 5,877,900 17,259,700 2,481,500 •3 • 5-2 21-7 63-7 9-2 4,516,300 20,153,700 5,787,800 21,885,100 3,384,000 5-5 24-5 7-0 26-6 4-1 The marked contrasts in this table, those for sheep and pigs, have been alluded to on p. 10. Even in Germany, however, it should be noted that the pig is popular only on the small farms; the farmer with 250 acres and over keeps 8 pigs per 100 acres, while the farmer with 12-50 acres keeps 24. t About one-tenth of all the pigs in the country are kept upon holdings of less than 1J acres. (No returns are obtained from holders of less than 1 acre in Britain.) Labour employed in Agriculture. On June 12th, 1907, a census of occupations was taken in Germany; on June 4th, 1908, a similar census was taken in Great Britain. The published figures are not strictly compar- able, as in Germany occupiers are included while in Britain they * The census of animals was taken on 2nd December, 1912. f For details see Table IX, p. 69. 16 are excluded. To get figures on which a comparison may be based, it has been assumed that all farmers so returned in the census of population, 1911, are permanently employed in agriculture and that other British " holdings " are occupied by persons who are temporarily employed. Many farmers, of course, occupy more than a single holding. On the other hand many who return themselves as " farmers " in the census have other occupations and are thus temporarily employed in agriculture. In the following table a comparison is made between Great Britain and Germany as a whole, and also between small hold- ings (under 50 acres) and large holdings (over 300 acres in Britain, over 250 acres in Germany). The figures show the numbers of persons employed both permanently and temporarily per 100 acres of cultivated land. X. — Number of Persons employed in Agriculture. Number per 100 acres of Cultivated Land. Total employed in agriculture. Permanently employed. Temporari] employed. y Male. Female. Total. Male. Female. Total. Male. Female. Total Average number employed on all holdings : — Great Britain Germany 4-6 8-3 1-2 10-0 5-8 18-3 3-6 6-2 1-0 6-0 4-6 12-2 1-0 2-1 0-2 4-0 1-2 6-1 Small holdings : — Great Britain (5-50 acres). Germany (12J-50 acres) 9-3 8-9 2-7 4-2 3-1 8-7 12-4 17-6 6-6 7-3 2-6 «-3 9-2 13-6 2-7 1-6 0-5 2-4 3-2 4-0 Large holdings : — Great Britain (over 300 acres). Germany (250 acres and over) . 0-4 3-0 3-1 7-2 2-4 3-1 0-3 1-7 2-7 4-8 0-3 1-1 o-i 1-3 04 2-4 Before commenting on the figures, three points must be referred to. The first is that the numbers do not correspond with those given in the census of population, since many of the persons who are temporarily employed in agriculture are classed under other callings in the census of population. The second is that these figures are averages and that within the countries themselves, especially within the large German Empire, the numbers employed vary widely. Thus the census of population for 1900 shows that in Schleswig-Holstein and the North German Plain the number of persons engaged in agriculture, with their families, may be as low as 10 to 14 per 100 acres of cultivated land, while in the densely populated West and South-West three to four times as many may find permanent or occasional occupation on the land. The third point is that the casual labourers on German 17 farms may sometimes much exceed those enumerated in the Census of June, 1907.* The average number of persons wholly or partly, engaged in agriculture in Germany is 183 per 100 acres, in Britain 5'8. When those who are permanently employed are compared the difference is somewhat less pronounced ; 122 find work on German soil, 4' 6 on British; and since the German annually ploughs more than twice as much of his holding as the British farmer, it will be noted that the amount of male labour permanently employed per 100 acres ploughed is relatively rather less in Germany than in Britain. There is a marked difference between the two countries in respect of the amount of female labour employed. In Germany six times as many women are regularly engaged on farm work per 100 acres of cultivated land as in Britain. There is also a great difference in the number of temporary labourers. Because of the winter employment provided by the extensive woodlands and by such rural industries as beet-sugar and starch manufacture, the German farmer has a marked advantage over the British farmer in the number of temporary workers he can secure at busy seasons. In some parts of the country, especially in beet-growing districts, the German farmer may also count on considerable numbers of migratory labourers. The net result is that per 100 acres five times as many persons (mainly women) are temporarily employed on the land in Germany as in Britain. A comparison of the conditions on small and large holdings is interesting. Unfortunately the sizes of the holdings compared in the two countries are not exactly the same, the result being that the full importance of female labour on the German small holding is not brought out by the figures in the table, which are for farms of 12J to 50 acres. On holdings under 12£ acres women do the greater part of the work. Of eight million women who are employed on the land in Germany 4-h millions work on holdings of less than 12i acres. The number of men on holdings of under 12h acres is only 2£ millions. About 83 per cent, of all the German women agricultural workers are employed on holdings of 50 acres and under. It is the German small holding that keeps women on the land, and it is largely from these small hold- ings that the women on the larger farms are recruited. t It is a coincidence that the small holdings of Britain should employ almost exactly the same number of women per 100 acres as the large farms of Germany. When the labour supply on the large holdings of the two countries is compared it will be apparent that, in view of the much greater proportion of land under the plough, the number of labourers permanently employed by the German farmer is relatively small; but, as already noted, he has a better supply of temporary labourers than the British farmer. * See Table V, p. 66. It is not possible to introduce comparisons based on the 6,604,971 casual labourers mentioned in this table, since many represent migratory labourers going from farm to farm and included more than once in the returns of occupiers of land. -f- It is, of course, not merely by her labour that woman assists German agri- culture. The success of the smaller holdings is largely due to her skilful management. 8390 B 18 Wages of Agbjcultubal Labotjrebs. Before giving examples of the rates of wages paid in different parts of Germany, it should be pointed out that a large part of Germany is not cultivated by hired labourers, but by occu- piers and their families. About nine-tenths of the work on hold- ings of less than 12£ acres and nearly three-quarters of the work on holdings of 12J to 50 acres is done by occupiers and their relatives. Hired labour, on the other hand, is responsible tor about two-thirds of the work on holdings of from 50 to 250 acres and for nearly all the work on holdings of 250 acres and over. Thus, of the whole area, about half is cultivated by hired labour. It is difficult to trace changes in rates or to estimate the real value of German agricultural wages; they are largely paid in kind, and the arrangements for hiring differ widely in different parts of the country. Agricultural wages in Germany during -the last part of the XlXth century were relatively much lower than in Britain, and the wage-paying large farmer of the former country appears to have had a considerable advantage in being able, to secure both cheap and efficient labour. In attempting to account for the increase in food-production in Germany at a time when cultivation decreased in Britain, a good deal of weight must be attached to rates of wages current in the two countries. It will not be necessary here to refer to the earnings of agri- cultural labourers in Britain ; the figures which follow are there- fore restricted to Germany. The best way of indicating the rates of wages and variation's in value will be to cite a few examples typical of particular parts of Germany. The following is a statement* of the rates of wages paid to men and women servants boarded on farms in Hesse in the years named. The wages paid in Hesse may be regarded as typical of Western Germany. The original figures are in marks per year, here rendered as shillings : — XI.- -Money Wages earned by Farm Servants in Hesse (in addition to Board and Lodging). Large Holding. Small Holding. Tear Horseman. Cattleman. Woman. | Man. Woman. 1875 ... s. 198 s. 138 s. 100 70 s. 40 1880 ... 204 144 104 100 52 1890 ... 222 162 104 136 70 1900 ... 330 270 160 320 145 The next examplef relates to estates in Posen selected as being typical of conditions in those districts where German (not Polish) labour was employed. The figures give the yearly wages current in Eastern Germany during two periods, and show both rates of wages and the rise in 30 years. It will be seen that the wages are paid chiefly in kind. They include cottage, land, peat, straw, milk, potatoes, wheat, rye, barley, and beans. The values of the wages paid in kind have been carefully calculated for each period. * Krentano : Die Deutschen Getreidezalle (2nd Bait. 1911). f Bierei : Landwirtschaftliche Jahrbiicher 1911. 19 XII. — Annual Earnings of Farm Se wants on Estates in Posen. First period 1877-88. Second period 1904-Oli. Increase Occupation. in total annual Money. Kind. Total. Money. Kind. Total. Earnings. s. s. s. s. s. S. s. Bailiffs ... 140 611 751 183 685 868 117 Horsemen 83 406 489 109 ! 498 607 118 Cowmen ... 94 411 505 132 1 484 616 111 Labourers ... 84 405 489 169 530 699 210 Seven estates were included in the investigation to which the above figures refer, and though all of these were selected to repre- sent well-managed properties paying good wages, the variation in the earnings of the labourers was considerable as between the different estates. Thus, in the second period, bailiffs earned from £34 to £48, horsemen from £25 to £28, cattlemen from £25 to £36, and other permanent labourers from £27 to £42 per annum. The payments in cash were sometimes as low as £2 10s. A third example* gives the results of an investigation made in Silesia (where wages are low) in 1905, and in Bhineland (where wages are high) in 1907-1908. In Silesia ordinary farm hands earned 500s. to 700s. annually, cowmen 700.S. to 850s. (if assisted by their wives — from 900s. to 1,200s.) and shepherds from 600s. to 900s. Local women, who work at busy seasons, made from 200s. to 250s. Migratory labourers made from l - 8 to 2'1 shillings daily, and earned from 350s. to 480s. a year; migratory women made 15 to 1'8 shillings ■daily, and earned from 280s. to 490s. a year. In the Rhine Province relatively few local women work for wages; the earnings of men labourers vary from 700s. to 1,000s., strong lads make 500s. to 700s., migratory labourers earned 3 -shillings a day or from 500s. to 700s. in a season, and migratory women earned 2'5 shillings daily or 400s. to 600s. in a season. All of these labourers were paid largely in kind and the money wages varied with the season. In connection with a law relating to insurance against acci- dents, a classification of agricultural and forest labourers accord- ing to their yearly earnings was prepared in 1905. This classifi- cation was published in Conrad's J ahrhiicher fur National- ohonomie for 1906 and is referred to by later writers on wages as a standard for comparison. Five groups of male wage earners were formed, whose annual earnings in shillings (marks) were estimated to be as follows : — I. 780-900; II. 660-780; III. 540-660; IV. 420-540; V 300-420. The percentages of the total wage earners occurring in each group, in certain parts of Germany, is shown in Statement XIII. t * Hagmann : Landwirtschaftliche J ahrhiicher 1911. f This statement is given so that the earnings in different parts of Germany may be compared. In examining the figures, it should be remembered that a -good many men may be part-time labourers who occupy small holdings of their • own, largely worked by their women-folk (see tables on pp. 66-69). S3 90 B 2 20 XIII. — Earnings of Agricultural and Forest Labourers in Germany . I. XL III. 1 IV - V. Kingdom or Province. 780 to 660 to 540 to ! 420 to 300 to 900 s. 780 s. 660 s. 540 s. 420 s. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Kingdom of Prussia •13 2-5 15 45 38 Province of East Prussia — — 2-5 22 76 „ Posen — — •5 19 81 „ Schleswig-Holstein •2 2-2 43 54 — „ Westphalia ■14 20 32 45 3 Kingdom of Saxony ■23 5 64 31 — Bavaria — — 12 45 43 „ Wurtemburg •18 2 98 — — German Empire ... •14 2-5 24 42 31 It would thus appear that at the beginning of this century the earnings in wages of the great majority of the agricultural labourers of Germany were under £33 per annum. The earnings are much less than in Britain, but the fact that German wages are so largely paid in kind must be kept in view, for, if low customary rates were attached to the values of the chief pay- ments in kind, such as cottage, potatoes, rye and milk, the actual value of the wages might be considerably higher than the estimated sums here shown. Value of Land. Some notes on the value of land in Germany are given in the- section of this memorandum relating to sugar beet cultivation (p. 37). At this stage, two examples* may be cited to show the rise in values and the comparative values of land in different districts . The first example shows the increase in the value of land in Posen from 1851 to 1894. XIV. — Increase in the Price of Land with Buildings in the Province of Posen. Period. Price per acre. Small Estates less Large Estates than 75 acres. 2,500 acres and over. £ £ 1851-60 5-60 6 40 1861-70 8-85 8 15 1871-75 10-45 9 90 1876-80 11-35 10 10. 1881-85 12-35 10 55 1886-90 13-40 9 65 1891-94 15-60 9-30 * Brentano : Die Deatschen Getreidezblle (2nd Edit. 1911). 21 Small holdings have continuously increased in value and by 1894 were worth nearly three times as much as in 1851. There was also a steady increase in the value of large estates until 1885. Thereafter, the agricultural depression began to tell, and there was a moderate decrease until 1894 when the record ceases. The total increase in value of the large estates is very much less than in the case of small properties. The second example shows the average value of land in certain districts (Regierungsbezirke) of Prussia between 1895 and 1906; also the average rent in certain years. XV. — Average Prices and Rents of Land with Buildings in certain Prussian Districts. Also the increase in Rents. Average value per acre, 1895-1906. District. Properties of 12£-50 Properties of 1,250 acres and over. Average rent per acre. is;4<>. 1867. 1907. £ £ s. KOnigsberg Potsdam 20 29 45 75 14 14 70 45 3-5 5-1 Breslau 32 60 19 95 5-7 Magdeburg... Hanover 96 36 75 25 55 18 65 00 11-0 Schleswig ... Cassel 29 36 75 85 23 14 90 00 — 6-3 8-9 7-0 18-1 s. 10 10 13 35 28 17 19 Since the percentage of the land which is let for rent is very small, the average rents do not bear any regular relation to the average values of the land ; but, in general, a comparison of land values and rents in the complete statement, of which the foregoing is an abstract, suggests that the land which is let on lease is below the average in quality. III. THE ORGANISATION OF GERMAN AGRICULTURE. Much attention has been devoted to the organisation of German agriculture both by Government (chiefly in Prussia) and by private agencies. Systems for providing credit and developing co-operation had gradually been developed during the XlXth century, and, to- wards the end of the century, a scheme for the development of agricultural education had been carefully thought out and given effect to. Thus, by the year 1900, the machinery required for promoting production was already in a relatively perfect state. No detailed description of this machinery can be attempted here, but a brief reference to each part of it will be made so that the effect in stimulating the German farmer to improve his practice may be indicated. 22 Credit. A complete account of the credit system of Germany will be- found in a very valuable special report prepared for the Board by Mr. J. E. Cahill and issued in 1913 [Cd. 6626]. In a country largely cultivated by the owners of the land, facilities for obtaining credit are essential to the progress of agriculture. The German credit system has stimulated produc- tion, not only by advancing money, but by supervising and influencing the business methods of landowners. The chief agencies for lending money on real property are the Land Mortgage Credit Associations (Landschaften) and tine Savings Banks; it may broadly be stated that the former deal with large landowners and the latter with peasant cultivators; though, in some parts of Germany, there are frequent exceptions to this- statement. Out of a total of £400,000,000 advanced on real property in 1912, each of these agencies was responsible for about £170,000,000. When a landowner wishes to borrow from a mortgage credit association he becomes a member. When he has discharged his- debt he ceases to be a member. When he applies for a loau his estate is valued by experts, and enquiries are made respecting, his business capacity and skill as an agriculturist by the local agents of the lending association who are themselves skilled farmers. The result of the system is that a German landowner who desires to borrow advantageously must have a good reputa- tion as a business man and a farmer ; thus the credit system reacts on the technical skill of the agricultural population. The English landowner holds land mainly as an investment. When he borrows money, the only question is as to the value of the security he can offer. The German landowner holds land not only as an investment but for the purpose of carrying on the business of an agriculturist. Capital must be freely available for developing his estate. In times of depression, when money is difficult to raise, the reputation of a landowner as a business man may seciire him an advance when otherwise he would fail. The estate of the German, unlike the home farm of most English land- owners, is managed on business principles. Its function is to maintain the commercial credit of the owner, and its merit depends mainly upon the balance sheet, not upon the number of prizes collected at local live stock shows. The ordinary German landowner must closely follow the business of producing food, his sons and his managers receive a good technical education, and it is from his well-managed estates that improvements spread among the peasant cultivators of the country. The local Savings Banks have a similar influence upon the business habits of the small owners. These institutions are used as deposit banks by the well-to-do ; they lend to local agricul- turists, and, unless a small farmer has a good reputation in his district, he receives but little credit. Agriculture in Germany is thus tuned up by the local credit system in a way not unlike that in which the business side of Scotch farming in the XlXth century was kept up to pitch by local agents of the Scottish banks. A continuous process of selection is in operation under which the fittest business men among the agriculturists survive. 23 "Working capital on the small German farm is usually provided by means of short-term loans on personal security from Raiffeisen banks. The special features of these popular village banks are that they provide loans for productive or provident purposes; they lend only to members (whose liability is unlimited*) ; they lend within limited areas, so that all members are well known; and, like most other German credit associations, they are very cheaply managed. Co-operation. German agriculturists make much more use of co-operative societies than the farmers of Britain. About one-fourth of all the manures and feeding stuffs used on German farms is bought through co-operative societies. As indicating the scale of their operations, it may be noted that Cahill records a purchase of 620,000 tons of basic slag in one year by a single German society. (This is about three times the quantity used in a year in the United Kingdom.) Co-operative creameries are very popular. These societies for dealing with dairv produce had a turnover of about £20,000,000 per annum in "l912. Cahill also reports the rapid development of co-operative implement societies (571 in 1910) ; electricity supply societies (none in 1900, 600 in 1913) ; potato drying societies (these have much extended their opera- tions since the outbreak of war) ; and distillery societies. A few beet sugar factories are run on co-operative lines, but for under- takings requiring so much capital the ordinary co-operative society is not well adapted, and most beet factories belong to joint stock companies. Although the capital is provided by joint stock companies, many of the beet factories arrange to have beet grown by members of the company on co-operative lines. Education. Germany, and especially Prussia, has developed a most efficient system of agricultural education, from which the Board learned much when the agricultural education of England and Wales was being reorganised. The information given below relates to Prussia ; for further particulars, reference may be made to two articles on agricultural education in Prussia which appeared in the Board's Journal in April and December, 1913. The policy aimed at in Prussia was, in the first place, to secure facilities for the study of agriculture in institutions of university rank ; it was recognised that before suitable instruction could be provided for small farmers there must first of all be careful study of methods and principles, such as is only possible at institutions possessing a large and well-trained staff. Between the years 1847 and 1881, seven institutions for providing higher education were founded ; in 1906 an eighth was established ; six of the eight * Members are liable not only to the extent of their share, but to the extent of their whole property. They are thus individually responsible for the whole of the engagements of the society to its own members or to outside creditors. Societies working on the principle of limited liability of members (viz., the Schultze-Delitzsch societies) are also in existence and form about 8 per cent, of the total number of agricultural credit societies. 24 are large and flourishing, two of them being agricultural colleges and four university departments of agriculture. The names, total incomes, Government grant, average number of students, and also the number of students who have taken degrees or diplomas in the years 1898-1912, are shown in the following statement : — XVI. — Statistics of Prussian Institutions -providing Higher Education in Agriculture. Total income 1910. Govern- ment grant 1910. Average yearly number of pupils since foundation to end of 1911-12. Examinations passed. 1899 to 1912* Degrees. Diplomas. Teachers' diplomas. Halle University Gottingen „ Kiel „ Konigsberg,, Breslau ,, £ 14,012 6,557 177 9,184 7,562 £ 9,760 5,039 177 6,997 6,186 457 73 5 56 99 74 58 3 51 42 216 35 3 29 59 74 18 34 11 Total 37,492 28,159 690 228 342 137 Agricultural Academy, Bonn-Poppelsdorf. Agricultural High School, Berlin. "Kaiser Wilhelm" In- stitute, Bromberg. 21,585 30,567 13,597 9,690 22,643 12,278 104 973 4 — 251 305 83 67 Total 65,749 44,611 1,081 - 556 150 Total for all Insti- tutions. 103,241 72,770 1,771 — — — It may be observed that the Government grants for academic institutions in 1910 were on a much more liberal scale in Prussia than in this country. The grant to the Berlin High School alone is more than the whole sum (about £18,000) which the Board had at disposal for grants to. colleges in that year. Since 1910 the Development Grants have became available, but the grant to the Berlin High School still compares favourably with the whole sum (about £29,000) available for English and "Welsh colleges and university departments — other than research institutes — in the year before the war. The attendances at some of the institutions are large, but in other cases it is clear that in calculating the Government grant Prussia takes into account the cost of providing an efficient type of instruction and is not guided by the " head-counting " method, so much adopted in England. German agricultural colleges have had other than financial advantages. The German military system stimulates the young agriculturist to continue his school education until he is able to pass the fairly stiff examination that entitles him to spend only one year in military training. The stimulus is not entirely, or in many cases chiefly, due to the desire to escape the full term of service in the army. Officers for the Army Reserve are * It will be observed that relatively few students take degrees or diplomas ; the majority attend only those classes which are necessary to prepare them for their work as agriculturists. 25 selected from among men whose education has been sufficiently good to enable them to pass the examination qualifying for one year's service, and, for social reasons, eligibility for selection is prized by young agriculturists. One direct result of the good school education which the military regulations foster is that many more young agriculturists are well qualified by their previous education to benefit by the training provided by agricultural ■colleges than would otherwise be the case. Again, for reasons indicated when referring to credit associations, German agricul- ture has been influenced to a greater extent than English farming by business methods and ideals, and the need for properly •educated men as managers of estates is much more commonly recognised in Germany than in England. Hence, a useful career in developing agricultural domains is open to successful students from the academic institutions of Prussia; while the English student, who has not sufficient capital to take a farm in this country, must look to some other country than his own if he intends to apply his knowledge to the practical improvement of agriculture. In England almost the only posts open to students from agricultural colleges are those in connection with teaching. These various advantages have resulted in a substantial number ■of Germans studying agriculture at universities or colleges. Up to 1910 some 65,000 had been trained at Prussian institutions. The influence of the farming of these men on the cultivation of German soil cannot be proved by figures ; but there can be no doubt that the readiness which German farmers have shown to adopt the aids to production which the XXth century has placed within their reach is due to the leavening of the mass by educated agriculturists. So soon as substantial progress had been made in the study of agriculture at the universities, when teachers had been trained and text-books written, Prussia began to provide instruction for peasant cultivators, and in the last few years great progress has been made in this direction. The task of reaching the German peasant farmer was a difficult one, and many complaints were made of his slowness and backwardness, but the increased pro- duction of Germany clearly proves that he has been reached, for the peasant farmer tills 70 per cent, of the land. Several methods of providing agricultural instruction of an elementary kind for the children of the smaller farmers have been tried. The most successful is the winter course, similar in character to the organised courses of instruction itow being developed in English counties. Of the.^e courses, there were 212 in Prussia in 1910. In addition there were 17 schools meeting ihroughout the year. The total attendance at the 229 schools and winter courses was 10,500 in 1911-12. The cost was £106,900, towards which the State contributed £30,000 in grants. In addition to the general agricultural schools there were 114 special schools, including 70 farriery, 15 dairy, and 14 gardening schools. Short courses, both general and special, for adult farmers are also provided. In 1911 there were 1,354 such courses, attended by 36,000 pupils. A feature of the Prussian system is that in the summer months the teachers employed in winter schools visit the pupils at their 26 homes and advise on farming questions. Peripatetic instructors have proved very successful and their numbers have recently been much increased. About 180 official agricultural lecturers, besides- schoolmasters from winter schools, are now employed. These- official lecturers are usually engaged by chambers of agriculture and agricultural societies, and not, as in England, by local authori- ties. The official chambers of agriculture provide about one-third of the salaries and expenses and the State contributes two-thirds. Fifty-two of the lecturers are specialists on live stock; 26 deal with general agricultural questions ; 12 with dairying ; 10 with poultry; 9 with seed-selection. Among other subjects claiming travelling lecturers are national economy 3, and book-keeping 3. Agricultural education of secondary school grade has also recently been developed in Prussia; twenty schools have been established at which, in 1911, 3,800 pupils were in attendance. The total expenditure on agricultural instruction in Prussia in 1910 was about £484,000, of which 40 per cent, came from State grants, 37 per cent, from endowments, fees, &c, 17 per cent, from local authorities, and 5 per cent, from chambers of agri- culture and societies. The total expenditure on agricultural education in England and Wales in 1910-11 was about £117,000, of which sum £80,000 was spent by local education authorities and the balance by universities and colleges. Reviewing the position of agricultural education just before the outbreak of war, Professor von Rumker of Berlin in a paper contributed to the Monthly Bulletin of Agricultural Intelligence of the International Agricultural Institute, Rome, observes that the total outlay (£190,000) by the Government was very moderate for a State like Prussia. In justification of a larger expenditure von Rumker says: — "The great progress that agriculture has- achieved in Germany during the last quarter of a century is the result of the union of practice with science and proves that money spent on research and on education in every class brings in a high rate of interest and is compensated for by the increase of land taxes and of the revenue from State railways." Chambers of Agriculture. • Having organised credit and co-operative societies, and pro- vided the foundations of agricultural education, Prussia, soon, to be followed by the other German states, set about the creation of leadership for the German farmer. The latter already had his " Royal Agricultural Society " in the admirable Deutsche Land- wirtschaftsgesellschaft (founded on the model of our own society in 1885) and his " Farmers' Union" in the Bund der Landwiite (founded in 1893). He had, besides, many agricultural societies and chambers of agriculture, the former mare or less successful, the latter wordy and generally ineffective from lack of funds. Prussia conceived the idea of providing an official chamber of agriculture for each province, and in 1894 a law was passed' establishing chambers and giving them power to levy rates on their members. At first the new bodies were viewed with 27 suspicion by some of the non-official societies and they were not set up in all provinces, but by 1900 each Prussian province had its official chamber ; similar chambers have since been founded in other parts of Germany. The German Agricultural Council (Land- wirtschaftsrat) , an important body about which some particulars are given on p. 52, serves as a central official chamber for the Empire. The members of the official chambers are all practical agricul- turists or are directly interested in agriculture, and they are elected for a term of six years by the District Councils ; * it has been arranged that one-half the members shall resign, in turn, every three years so as to preserve continuity. The membership varies from 32 to 124 in the different Prussian provinces, and the number of committees (by means of which the work is done) from 5 to 14. Members of the chambers are unpaid, but travelling and subsistence allowances are provided. The primary functions of the chambers are twofold, viz., to represent the interests and needs of the farming community to the State and to carry out schemes for the development of agri- culture. They are also intended to assist in the organisation of credit and co-operation, but as yet they have done little in this direction. As already noted, they take a prominent part in the State's educational policy and appoint and direct the movements of the travelling agricultural lecturers. The nearest approach to the German provincial chamber of agriculture which we have in this country is the National Agri- cultural Council for Wales ; this body and the provincial councils in England are intended to exercise certain of the functions of the German chambers. The difference is that, with the exception of the Yorkshire Joint Council for Agricultural Education, our councils are purely advisory, and have no funds at their own disposal for carrying improvement schemes into effect. The Prussian chambers in 1908 had an income of £260,000 at their disposal, of which £155,000 came from the State. The balance was raised by rates levied on the farmers of the province electing the chambers. IV. GEBMAN" ECONOMIC POLICY. The measures taken to organise the development of German agriculture are intimately associated with the Empire's general economic policy, and an attempt must now be made to ascertain the effect of that policy on the increased production of German soil. It is sometimes stated that recent progress in German agricul- ture and retrogression in British farming may be equally explained by the fiscal policies adopted by the respective countries. That the fiscal policy has affected the conditions is undoubted, but the extent to which protection has assisted German agricul- ture and the precise manner in which tariffs have contributed to its prosperity are difficult to discover. * German " Districts " (Regierungsbezirke) are large areas. There are, for example, 36 " Districts " in Prussia. 28 The Rise of the Ageaeian Paety. In order to appreciate the effect of tariffs on German agri- culture, some reference to the economic and political, as well as to the purely agricultural aspect of the question is necessary. German agriculturists, like our own, enjoyed a term of prosperity in the third quarter of the XlXth century ; the country was self- .sufEcing — to some extent, indeed, an exporter of grain — and the agrarians were, therefore, free-traders. Soon after the Franco- Prussian War foreign competition began to affect corn growers, -and small protective duties were resolved upon. On January 1st, 1880, a tax of 1 mark per 100 kilos. (2s. l$d. per quarter of wheat) -was imposed on wheat, rye, and oats, and 1 mark per 200 kilos, on barley. In the early 'eighties the pressure of foreign com- petition increased rapidly; in 1885 the tariff on wheat and rye was raised to 3 marks and in 1887 to 5 marks per 100 kilos., while increases were also made in the rates on oats and barley. In 1892, under Caprivi's " commercial treaty " policy, the rates for wheat and rye were lowered to 3' 5 marks, at which they stood until 1906. In that year the tariff on wheat (as modified by treaties) was raised to 5"5 marks (lis. 9d. per quarter), on rye and •oats to 5 marks, and on malting barley to 4 marks per 100 kilos. The harvests of the early nineties were abundant and the price of wheat in Berlin fell from 47s. 9d. per quarter in 1891 to 29s. in 1894. The fall was attributed by the agrarians solely to the "accursed" policy of the "little successor of the Great Chancellor." Caprivi, who took no pains to conciliate the agrarians — announcing himself as "a man without a stake in the soil " — was forced to resign; but not before he had converted German agriculturists into active politicians. Until 1892 the agrarian had given little attention to politics ; in that year a " Party of the Plough " was formed, which a few months later developed into the " Bund) der Landwirte." The policy of this Union was direct and German. " We must proclaim ourselves. Only as we follow class politics ruthlessly and undisguisedly can we possibly save ourselves."* The policy of the Blind, which has remained unchanged, has from the agrarian standpoint proved highly successful. " Its agitation, in form and scope unpre- cedented in Germany, imbued public opinion with an amount of agrarian spirit which would earlier have been thought impossible."* The agrarian's policy, however, did not arise from pure " ruth- lessness." There can be no doubt that owing to the high prices paid for land, the heavy borrowings on estates during the pre- vious prosperous period, the fall in prices, the rise in wages and the scarcity of labour (which, even before the close of last century, was being keenly felt), the position of the German agriculturist about 1894 was very bad. It was, indeed, not merely the clamour of the influential East Prussian agrarians, but the plight of the peasant owners that moved German econo- mists to recast their principles. * " The German Tariff Controversy," H. Dietzel (University of Bonn) Q.J. of Economics 1903, from which most of the information in this section is taken. 29 The Attitude of German Economists to Agriculture. Until late in the XlXth century the economic doctrines of Germany were those generally current in Britain. As German, agriculturists had gone to Sinclair and Arthur Young for their farming principles, so their economists founded on Adam Smith. The accepted views on protection were those of List, who taught that its only uses were (1) for the encouragement of infant indus- tries, (2) for saving a useful industry in temporary distress, (3) for purposes of bargaining. By the end of the century, how- . ever, the free trade principles of List were held by a small minority of German economists only.* The predominant views* m the controversy which centred round the Tariff Law of 1902 were protectionist. The out-and-out protectionists were not an important group ; indeed the number of convinced protectionists who held that agriculture and manufactures were equally im- portant and that they must be equally protected was quite small ; much the most influential party based its argument for pro- tection on the special case of agriculture. The view put forward by Wagner, the leader of this party (which appears to have been accepted by von Biilow), was that Germany was becoming over- industrial, and that to maintain a healthy community, physically and industrially, fiscal measures must be taken to assist agri- culture. Unless it received protection it was impossible that under the new conditions — competition of virgin lands with arti- ficially enriched soils and competition of quick-return industries with slow-moving agriculture — the latter could remain both pro- ductive and solvent. A choice must be made between tariffs which would encourage intensive methods and thus produce sufficient food from native soil, or free trade which would assist most manufacturing industries but would draw workers from agriculture, abstract from the land the capital required for its tillage, and necessitate a largely increased importation of food. The conclusion which this group of economists forced upon the German public was that Germany must " keep under the pro- tection of her guns the ground upon which her corn grows and her cattle graze." An influential middle party among the economists agreed that agriculture must have moderate tariffs, but protested against the increase asked for by the agrarians because of the effect of heavy duties on the food of the poor. To the influence of this party may be traced the provision which von Billow's tariff makes for part of the proceeds of corn duties to be applied to social amelioration. I have referred to the views of German economists for the purpose of drawing attention to the marked change which took place in the doctrines taught at the German universities between 1880 and 1900. This change was not brought about by any sympathy with the policy of the Bund der Landwirte, whose actions were freely attributed f o selfishness ; nor was there any wish to enrich the agrarians, whose misfortunes were not infre- quently attributed to stupidity and the failure to modify their " Dietzel, himself one of the number, remarks that the group follow "still somewhat cautiously" the British free traders. 30 methods so as to conform to new economic conditions. German •economists, and with them the majority of the German people, though well aware of the disadvantages of protection, supported tariffs on agricultural produce hecause they were convinced that their first endeavour must be to secure, not a cheap, hut an •assured source of food. The change in the attitude of the non- agricultural population was assisted no doubt by the circumstance that German lenders were deeply committed to agriculture through the popular system of credit so widely spread and so largely resorted to in Germany ; but, in the main, the desire to help the agriculturist was dictated by the conviction that inten- sive cultivation was a necessity for the Fatherland. It is clear that, whatever the motives which led to a change in the attitude of the non-agricultural population, the effect of the change on the progress of German agriculture during the past '20 years has been beneficial. Moral support quickly took a material form. The German agriculturist, whose technical methods were being hindered by lack of capital and whose enter- prise was checked by the uncertainty of the future, found his position established and his credit improved because his country- men had adopted a settled policy towards his calling. Agriculture moves slowly, the farmer's plans cannot be altered during the year, nor even once a year, and a rotation of crops may extend to six years or more. To the enterprising agriculturist, "willing to increase production by the expenditure of fresh capital, a settled policy is, therefore, clearly an important consideration, and in attempting to explain the success of the German farmer, the effect produced by the consciousness that he now had the definite support of his countrymen must be given a prominent place. The State's Agricultural Policy. Between 1890 and 1900 there is some evidence that the agri- cultural policy of the German people dictated the policy of the Imperial Government. As has already been noted, Caprivi's treaties were responsible for the political ferment raised by the agrarians, and between his resignation in 1894 and the passing of the Tariff Law of 1902, Caprivi's successors appear to have been mainly concerned in an endeavour to strike a just balance between the rival demands of agriculture and industry. In the final event, the extreme agrarians were dissatisfied with the Tariff Bill and refused to support it. If the agricultural policy of the Imperial Government before 1900 was uncertain, there can be no doubt that it has since ■definitely aimed at a large increase in food production from ■German soil. In his book, "Imperial Germany" (1914), yon Biilow explains at length the reasons which led him to increase the protective tariffs on agricultural produce : " I was persuaded that vigorous agriculture is necessary for us from the economic, but, above all, from the national and social points of view"* .... " Without great and flourishing agriculture by its side, industry would soon use up the best forces of the * p. 209. 31 mation " * .... " Agriculture is the mother of the nation's strength which industry employs."* These quotations show the ■considerations which weighed with von Bulow. He appears to have been specially impressed with the eugenic argument for agriculture. He alludes to the great fall in the birth rate in towns and gives some striking figures as to the effect of town life on physical vigour. He refers to a Commission appointed by himself in 1906 to enquire into the percentages of men fit for military service who came, respectively, from town and country. This enquiry showed that for each 100 men which it was esti- mated would be forthcoming for military service, there were supplied : — By large cities (100,000 and over) 65 men fit for service. By towns of 20,000-100,000 ... 83 By country districts and villages of less than 2,000 114 Of the parents of men fit for service, 75 per cent, came from the country and only 1"7 from large towns. (It should be noted that the housing conditions in many German towns are bad.) Yon Bulow's reference to the value of a strong agriculture in time of war is also of much interest. The following sentences were probably written in 1912:- — " As in time of war, industry is dependent on the buying power of agriculture, the productive power of agriculture is a vital question for the whole nation. There are parties and groups representing certain economic interests which demand that the Government shall place a very small duty on agri- cultural products from abroad, or even let them in duty free, so that the price of comestibles, under the pressure of foreign competition, may be kept low, and thus the industrial work- man's expenses of living may be reduced. They want to base all economic policy on an imaginary permanent peace. Our agriculture which has to compete, so far as wages are ■concerned, with the high wages paid by industrial concerns, which has to employ the most modern and expensive machinery in order to pursue intensive culture on soil that has been tilled for centuries, is absolutely unable to produce at the same price as the large, young agricultural countries, which work virgin soil and pay small wages. " Our agriculture needs a protective tariff. Imported agricultural products must have a sufficiently heavy duty imposed on them to prevent the foreign supply from falling below a price at which our home agriculture can make a fair profit. The reduction of agrarian duties at the time of Caprivi's commercial policy brought about a crisis in our agriculture which it was only able to weather by dint of working with stubborn energy, and hoping for a complete change of tariff arrangements within a short time. If we sacrificed the protective tariff on agricultural products in order to lower the cost of living by means of cheap imports, the danger would arise that agricultural work would grow more and more unprofitable, and would have to be given up to a greater and greater extent. We should go the way England has gone."t p. 213. f pp. 221-222. 32 The Effect of the Tariffs. The task of attempting 1 to estimate the actual influence of tariffs on the development of German agriculture remains. On one hand we have the general official opinion of Germany re- flected in such works as Deutschlcmd unter Kaiser Wilhelm II., eulogising the remarkaBle results that have followed German economic policy, and on the other side, the views of the German free trader, not yet convinced that tariffs have teen responsible for agricultural progress. The real causes of progress, according to free traders, were co-operation, education, the fall in prices of manures and feeding-stuffs, and the rise in value of animal products because of the increasing prosperity of the working classes. Tariffs temporarily increased the profits of the farmer, but they increased the cost of living and forced up wages ; they raised the value of land and thus increased interest charges or rent ; they clogged enterprise and permitted the survival of the unfit. They were not " food for industry," as claimed by pro- tectionists, nor even " medicine," as argued by economists of the middle school, but a " stimulant," which at frequent intervals must be repeated in increasing doses if any effect on production was to be hoped for. An unprejudiced outsider must admit that the balance of evidence from Germany supports the advocates of tariffs. It is, indeed, evident that within the period 1888-1913 they exercised a remarkable influence on German agriculture — -but how ? It can- not be alleged that the extra money which tariffs brought to agriculture is the sole, or even the main, cause of the increase in production. If other and quite different causes had not been operative German agriculture must have been bankrupt ere now. For in 1888, when German agriculture was feeling foreign com- petition severely, the tariff on wheat was only some Is. Id. per quarter less than in 1914 and, in the interval, wages had risen greatly. In 1894, when the tariff on wheat was 4s. id. per quarter less than in 1914, land was falling in value, farms were being abandoned by tenants, agricultural indebtedness had reached a dangerous level, and the agriculturist himself regarded his position as desperate. Yet by 1897, before there was any increase in the low protective duties introduced by Caprivi, the crisis had passed and agriculturists were prospering. A study of the position makes it clear that quite independently of tariffs there was, as in this country, a marked improvement in the value of agricultural produce between 1896 and 1906, and an examina- tion of prices* shows that if world prices had not favoured the agriculturist the protective tariffs of Germany could not have removed his financial embarrassment. Whereas, however, British land went down to grass, and our farmers regained financial equilibrium by cutting down expenses and producing less food, German farmers maintained their arable land and steadily in- creased their production. It is not possible to resist the conclusion that it was the economic policy adopted by his country that prevented the * See p. 70 for prices of wheat and oats. 33 German from following the methods of the British farmer. The agricultural policy adopted by Germany was indeed extraordin- arily successful in restoring confidence and emboldening farmers to resort to intensive cultivation; but if one asks "Why?" the reply must admit that success was, in no small degree, due to good luck. Between 1880 and 1900 world prices moved in such a way as to furnish the agrarians with the case they needed to secure ascendancy in the German Empire. The seasons could not,, indeed, have done more to help the landed interests had Nature herself joined in a conspiracy with the Bund der Landwirte to establish the political position and the fortunes of the agrarians. In the period 1880-1890 prices of corn fell until a substantial protective duty was imposed in 1885 ; wheat responded to the tariff almost immediately, and when a heavier duty was imposed in 1887 both wheat and rye rose sharply in price. The agrarians, who had hitherto been indifferent to economics, were rapidly persuaded of the effectiveness of tariffs. Prices reached a high level in 1891; Caprivi. in pursuance of his "accursed policy," reduced the tariffs in 1892 and though he had only lowered the protective duty on wheat by 3s. 3d. per quarter, the price fell (because of bountiful harvests) by 18s. 9d. per quarter in three years. The agrarians persuaded themselves and the public that the fall in price was due to the new policy, and Caprivi dis- appeared. Xo sooner had the agrarians won than the seasons altered in their favour, and though no change in the tariff occurred until 1906, prices rose soon after Caprivi' s fall and remained reasonably good for the next eight years (see p. 70). After the new tariff in 1906 prices again rose sharply (to a greater extent than could be attributed to the duty) until 1909. In effect the changes in the tariffs (which for about half the period Wilhelm II. has reigned were relatively low) were so fortunately timed from the agrarian's standpoint as to ensure the success of his political aims without seriously curtailing his profits. As the period of prosperity set in several years before the revision of Caprivi's low tariff, to which was attributed the dis- tress of the early nineties, German economic policy cannot have increased the productiveness of German soil solely by the extent to which it affected the prices of agricultural produce. The effect of the policy was largely indirect, and may thus be accounted for: A highly developed system of credit had been evolved in the XlXth century; it had been shaken by the rapid fall in prices and the resulting depreciation in value of real property. A fine system of education had been thought out; its new technical methods were unheeded, because there was no capital for the development of estates. The foundations for a widespread system of co-operation had been laid, but enterprise was at a standstill. Chambers of agriculture and agricultural societies had been formed to provide leadership, but the leaders could speak only of agricultural depression. The end of the XlXth century saw German agriculture organised, but the machinery was at a standstill. At this juncture came the fiscal controversy; the nation decided that intensive agriculture must 8390 c 34 !be promoted for the common good ; the policy was settled ; ■confidence was awakened ; credit was restored ; the capital that had been exhausted during the period of depression was replen- ished ; and the machinery, developed — as the Germans themselves say — by " deep thought," began to move. The main value of the tariff policy to German agriculture was the sense of security which it created in the farmer. It was the conviction that he was essential to the community, and that the community would not permit his land to go out of ■cultivation, rather than the prospect of receiving an extra two marks per 100 kilos, for his wheat after the year 1906 that stirred the German agriculturist of the new century to make an effort; and, it may be added, it was the knowledge that his grain was not wanted and that his fellow countrymen did not depend upon his exertions that led the British farmer, at this same period, to ■cut down expenses and reduce, or at least fail to increase, the productivity of his land. While, however, the different economic policies have led to an increase of food production in one country and a reduction of food production in the other, it must not be too readily assumed that had the German policy been adopted in Britain the results would have been similar. The German policy was successful because it supplied the energy required to set carefully devised machinery in motion; but at the end of the XlXth century we had not ■developed the organisation for promoting agriculture that then existed and has since been so effective in Germany. As com- pared with the German system, British agricultural education was specially defective before 1900. •General Influence of Industrial Progress on Agriculture. In accounting for its progress during the past 40 years we must note the advantages which German agriculture has derived from the general economic progress of the country. We have seen in connection with the discussion of tariffs that to some ■extent there was rivalry between agriculture and industry. This was especially the case in the years 1896-1906. The agrarians had won on the general question of tariffs and their ruthless •class policy required a new stimulus. They found it in the scarcity of labour caused by the demand of town industries and by the consequent rural exodus. Leutenot (scarcity of people) became their catchword after Caprivi had been disposed of. This drain of labour, however, stimulated the use of machinery ; further, it was the prosperity of the towns that gave agriculture good prices for meat and milk, that furnished cheap capital, provided the agriculturist with guidance in co-operative methods .and in general infected him with the enterprise that characterised German industries of this period. The Virtues of the Agrarian. Finally, in considering the effects of German economic policy, we must not fail to note how much German agriculturists have done to organise themselves, not only for political purposes, but for the improvement of the practice of agriculture. It would be unjust to the German farmer to suggest that his general attitude ^5 -towards his fellow countrymen may be indicated solely by the bellicose tone of the public policy of the leaders of the Bund der Landwirte. It is unquestionable that the leaders among German agriculturists regard the cultivation of the land, in the best possible way, as being a duty which is owing to the Fatherland. If it was the duty of the industrial population, acting on the advice of their leaders, to accept fiscal proposals repugnant to them, so as to secure increased production from the soil of Germany, much more must it be the farmer's duty to see that his share of the work is thoroughly done. This attitude is re- flected in the work of the agricultural societies. Like our own societies, they have set themselves to improve farm animals and plants by means of shows and competitions ; but their proceedings indicate that while they take measures for the improvement of the farm, they do not forget the improvement of the master. It is only necessary to turn to any volume of the Jahrbuch der Deutschen Landu-irtschaftsgeselltchaft and to note there the sub- jects set down for discussion at the spring or autumn Berlin meetings, or at the annual country meetings, in order to realise how much has been clone by German agricultural societies to educate farmers in the business of production and to place before them ideals towards which their energies must be directed in improving their technical methods. The spirit animating the agrarian leaders is well illustrated >by the following sentences taken from an essay in the work, Deutschland unter Kaiser Wilhehn II., already mentioned, by the President of the Landivirtschaftsrat, Count von Schwerin- Lowitz.* Beferring to the agricultural depression of 1893-95, and to the advice then given to cease from the attempt to produce such large quantities of corn and to resort to less intensive methods of cultivation in which foreign competition was less felt, Schwerin- Lowitz remarks : " Fortunately, however, the love of the German farmers for their ancestral fields and their tenacity even in a time of greatest depression enabled them to withstand the economic and political views of the wise men of that day. In the end, however, many thousands — especially those with small farms and little capital — were brought to the brink of ruin or were forced to sell the land which they had inherited from their fathers. The greater number of farmers, moreover, possessed neither the courage nor the necessary capital in order to carry through the technical improvements which were recognised as necessary at that time. In spite of all, however, German agriculturists, taken as a whole, never for a moment gave up- the determined resolve to overcome the terrible difficulties which faced them by means of a redoubled concentration of all their forces, aided by economy in actual farming, technical perfectness in their methods, together with firm co-operation in all that pertains to their profession, and above all in the political struggle which they saw to be impending, find by such means to fight for and obtain in the future better conditions of existence." He may have resorted to a ruthless class policy, but in attempting to explain the progress of German agriculture let us not omit to note the virtues of the agrarian. * This essay is printed as Appendix I, see p. 4 ( J. 8390 " C 2 36 V. IMPROVEMENT IN THE TECHNICAL METHODS OF THK GERMAN FARMER. I have referred to the general conditions responsible for German agricultural progress. A good system of credit, co- operation, a developed scheme of agricultural education, an economic policy favouring agriculture, and the stimulating in- fluence of an increase in general prosperity, these explain how agricultural progress was made possible ; but they do not account for the actual increase in agricultural production. It has already been stated that the area of cultivated land in> Germany has slightly decreased in recent years. The reclama- tion of moorland, about which we hear much, is interesting as an- indication of agricultural energy, but it counts for little in the- feeding of the German people. The agricultural population has remained practically stationary. Rather less than more labour- is being employed now than 25 years ago. It is, indeed, evident that the larger production has not been due to an increase in the area tilled, or to an increase in the number of persons engaged im tillage, but to better farming; the soil has been better cultivated, crops have been more skilfully manured, plants and animals have been improved in type ; the use of oil-cakes and other feeding stuffs has increased ; sanitary laws have led to a great improvement in the health of farm live stock. Side by side with these improved! technical methods improved business methods have been resorted to, and the profits of agriculture have in turn been employed in> further developing the means of production. One or two illustra- tions of the improved practice of the modern German farmer may be given. Increased Use of Manures. The chief immediate cause of the increased productivity of' German soil is the increase in the use of artificial manures. As- compared with this country the extent to which German farmers have recently resorted to the use of artificial manures is note- worthy. The following statement estimates the approximate quantity of artificial fertilisers used per annum per 100 acres of cultivated land in Great Britain and Germany. The weights of nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potash contained in the various manures applied annually have been calculated and are stated in terms, of three standard manures — sulphate of ammonia, superphosphate and kainit. XVII. — Consumption of Artificial Manures in Great Britain and" Germany in terms of Standard Manures. Fertiliser. Per 100 acres cultivated land. Great Britain. Germany. Sulphate of Ammonia (20'5 per cent. N.) Superphosphate (30 per cent, soluble phosphate) Kainit (12| per cent. K 2 0) Tons. 0-48 2-85 072 Tons. 0-87 3'62 3-67 37 The estimate indicates that the average German farmer uses •nitrogenous manures nearly twice as liberally as the average British farmer, and that he employs about one-third more phos- phates and five times more potash. On tbe other hand, the British farmer uses 11-5 tons of imported feeding stuffs as against S'T tons per 100 acres used by the German, and theoretically this ought largely to compensate for the smaller amount of nitrogen and phosphates applied direct as manure; but owing to the heavy losses which occur in farmyard manure through improper storage, the actual results obtained from the larger consumption of feeding stuffs are certainly very much less than those from the direct appli- cation of the fertilise! s. In comparing the extent to which manure is applied, it must not be forgotten that the German farmer has a much greater proportion of arable land to maintain in good condition, and that he farms much light sandy soil specially dependent on potash manures. The increase in the use of artificial manures in Germany in t-he past 25 years has been very rapid. Helfferich points out that between 1890 and 1910 the total consumption of artificial ferti- lisers rose from 1.600,000 to 6,000,000 metric tons; while the use of potash increased tenfold, and the use of basic slag more than threefold. Other German writers emphasise the effect of this great increase on production. The increase in the use of artificial manures was partly accounted for by the fall in price which followed cheapening in production and transport in the last quarter of the XlXth century. Brentano supports his free trade arg-urnent by figures showing that between 1880 and 1897 the prices of nitrogenous manures in Germany fell by 50 to 60 per cent., of super- phosphate by 47 per cent., and of potash by 36 per cent. In •certain cases special circumstances were responsible for an in- creased use. A large home production of basic slag resulted from "the great development of the steel industry, and the use of potash — practically a German monopoly — -was popularised by the energy of the powerful Potash Syndicate. The chief factor in developing the use of artificial manures in Germany, however, was unques- tionably a well organised system of technical education. Investi- gation at the research stations established the precise uses of these manures: trustworthy advice was supplied by institutions, by peripatetic instructors, by technical leaflets and by agricultural newspapers ; and the farmer, even the backward Bauer, like other ■Germans brought his methods into line with "Authority." Germany has not only great deposits of potash salts, but vast tracts of light soils specially benefited by potash manures ; hence very successful results were secured from these manures when used under guidance. This natural combination of a home potash supply and of soils benefited by potash must be kept in view in accounting for recent progress in German farming. The Beet Stgab Industry. Germany has been successful in founding some important industries in direct association with agriculture. In addition to =the brewing and distilling industries, there is the great sugar 38 industry, a considerable potato-starch industry and a rapidly growing potato-drying industry. These industries have had a* very considerable influence in developing agriculture ; they have- been directly effective by providing local markets for agricul- tural produce, and indirectly useful in supporting a rural popu- lation which provides agriculture with much occasional labour at busy seasons. In the latter respect, the beet sugar industry is especially valuable, for the factory campaigns are carried on from November till the end of January, just at the time of year when employment is most needed by rural workers. The beet. sugar industry has exercised so important an influence on the rural economy of Germany that some further reference to the crop may be made with the object of illustrating German technical methods. It is generally admitted in Germany itself that sugar beet has been of immense service to agriculture. The following quotation from Helfferich shows the view taken of it by business- men. " In addition to the immediate profits derived by German agriculture from the increased production of beet sugar, the cultivation of the beet root has brought large remoter advan- tages. The intense and intelligent cultivation required by the beets proved everywhere an advantage for the other branches of agriculture." In the discussions on the value of the sugar beet to the British farmer which have taken place in recent years, it has frequently been stated that while beet is an expensive crop to grow, the gross value is small compared with that of certain other farm, crops. Thus an acre of beet, which costs £9 to £11 to grbw,. may be worth only £10 to £12. The mangold crop which costs less to cultivate is worth more in some districts for cow feeding, and the gross value of an ordinary potato crop is often consider- ably more. Thus, it has been argued that beet is a crop worth attention only when labour is cheap and the soils are not adapted for potato growing. The relatively low gross value of beet cannot have escaped attention 50 years ago when the crop was fighting for a place on the German farm, but the considerations which have told against beet in recent years in England have not pre- vented it from becoming the popular root crop on the best land of Germany. Beet, like other crops, requires well-defined conditions if it is to be grown to perfection ; these conditions do not exist all over Germany, but where they do, beet culture has made rapid pro- gress, and the production of raw sugar is now ten times as large as it was 40 years ago.* With the object of showing the agricultural importance of the beet crop, I have collected the following figures which compare the increase in rents and the value of land in certain adjacent Prussian districts (Regie mngsbezirke). In the first three districts, Magdeburg, Merseburg and Hildesheim, from 7 to 10 per cent, of the cultivated land grows beet ; in the remain- ing four— Erfurt, Potsdam, Frankfurt, Liegnitz— the crop- occupies only from Q-T to 1'4 per cent, o f the cultivated area. In * Figures for 25 years are given on p. 72. 39 other respects the cropping is similar; in all districts the potato is an important crop claiming from 9'3 to 19 per cent, of the land, while cereals occupy from 55 to 61 per cent. XVIII. — Rent and Land Value in (1) Beet Growing; (2) Non- Beet Growing Districts of Prussia. District. Cropping per 100 acres of Arable Land (1900). Rent per acre. Value per acre of Estates of Beet. Potatoes. Cereals. 1867. 1907. Increase. acres (1895-1905), £££? }*«*** Hildesheim J S rown - Acres. 10-5 7-0 9-7 Acres. 14-0 12-5 93 Acres. 56 60 61 s. 18 16 s. 36 27 30 Per cent. 100 69 £ S. 55 33 4 45 16 Erfurt ~\ Potsdam (Little Beet Frankfurt f grown. Liegnitz ) 1-3 1-0 0-7 1-4 11-9 16-0 19-0 15-0 56 56 55 60 13 9 10 9 14 10 13 14 8 11 30 55 20 16 14 6 12 19 15 7 Column 7 of the statement shows that in the forty years 1867- 1907 rents rose from 69 to 100 per cent, in two of the three beet- growing districts and from 8 to 55 per cent, in the four non-beet- growing districts ; further, it will he seen from column 8 that, at the beginning of the present century, the value of land in the beet districts was very much higher than in the others. Reviewing all the figures in this statement, two conclusions may be drawn; viz., that beet is now a favourite crop on the best land in Prussia, and that, since beet-growing developed, the value of this land has increased to a much greater extent than the value of land in adjacent districts less well suited for beet cul- tivation. Examination of the productiveness of the districts in question does not modify the conclusion that beet, not the potato (in England accounted the more profitable) determines the value of the land. Potsdam, for example, had 16 per cent, of the cultivated land under potatoes, Magdeburg had 14 per cent. ; the fields in the latter district are but slightly better than in the former, and if the potato were the crop which determined the value of the land the difference in value between the two districts should have been much less. The importance of the sugar beet crop was recognised in Germany at an early stage, and its development has been care- fully fostered by duties and by laws calculated to assist the industry. The first German excise on home-grown sugar took the form of a tax on raw beet, which gradually rose from 1 mark per metric ton in 1841 to 18 marks in 1888. This method o£ taxing raw beet was apparently inimical to the interests of growers, and was much criticised, but it had the advantage of putting a premium on roots of high quality and stimulating selection in the production of seed. The great improvement in the quality of the roots which resulted from continuous selection has since contributed in a marked degree to the success of the * By 1913 the percentage of area under beet in these districts had risen to Magdeburg 11*8 per cent., Merseburg 8-8 per cent., Hildesheim 10 - 2 per cent. 40 industry. (Helfferich points out that whereas in 1875-76 it took 1162 tons of beet to produce 1 ton of raw sugar, in 1910-11 only 6'08 tons of beet were required.) In 1892, the merits of selection having meantime been established, the excise duty on beet was replaced by a duty of 18 marks per 100 kilos, on raw sugar; this duty was raised to 20 marks in 1896. To assist exporters, refunds of duty of various amounts had been allowed since 1861, and in 1892 a direct bounty was given ; but the production of sugar was controlled so as to limit the State's liability for bounty, and a small tax was levied on fac- tories. In 1896 the bounty was increased to 256 marks per 100 kilos, of raw sugar. Under the terms arranged by the Brussels Convention, however, bounties ceased as from 1st September, 1903, and thereafter the protection of German sugar was limited to the extent agreed upon by the parties to the Convention, viz., fi fr. per .100 kilos, of refined sugar (2s. Ad. per cwt.).* Since 1903 the actual import duties on raw sugar have been 184 to 18'8 marks per 100 kilos. ; the excise duty has been 14 marks. The excise on sugar is one of the important sources of revenue of the Imperial Government. Its yield rose from £3,168,000 in 1875-76 to £9,441,000 in 1909-10. As compared with the 37 million acres under cereals, the total area under sugar beet (before the war about 1,440,000 acres) is small, but, as the above quotation from Helfferich shows, the beet crop has exercised a much greater effect on German agricul- ture than the amount grown would suggest. As has already been indicated, it has brought an important industry and large sums of money to rural districts; it has necessitated deep cultivation and heavy manuring, with most beneficial results to succeeding crops ; the beet growers have been the pioneers of improved farming in many parts of Germany ; the residues from the crop have been skilfully used for cattle feeding, and animal husbandry has flourished where sugar beet is grown ; finally, it is recognised as the crop which produces most human food per unit of area. Writing in February last to a German newspaper, Dr. Eltzbacher, the Berlin economist and authority on German food production, urges agri- culturists to grow more sugar beet in 1916; he describes it as the most nourishing crop grown by the farmer, yielding five times as much food as rye and twice as much as potatoes from the same area of land. The sugar beet crop occupies less than 2 per cent, of the cul- tivated land of Germany, but without it the high level to which German agriculture has attained in recent years would have been impossible. The Potato Crop and Related Industkies. Reference may be made to a second crop to which German agriculture owes much. In Germany, as in Ireland, the potato is of great importance, and, as has already been noted, the average German farm produces five times the quantity of the average British farm. Of the total crop of some 45 million tons, it is estimated that only 12 million are usually consumed as human * A country adhering to the Convention is at liberty to impose an import duty of 6 fr. per 100 kg. in excess of any excise duty levied on refined sugar. 41 iood, 17 million are fed to stock, and 4 million are converted into spirits and starch. The crop provides a great reserve of food which was designed to be available in case of war, and much -attention has been given to increasing its usefulness. The chief ■drawback to the potato is its perishable nature. To some extent the starch factories convert tubers, that would otherwise decay, into a saleable commodity; but every year a large quantity, •estimated at 10 per cent, of the total crop, is wasted. With a view of preventing this waste, potato-drying machines •came into use a few years ago; they proved successful and have increased in number from 170 in 1908-9 to 327 in 1910-11. In that year some 400,000 tons of potatoes were ■dried. Since war broke out there has been a great increase in the number of drying machines, and in January last 762 were at work, so that during the past winter the Germans have probably dried for use at least a million tons of potatoes, -an amount equal to more than one-fourth of the total crop of Great Britain. Machinery for potato drying is usually erected •on farms either by large farmers or by co-operative societies of farmers, with the result that another rural industry, affording regular employment to farm labourers in the winter months, is 'being provided. Starch factories and distilleries similarly assist in giving employment in winter. The Assistance given by Forests. It is difficult to exaggerate the importance to the farmer of -arable land of such industries as provide work for rural labourers in the winter months, and in this connection attention may be drawn to the benefit which German agriculture derives from the 35 million acres of land under forests ; for woodlands provide much winter employment and thus reduce the amount of the labour bill falling upon cultivated land. This combination of forestry and agriculture, the former pro- viding winter and the latter summer employment, enables large tracts of poor land in Germany to support a considerable rural population. In Britain, similar tracts of country are almost unin- habited. VI. SOME LESSONS. Summary. 1. The German farmer now produces about the same weight oi ■cereals and potatoes per acre as the British farmer; but a much greater weight per 100 acres of cultivated land. The German produces about the same weight of meat and nearly twice as much milk per 100 acres as the British farmer. The German feeds from 70 to 75 persons per 100 acres of cultivated land, the British farmer feeds from 45 to 50. 2. The ascendancy of the German has been gained in the past 40 years. 3. The soil and climate of Germany are less favourable to agriculture than those of Britain. 4. The actual methods of tillage adopted in the growing of -corn, potatoes, &c, in Britain are not inferior io the methods 42 adopted in Germany. The difference in production is chiefly due- to the circumstance that in Britain more than two-thirds of the- cultivated land is now in grass, while in Germany less than one- third of the cultivated land is in grass. There has been a slight decrease in the area annually ploughed in Germany; in England and Wales the area which is annually ploughed decreased by about 26 per cent, in the forty years before the war. 5. A comparison of the main features of the agriculture of the two countries is given above, largely in the form of tabular state- ments. It is pointed out that German land is mostly tilled by peasant owners, British land by tenants. The German depends to> a great extent on women labour, provided by the families of the occupiers. Wages are relatively low in Germany, and rural industries help to provide winter employment and tend to cheapen summer labour. 6. Much attention has been given to organising production from German soil. The credit system is well adapted to promote- good farming. Co-operation is largely resorted to. Education has been well developed. Societies have been created to provide: leadership. 7. German economic policy in recent years has favoured agri- culturists, who have benefited partly from the higher prices resulting from tariffs and partly from the steadying effect which the known policy of the State has had upon the industry. 8. The general effect of the agencies and influences mentioned in the two preceding paragraphs has been to produce a very rapid improvement in the technical methods of the German farmer ; the use of manures and feeding stuffs has greatly increased. Superior strains of both plants and animals have been raised. Business methods have been introduced and important rural industries have been developed. The British and the German Eaemee. The foregoing account of the rapid progress of the German agriculturist may perhaps give the impression that he is now much more skilful than the British farmer. This conclusion would not be fair to the latter. In some respects the German does his work better; notably, he resorts very freely to co-operation, and thus the peasant is enabled to buy and sell as advantageously as the large farmer; again, though the German peasant is neither scientific in his methods nor teachable, he has more regard for " authority " than the English farmer, and adopts the advice- provided for him by chambers of agriculture and societies. Large- farmers, as a rule, are much better educated in Germany than the- similar class in Britain. Many, indeed, have had an excellent technical education : they are thus able to apply the principles learned in classrooms to the working of the land and to act as pioneers of improved farming. The discussions which are held at the periodical meetings of the German Agricultural Society indicate how well posted the leading practical agriculturists are in scientific questions. The excellence of the instruction pro- vided at the agricultural colleges has been made possible by the very close attention given by the Germans to research in agri- culture. 43 These advantages, largely due to the foresight of his Govern- ment, the German farmer puts to good uses, but when comparison is made between the ordinary methods of farm management adopted in the two countries, there is only one respect in which ihe British farmer lags behind, and that is in the use of manure. This shortcoming, too, is not so great as the actual figures in Statement XVII. suggest; it is largely because the British farmer has less tillage land and less sandy soil to manage, that he uses- less manure. The present differences between the average British and German farm are not so much differences of quality as of quantity. German crops are certainly no better, German breeds of live stock are certainly not so good as our own; the chief explanation of the greater food production of Germany is that the German is able to till two-thirds of his cultivated land, while the- British farmer tills one-third. While, therefore, Germany has temporarily gained an ascend- ancy in food production, because her policy has been to grow food while ours has been to import it, there is not the slightest reason to suppose that she has natural advantages which we have riot; or that, if the people of this country demand the production of more food within the British Isles, the farmer will fail to grow more. I have been all my life very closely associated with farmers ;. until 1906, when I came to London, I was constantly in their company ; I knew their work in many counties, and my experience was that if I wanted to find examples of really first-rate farming in any district I had seldom far to look for them. We do not lack well-managed and profitable farms, and it only wants system to get improved methods extended. The number of hide-bound farmers, whose perpetual boast is that they are practical men and 1 have nothing to learn, is, fortunately, not nearly so great as is sometimes supposed ; my personal experience is that the farmer is quite teachable if he is approached in a reasonable way. I have heard Germans complain, just as I have heard British teachers complain, of the slowness and backwardness of their farmers, and in the agrarian controversies the German intel- lectuals and industrials were not slow to attribute the difficulties of agriculturists chiefly to their own deficiencies. Their agri- cultural leaders themselves recognise how much scope there still is for improvement; thus, in the essay on "Agriculture in the Reign of Kaiser Wilhelm II.," reprinted below, the President of the Agricultural Council, after a glowing account of the triumphs of the past 25 years, refers to them as being but an earnest of what is to be expected when the peasantry of Germany adopt the scientific methods now being devised by their leaders. The Plough Policy. In studying the records of German progress I find no reason for discouragement with our own position. We have not lost the art of good husbandry, but have modified our methods for reasons sufficiently obvious ; and if after the war the British people make a new demand upon the farmer, I see no reason to suppose that he will fail. If, however, he is called upon to modify the methods which have been forced upon him since 1879, by the loss of 44 capital and the relatively high cost of labour, there must be a change in the policy of the country. The clear lesson which we may learn, if we wish to learn, from German experience is that if we desire to make any considerable addition to our home-grown supplies of food we must as a nation adopt the old farming motto " Speed the Plough." In the foregoing notes an attempt has been made to indicate the factors which have been responsible for the success of the " plough " policy of Germany. Among them all, two are funda- mental. Without security for capital and sufficiency of labour the extension of arable farming is not possible. This is in one sense a truism, but behind the truism there are points which are often forgotten and for which provision must be made in any policy that seeks to develop food production. Safeguarding the Farmer's Capital. The first point relates to capital. As compared with the variations in the gross value of the crops which he grows the arable farmer's capital is small. For example, a farmer taking an arable holding of medium quality worked on a four-course rotation would require a capital of about £8 per acre. At the prices ruling before the war the gross value of the four crops grown in succession on his fields might vary between the follow- ing limits : — £ s. Roots ... ... ... 6 10 to Wheat 7 to Grass and hay 4 10 to Oats 6 to £ s. 9 10 8 9 Total Gross Value £24 to £36 Under ordinary conditions of season and prices the average gross value of the farmer's crops may vary by as much as £3 per acre. The farmer's calculations, however, are based on the expectation that taking one period or rotation with another the gross value may be near the mean, and, since the several crops are not likely all to have the lower value in the same year, his expectation is usiially justified. If, however, for any reason as, e.g., a cycle of low world prices, or a series of bad seasons, the lower values only were to be realised for several years in succession the farmer's capital would quickly disappear. Even two succes- sive years of very low prices, or of unfavourable weather, might cause anxiety to many a capable and hard working tenant. When such periods follow each other in quick succession there may be disaster. The dreaded event is the cycle of bad seasons ; in former times bad seasons at least brought the farmer the natural compensation of high prices, but this was not so after 1879, and since that year the farmer has realised that he must face cycles both of bad weather and of low prices. For this reason arable farming has seemed to many farmers to be so speculative that they have been afraid to take the risks ; and when it is realised that in 45 bad seasons the farmer's expenses are increased, not lessened (for weeds in arable land spread rapidly and fertility is quickly drained out of the soil), the reluctance of the farmer to break up grass land can readily be justified. It is not possible to regulate the seasons, nor is it possible for the tenant farmers of the country to reckon a second time on the assistance from landowners which prevented the ruin of many farmers of arable land between 1880 and 1900. If, therefore, grass land must again be broken up so that more food may be grown, it will be necessary to prepare against the cycles of bad seasons (which will certainly come) by measures calculated to maintain or increase prices in lean years, and by some scheme, which, when the necessity arises, will ensure that distressed farmers can secure credit. Otherwise the result of ploughing* up grass land extensively must be bankruptcy when a cycle of lean years recurs. In ordinary circumstances the thrifty and capable farmer can borrow advantageously from joint stock banks ; but when three or four unfavourable seasons have drained away Lis capital he can only expect to borrow, if he can borrow at all, at high rates of interest. It is not, of course, suggested that it is the business of the State to find cheap money for every needy farmer, but if arable land is to be greatly increased in area it is the business of the State to recognise that conditions will arise in the future, as they did in 1816-17, in 1843-44, and in 1879-83, when special measures will be required to retain land in cultivation. Unless the people of Britain are prepared to face the certainty that such periods will arise and are prepared to say to farmers " If you grow more food we shall see you through the lean years," it is difficult to discover how the farming capital required by arable land is to provided. It was not the tariff but the policy of which the tariff was an expression that vitalised German agricul- ture, and if the German farmer had not been assured 20 years ago that the nation was behind him Germany could not now have maintained her people for 12 months. The Labour Supply. The second point in connection with the development of a plough policy relates to labour, and it is one which farmers themselves have largely overlooked. It is recognised that better wages and good cottages would greatly assist in providing the labour supply required by arable land; but it should be noted that neither of these accounts for the success of Germany, in pro- viding the large amount of labour required by her arable land. It is clear that in respect of labour the German farmer has had an advantage over his British rival, in spite of compulsory military service (which leads many young men to forsake the land) and in spite of the competition of town industries, which has been specially felt in Germany in the past 20 years. The source of German agricultural labour is the small holding, and until measures can be devised for greatly increasing the area under holdings of less than 100 acres in this country we are not likely to breed and maintain in the country a sufficient number 46 ■of that class of worker which will be required if we are greatly to ■extend our arable land. As has often been pointed out, the small farmer succeeds best when there are rural industries, and we should learn from ■German experience the value of forests and of beet sugar and •other similar industries, which provide employment in the winter months. Factors in the Success of German Farming. With regard to the other factors which have contributed to ihe success of the German farmer, we are now fairly well situated. Our system of agricultural education is very similar to that developed in Germany, but as it started 30 years later its effects are not yet comparable. What our system of education mainly wants is'time to grow. I hope that in the general reconstruction after the war it may not be considered desirable to dig up this young plant to examine its roots. Manure (in the shape of funds) and not tillage of a drastic type is wanted meantime ! It is in a sense unfortunate that our new system had just got started before the war, and that its results will be sought at a time when patience, so necessary for development, will be difficult to exercise. It is extraordinarily difficult to convince a generation of farmers who have had the particular experience of most of those now tilling English soil that technical and scientific education in youth can be of real value; but when we, like the Germans, reach the second generation after the introduction of the new system of education progress will be easier. Meantime the very successful Tesults of the Prussian policy of concentrating first on research and higher education is worth our special notice. The methods and merits of co-operation we already advocate ; there is some reason to hope that after the war agriculturists will show a greater disposition to co-operate; but we cannot expect ■co-operation to do as much for British agriculture as it has done for the Germans, who so readily join societies and support co- operative efforts. Our agricultural societies might with advantage study the subjects which engage attention at the meetings of German agri- cultural societies. The improvement of live stock is a most useful aim, and we have reason to be satisfied with the progress ■of the XlXth century. There is, however, one inhabitant of the farm that, in the second half of the century has, perhaps, changed less than any of the others; and it is now time for our British societies which have done so much for the improvement of live stock to give more of their attention to the development of the master. We can learn something from the organisation and work of the German chambers of agriculture. Although Germany had good agricultural societies, the State came to the conclusion that a new organisation to inspire and guide agricultural policy and to keep the central administration in touch with farmers was reqviired. It was for a similar reason that, three years ago, the Board set up advisory councils in England and Wales. Our intention was to secure association between those directly interested in 47 -developing agricultural education throughout each of the twelve provinces into which, for the purpose of agricultural education, the ■country has been divided. At present these councils have advisory .functions only, and where the central college and the adhering counties between them provide the instruction called for by the .needs of the district, there is no reason for inviting the councils to undertake executive functions ; but a number of counties have failed to provide instructors and, in such cases, it would seem lo be desirable to enable the council, acting in conjunction with the central college, to provide peripatetic teachers as the chambers of agriculture do in Germany. The formation of the chambers was at first resented in Germany, just as some of our • county authorities have objected to the setting up of advisory councils ; but experience has shown that the German chambers are most effective, and we should take courage from this experience in our attempt to provide local leadership in our agricultural " provinces." There is nothing that some English education authorities like less than being asked to co-operate with their neighbours in developing an educational policy; this is quite a natural attitude, but no one who has studied their work can fail to be impressed with the need for co-operation, and the duty is ■ one which the State should continue to urge. The success of the Germans in providing cheap power for farms through co-operative societies and other agencies for the supply of electricity should be noted. There is reason to hope that if • our existing peat bogs cannot be made to grow an appreciable • quantity of food, they might provide the energy which, trans- mitted elsewhere, would add to the productiveness of other soils. "We can also learn much from German methods of farming sandy soils, heaths, and drained bogs from which peat has been stripped. The main source of an increased food supply in Britain, as in • Germany, must, however, be the land already being farmed, and provided that enough of this land can be diverted from grass to tillage the pressing problem will be solved. In connection with the methods of managing arable land, we may note how successfully Germany combines dairy farming with tillage farming, using manures freely to produce fodder, and so • economising in purchased feeding stuffs. The use of manures should be greatly increased in this country, and, no doubt, will be greatly increased as information on the subject is spread. As a rule, our farmers are skilful in selecting crops and stock to suit their particular conditions, and many select feeding stuffs reasonably well ; but in most parts of the country even experienced farmers select their manures badly. Of the possible improvements in our management of land, none offers more scope than improvement in the use of manure. In Germany advances in the practice of manuring the land have mainly been secured by educational means, and there is no reason "to suppose that similar methods will fail in this country. To one other practical point attention must be drawn. One of the important factors in the increase of German crops in the past 40 years has been land drainage. Those who have studied 48 the progress of English farming in the period 1840 to 1880 know how greatly the production of the soil of this country was in- creased by the system of regular field drainage then introduced, and those familiar with English land to-day know that much of it is now deteriorating because the drainage systems laid out by an earlier generation have been allowed to fall into disrepair.. The fertility of English land cannot be maintained unless we continue to give to land drainage the same close attention that, it received from our own forefathers in the middle of last century and from German farmers in the period now under review. ■Sit -3tr 4(r -ife # *■ If one attempts to summarise in a paragraph the impressions- produced by a study of the recent progress of German agricul- ture, the conclusion is that from the agricultural policy of" Germany we may learn something, and from the admirable- machinery — administrative, educational, and commercial — set. up to lead, teach and finance agriculturists we may learn much. On the other hand, from the actual processes of German hus- bandry there is relatively little to learn. In many parts of" Britain the tillage of the soil and the management of stock are as good as anywhere in Germany. When we set about increasing- the food supply of the country we may find examples of the necessary methods without looking across the Rhine; and, fortu- nately, there is not any reason to suggest that before our farmers can hope to regain the position which British agriculture has lost, they must be prepared to remodel their own practice from seed-time till harvest on the farming of the Fatherland, and to- write the name of their ancient industry with a " k " ! Our farmers, indeed, have changed their methods in the past 40" years ; but we must not hurriedly conclude that their skill in till- age has disappeared. Such changes in farming methods are not new, nor is this the first time in agricultural history that the policy of the plough has been urged on husbandmen temporarily turned" stock-raisers. Twenty-two centuries ago, at a time when scarcity of labour, low corn prices, and profitable stock-rearing led the- Romans to neglect their arable land, and when, as among our- selves to-day, the advantages of grass and tillage farming were being debated, Cato the Censor, statesman and farmer, laid down, an agricultural policy in the following words* : — " Quid est agrum bene colere? " Bene arare. " Quid secundum? " Arare. " Quid tertium? " Stercorare." Even in the XXth century these maxims point the essential' processes in any system of husbandry that makes food production its first aim. * They may be freely translated :— Which is the first point of good husbandry ? To plough well. "Which the second ? To plough. Which the third ? To manure. 49 APPENDIX I. GERMAN AGRICULTURE : By Count von Schwerin-Lowitz, President of the German Agricultural Council. [To a large work in three volumes entitled Deutschland unter Kaiser WUhelm II., published in Berlin in 1914, in commemoration of the semi- jubilee of the German Emperor, the following chapter on the Development of German Agriculture was contributed by the President of the Agri- cultural Council. In this essay the agrarian speaks for himself, and it will be admitted that he deals with a good case in a most interesting way. The record of German achievement does not suffer from Count von Schwerin-Lowitz's handling of the figures, nor is attention distracted from the virtues of the recent economic policy of Germany by any attempt to discuss the merits of rival policies; but, quite fairly, the writer brings out the importance of the other factors — Education, Co-operation, and Organised Credit — which have done so much to increase the food supply of Germany. I had collected and assembled most of the materials for the foregoing Memorandum before I examined this essay, and it seemed to me that, making allowances for a " semi-jubilee " atmosphere, the statement was such a lair presentment of the agrarian's " case," and of the attitude of mind of the educated agrarian himself as to be worth printing in extenso. This view was confirmed by others whom I consulted. For the translation I am indebted to Mr. B. W. Phillips of this Depart- ment, whose intimate knowledge of the sources of information on German agricultural questions has been of the greatest assistance to me in the preparation of the above Memorandum. — T. H. M.] The commencement of the reign of our present Kaiser fell at a time when — on account of the opening up of the agricultural resources of fruit- ful lands in distant parts of the world, together with the comparatively small population of these lands and at the same time an unexampled cheapening of sea freights — the cultivation of corn in Germany was faced by a competition greater than had ever before been experienced. In circles which enjoyed the best opportunities of forming a definite opinion on this matter, and even in the Ministry of Agriculture itself, I was met at that time by the opinion that, against such powerful com- petition with large quantities of cheap corn coming from all parts of the world (North and South America, India, Southern Russia, The Balkan States, &c.) overwhelming our market, the cultivation of corn crops in Germany could not be continued to the same extent as had been the case before. This had not been possible in the case of the much more fruitful and climatically better-favoured land of England. There would bo nothing left for German agriculture in the long run but to limit the cultivation of corn crops to the best and most productive soils, while carrying on the extensive breeding of cattle in the damper districts and leaving the lighter soils of the East to the pine trees, for which they were intended by nature. This was the opinion of a wide and influential circle after the retirement of Prince Bismarck. The second Imperial Chancellor was logically right when he gave the advice to the farmers to accommodate themselves to the changed circumstances, and in consequence of the altered position of things to " write down " in a corresponding degree the value of their land and their farms. This view of the situation was one which he himself firmly believed in. What would have become of German agriculture — what would have become of the German Empire — what would have become of its power to feed its people and its power to defend itself against its foes under present political conditions — what would have been the result, if German farmers had followed this advice : advice, which without doubt was honourably given ? Our position in the heart of Europe surrounded by envious 8390 D 50 enemies would have been exactly parallel to that of a fortress reduced by hunger, or of a fortress which, in spite of all military power, was certain to be reduced by hunger in the end. Fortunately, however, the love of the German farmers for their ancestral fields and their tenacity, even in a time of the greatest depression, enabled them to withstand the economic and political views of the wise men of that day. In the end, however, many thousands — especially those with small farms and little capital— were brought to the brink of ruin, or were forced to sell the land which they had inherited from their fathers. The greater number of farmers, moreover, possessed neither the courage nor the necessary capital to carry through the technical improvements which were recognised as necessary at that time. In spite of all, however, German agriculture, taken as a whole, never for a moment gave up the determined resolve to overcome the terrible difficulties which faced them by means of a redoubled concentration of all their forces, aided by economy in actual farming, technical perfection in their methods, together with firm co-opera- tion in all that appertained to their profession, and, above all, in the political struggle which they saw to be impending; and by such means to fight for and obtain in the future better conditions of existence. New Developments. An important — perhaps the deciding — feature in this terrible fight for their existence and their future was that, at this time German agriculture found itself in the fortunate position that the critical 10 years that closed the last century had been preceded by a series of very important new discoveries in agricultural technique. The teaching of the great reformer of our system of agricultural science, Justus von Liebig, had gradually not only become part of the ordinary education given by our agricultural professors but had also become part of the general knowledge enjoyed by educated farmers. Deep- thinking, practical men had, by carrying the newly discovered natural laws to their logical conclusions, found out new methods of farming, especially new methods of farming on soils of poor value, such as sand and moorland, and had been able to devise practical methods of carrying out these new systems of farming. Schulz-Lupitz created a new system by which, through the cultivation of plants which gather nitrogen, together with abundant manuring with phosphoric acid and potash, the lightest sandy soils, which are very poor in nitrogen, are enriched in such a way that they are able to produce the finest crops of rye and potatoes. Rimpau-Cunrau, discovered, on the other hand, a system by which the low-lying moors, which are very rich in nitrogen, are enabled, through improving their physical condition (by drainage, and covering with sand) and at the same time by copious use of phosphoric acid and potash, to be brought into a state of the highest culture so that they produce crops, not only fodder-crops and roots, but also corn crops which are little, if any, inferior to those obtained on the best arable land. Keen observers and careful practical farmers like Beseler, Heine, Paulsen, Cimbal, and, later on, von Lochow, recognised in how great a measure the productive power, not only of our domesticated animals, but also of our cultivated plants, is increased by a system of breeding which aims at a definite end. New kinds of corn and especially of potatoes frequently yielded, after careful selection according to soil and climate, crops of double the amount obtained from the old sorts. The whole system of cultivating the land was subjected to an entire change, based on an improved understanding of the physical laws relating to the maintenance of moisture in the soil. In place of the oul>of-date agricultural machines, modern disc-ploughs, designed for the maintenance of the proper degree of moisture in the soil and preparing it for the deep cultivation which follows, were universally employed, seed drills took the place of broadcast sowing, and mowing and threshing machines replaced the scythe and threshing floor. Based on a better scientific understanding of the laws of nature, the method of carrying on agriculture was changed more and more into that of 61 a business, producing finished articles from raw materials on the model of commercial and manufacturing industries, that is to say, raw materials or half-finished goods, such as artificial manures and feeding-stuffs, are worked up into half or wholly finished goods of high value, while at the same time the necessity of maintaining a rational economic standpoint is not lost sight of, in that the soil and the plant foods contained in the soil, which are the raw materials for the production of plants, are not uneconomically used up, but by constant additions the soil is made richer and more pro- ductive of valuable finished products. The use alone of artificial manures increased from, approximately, 1,600,000,000 kg. in the year 1890 to about 7,000,000,000 kg. of the value of about £25,000,000 in the year 1912. This great expansion could naturally only be carried through in all branches of agriculture by the closest co-operation and the working hand-in- hand of science and practice ; therefore, it must be regarded as a specially favourable circumstance for successfully dealing with the agricultural position in which our agriculture found itself in the end of the preceding century, that in the year 1885 the German Agricultural Society was founded by Max Eyth on the model of the English Royal Agricultural Society. This Society, under the leadership of its genial chairman, before long caught up and passed its English model, and, taking as its chief aim perfection of technique, was very soon the centre of a great intellectual fellowship of German farmers or, perhaps, more correctly, a permanent mirror of scientific research and practical experience. Professional Organisation. Of not less and perhaps of greater importance than the German Agri- cultural Society in the fight for the improved position of German agri- culture, was the legal stamp given to its professional organisation by a Prussian law which, in the year 1894, brought into being the first Chambers of Agriculture which soon spread to every Prussian province (in Hesse- Nassau there were two, for the districts Kassel and Wiesbaden) ; the system of Chambers of Agriculture was soon to be found over the whole of the German Empire on the same basis as in Prussia. The need of the times had, indeed, led the farmers before this year to institute in ever-growing numbers separate local Agricultural Societies, and to combine a number of these into provincial societies. In these cases, however, it was merely a question of the combination for the common welfare of a few enthusiastic and self-sacrificing members with a limited sphere of activity. And although this professional enthusiasm in the formation of local societies could not be lost sight of in the organi- sation on a far-reaching and legal basis of the whole farming profession, and, indeed, was carefully made use of in carrying the latter into effect, yet it soon became clear how much more efficient the Chambers of Agri- culture could be in protecting and serving the interests of the farmers, having regard to the fact that they represented the whole body of agriculturists and in addition possessed the right, to a limited extent, of levying rates. According to the Prussian law of the 30th June, 1894, and the similar laws in the remaining States of the German Empire, the Chambers of Agriculture had the following tasks set them : — " To take account of everything that affects the interests of agri- culture and forestry in their districts " . . " to assist the administrative bodies by submitting information and advice on all questions relating to agriculture and forestry" . . . "to help forward the technical development of agriculture" . . "to assist in the management and the settlement of prices in the produce exchanges and markets, especially in the cattle markets." The Prussian Chambers of Agriculture very soon recognised how much better they would be able to carry out the duties entrusted to them, and especially the duties relating to the general interests of agriculture, _ as well as in connection with the local State and Imperial administrative bodies, and as regards those interests of farmers which affect other classes of the community, and also as regards laws relating to agriculture, if the 8390 K 2 52 Chambers of Agriculture were in touch with a central general office for the whole of Prussia. They created, therefore, as early as the year 1897 — that is to say, before Chambers had been founded in all the provinces— a common centre in the so-called Central General Office of the Prussian Chambers of Agriculture. They accepted willingly, however, in the year 1898, after Chambers had been founded in all the provinces, the Eoyal order which decreed that the old Prussian " Landesokonomiekollegium " should hence- forth be the General Central Office for the carrying out of the various- duties attached to the Chambers of Agriculture, and in this way the work of the Kollegium, which up to then had been exclusively that of giving advice to the Prussian Minister of Agriculture, was considerably increased. It would lead us too far to follow the similar developments which took place in the majority of the remaining States of the German Empire. To-day there exists in almost every State an organisation, brought into being either by law or by decree, representing the whole of the agricul- tural interests of the State. In the three great States which, up to the present, do not possess Chambers of Agriculture with the right of levying rates— Bavaria, Wurttemberg, and Mecklenburg — the foundation of Chambers will shortly be carried out. German Agricultural Council. Since the foundation of the Empire, the societies representing the agricultural interests of the farmers in the various States have had at their head the German Agricultural Council (Deutscher Landwirtschaf tsrat) . The function of this body is to represent and foster the interests of agri- culture in the whole of the German Empire. It is apparent that the dignity and the importance of the German Agricultural Council was con- siderably increased by the fact that the representatives in it of the various States were no longer delegates from unofficial bodies but came from the legally constituted Chambers of Agriculture. The importance of the duties of the German Agricultural Council have very greatly increased - T it is well known that for a series of years the Kaiser has personally attended the meetings of the Council, and that the Council has had handed to it by the Imperial Administration important duties, such as corre- spondence with the International Institute at Rome, the direction of the scientific researches and experiments carried on by the Empire as dis- tinct from the several States, the office of judge in the awarding of prizes in agricultural matters, &c. The great respect which the German Agricultural Council enjoys to-day in the widest— and not merely agricultural — circles, and among the- administrative bodies, rests on the strict attention to fact and the extreme thoroughness which are characteristic of its meetings, its resolutions, and its publications. The duty of dealing with political matters in the interests of farmers and of carrying on the political battle rests with the Association of Agri- culturists (Bund der Landwirte). This association was founded in the- year 1893 and was a pressing necessity in order to rouse up the German farmers, who by nature are very inert as regards political matters, and to stir them up to a strenuous fight for those interests which had long been- neglected and were threatened afresh. The representative agricultural societies have rarely found themselves at variance with this association,, but they have never identified themselves with it, preserving intact their independence in their relations to it. The Co-operative Movement. An organisation which, in addition to the associations already men- tioned, is of specially great importance — in fact, for the purely economic development of German agriculture perhaps the most important — was the system of co-operation. In no other department of German agriculture has the splendid feeling of fellowship amongst German farmers, result of the need of the times, shown itself in better and more brilliant light than in the 53 astonishing developments of our system of co-operation, and it is to say the least, doubtful, whether — apart from the improved political position and the veterinary protection afforded by the State — the replacement of Ger- man agriculture on a sound basis in the last 10 years is to be ascribed in » greater measure to technical advance in agricultural methods, or to the development of the co-operative system. Perhaps it would be right to say that for the large farms the result is due to the improvements in technical methods, and for the smaller farms, which take up more than three-quarters of the arable land in Germany, the chief influence, to which the improvement is due, is that of co-operation. For it is only through co-operation that the advantages of farming on a large scale are made possible for smaller farmers. The more important of these advan- tages are the regulated purchase of all the raw materials and half-finished products (artificial manures, feeding stuffs, seeds, &c.) which are necessary for farming, better prices for products, facilities for making use, in moderation, of personal credit at a cheap rate of intorest, together with the possibility of putting aside small sums of money which can be spared from carrying on the work of the farm with the possibility of obtaining interest; all those are very important commercial advantages possessed by the man who farms on a large scale. These advantages have been placed within the reach of the smaller farmers by means of the various local co-operative societies for buying and selling and farming co-opera- tively, as well as by the saving and other banks; all of the societies and banks are connected to great central associations and central co-operative societies. By taking full advantage of their opportunities in this direc- tion the smaller farmers are able to carry on business to a considerable extent on a purely commercial basis and therefore profitably. Over two million small farmers are organised in Germany on co-operative lines. To what a large extent, during the reign of our Kaiser, the number and the amount of business carried on by our agricultural co-operative societies have increased is shown by the following short tables : — X umber of Registered Societies. Saving and I Purchase Dairy Other Total. Credit Banks. ' Societies. Societies. Societies. 1890 : 1.729 537 639 101 3,006 1895 j 4,872 869 1,222 207 7,170 1900 ! 9.793 1,115 1,917 811 13,636 1905 1 13,181 1.867 2,832 1,443 19,323 1912 16,774 2.417 3,475 3,360 26.026 Business done at the Central Offices. Number of Central Offices. Reserves Yearly (Haftsumme).j Turnover. "Value of pro- perty possessed bv the Office. In millions of Marks 1895 10 7 ' 37 93-90 1 0-73 1900 21 SO -15 859-03 < 2-87 1905 35 203-95 2857-20 14-01 1911 34 I 308-30 6341-98 ! 31-80 54 Agbicultukal Education. Finally, the development of agricultural education must be particularly mentioned as one of the more important of the various factors which have led during the past 20 years to the recovery of our agricultural system from the almost hopeless condition in which it found itself. For it is only by means of education that there is a hopeful possibility of bringing the important scientific and technical advances of the present age more and more to the notice of our millions of small farmers. The development of higher agricultural education will be adequately dealt with elsewhere.* We content ourselves here with giving a few figures bearing on the development of the intermediate and lower agricul- tural schools in Prussia : — Agricultural Schools. I Agricultural Winter Schools. Number. Number of ; XT , dumber of -□ ., , JNumber. -„ ., Pupils. j Pupils. ' i 1888 16 1911 18 1,994 4,109 58 212 1.66C 9,357 The grants made in aid of intermediate and lower agricultural education by the Prussian Government, the provinces, other local bodies, and the Chambers of Agriculture have also increased in a corresponding measure from 642,955 marks in 1888 to 2,593,573 marks in 1911. The actual yearly grants made, therefore, have increased in 25 years by about 2,000,000 marks or by 300 per cent. From the time of the foundation of the various agricultural schools and winter schools to the year 1911 not less than 163,857 pupils attended these- institutions, including 119,454 who attended the winter schools. These- are now pioneers in the work of bringing about an advance in the technical methods adopted by small farmers. The Results. And what are the results? A critical examination of what has been obtained by all this strenuous endeavour is necessary. On the one hand there is the question of the net increase in»' the productive power of th& farms considered from the point of view of the farmers, and, on the other, the question of the total increase in the production of food stuffs con- sidered from the point of view of obtaining the maximum proportion of the food required by Germany within her own borders. Working expenses have increased very considerably and, while th» extent of the increase has varied according to the intensity of the methods- of farming practised, a definite increase in the cost of running farms has been apparent almost everywhere. This increase has not been wholly due to the tremendous rise in wages — which in the case of agricultural labourers have increased in the last 25 years by about 50 per cent. — but also to the- great increase in price of such necessary commodities as building materials coal, iron, harness, carts, and machines. On the other hand, it is admitted that, on the whole, during the last few years the increase in the gross production of saleable goods and in the cash receipts has more than counter-balanced the increased working expenses, so that the result has been an increase in the net profits. Although the increase in agricultural production is much lower than the corresponding increase in other indus- tries, and, although it does not allow of the increase of available capital to anything like the same extent as the manufacturing trades and commerce, yet the increase in production has undoubtedly played a great part in the re-establishment of the whole agricultural system on a sound basis and has also contributed greatly to an increase in the purchasing * That is, in another part of the book Deulschland unter\Kaiser]Wilhelm'II. ■ ■ - -4 55 power of farmers with respect to the goods produced by other sections of the community — an increase which has been of advantage to manufac- turers generally and particularly to the smaller trades, as has been amply shown by all the recent reports of the Chambers of Commerce.* Total Agricultural Production. We turn now to the still more important question, from the national point of view, of the development of Germany's total agricultural production. One of our most important banks, the Dresdener Bank, recently sub- mitted to the members of the Reichstag a remarkable pamphlet entitled '• The Economic Strength of Germany." The following statement is con- tained in this pamphlet, the authors of which cannot be regarded as being in any way biassed in favour of the agrarian interest : — " The results of the harvests show that Germany, in spite of her great development as a manufacturing country, still has a, place among the great agricultural countries of the world, a place which is due to the extraordinary advance in the methods of intensive culture practised by her farmers. In this matter Germany stands at the head of all the purely agricultural countries, a result which must be regarded as all the more wonderful when it is borne in mind that the quality of the land and soil in Germany is very much inferior to those of other agricultural countries. The favourable results of the har- vests in Germany are due to the widespread use of scientific methods of farming, to the constant extension of agricultural education, and to the increased use of artificial manures. Germany uses as much potash as all the other countries of the world taken together. An estimate of the yearly value of her production of the three staples, corn, meat, and milk, gives a sum of nearly five hundred million pounds sterling." This estimate of the total value of Germany's agricultural produce as regards these three items is dealt with in more detail in another part of the pamphlet, and the following figures for 1912 are given : Corn, £140,000,000; meat, £200,000,000; and milk, £137,500,000; that is for all three in 1912, £477,500,000, or nearly £500,000,000. These figures are well worth attention and correspond closely with those obtained by other well-known statisticians. This figure of five hundred million pounds does not, however, by any means represent the total money value of Germany's agricultural produc- tion. To obtain such a figure it would be necessary to include the money value of the potatoes, vegetables, and fruit used as human food, the potatoes used in making spirit and starch, beet used in the manufacture of sugar, crops producing oil and fibre, the grapes used in making wine, poultry and fish, and, in addition, the produce of the forests in the form of wood and game. For most of these, reliable estimates as to their total amount and value are not available, but they must all be counted as part of the total agricultural production and they represent a considerable value in money. "* The increased demand for agricultural machines has been of great importance to manufacturers and their workers. The following figures show the number of farms on which agricultural machines were being used in the years stated according to the agricultural census : — Increase. 1882. 1895. 1907. 1882-1907. 1895-1907 Per cent. Per cent. Steam ploughs 836 1,696 2,995 258 77 Seed drills 6.1,842 169,465 290,039 354 71 Mowers .. 19,634 35,084 301,325 1,435 759 Steam threshers 75,690 259.364 488,867 546 88 Other threshers 298,367 5911,869 947.003 217 75 56 The consumption of potatoes for eating purposes amounts yearly to over 14 million metric tons, and a further 4 million tons are used in distilleries and starch factories; the average quantity of potatoes pro- duced during the last five years amounts to 44-3 million metric tons. The average weight of beet actually passing through the sugar factories was for the same period of years 13 million metric tons, while the amount of raw sugar produced was about 2 million metric tons. To the figure given above for the estimated value of the agricultural produce grown in Germany a further sum of about £50,000,000 must be added as representing the value of the sugar-beet grown and of the potatoes vised for eating purposes, for spirit-distilling, and for starch manufacture. Other large sums would also have to be added if all the branches of pro- duction mentioned above were taken into account. These figures, however, only begin to have a real meaning for us when we compare them with the total value of the goods produced in our manu- facturing industries. According to the estimates of Steinmann-Bucher the total gross value of the goods manufactured in Germany in the year 1905 was £1,800,000,000. The net value of these manufactured goods, that is to say the value of the finished goods without counting articles two or more times over in various stages of manufacture, would not exceed £700,000,000 to £750,000,000. It must be noted that goods produced by " trades " are also included in the term " manufactured goods," and that a very con- siderable part of the goods are produced for agricultural purposes. It follows then that, considered from the point of view of the value of the produce, German agriculture has been able to maintain a position of equal importance with that of our tremendously increased manufacturing industries. The FooD-stTPPL-sr of the People. The most important economic question for all nations in the past and also in the future has been and will be the question of a, sufficient food- supply, independent of imports. And in this connection the total value of the country's produce is of less importance than the actual amount of human food produced on the available land. What has German agriculture done in this connection during the reign of Wilhelm II. and what can it be expected to do in the future? In order to answer this question, a summary of the returns of the most important agricultural countries as regards the production of corn and potatoes is given. According to the Statistical year Book of the German Empire the results of the harvests in 1912 were: Total Production in 1,000 Metric Tons. 1912. Wheat and Rye. Barley and Oats. Potatoes. Germany Austria-Hungary Russia (Europ. N. Cauc.) ... Rumania ..." United States Canada Argentina 15,958-9 11,246-5 42,651-2 . 2,524-3 20,780-3 5,488-2 6,400-0 12,002-2 6,872-5 24,051-2 759-9 25,460-5 6,537-0 1,682-0 50,209-5 18,515-1 36,922-1 131-5 1 1,448-3 2,213-8 57 Production per Hectare in 100 Kg. 1912. Wheat. Rye. Barley. Oats. Potatoes. Germany ... 22 '6 18-5 21-9 19-4 150-3 Austria 1.V0 14 6 16 13 100 2 Hungary ... 12-7 11 6 13 9 10 4 84 4 Russia 6- l J 9 8 7 8 81 7 Rumania ... 11-8 8 5 9 1 8 85 United States 10-7 10 G 16 13 4 76 2 Canada 13-7 12 16 7 15 115-8 Argentina ... 9-3 — — 141 The last table shows without further words how Germany, in spite of the poor quality of her soil, has beaten all the agricultural countries of the world as regards all crops in the year 1912, considered from the point of view of yield per acre, and that the superiority of Germany in this respect amounts to an average of 30 per cent. The question may be raised what does the year 1912, taken by itself, prove? It may be that that year was particularly favourable for Germany. To answer this question it is desirable to show the increase in the yield of crops during the whole of the last 25 years. According to the official statistics of the German Empire and the calculations of the German Agricultural Council (Deutscher Landwirtschaftsrat) the harvest results were : — German Harvest Results (in metric tons). 1885-1889. 1908-1912. Increase. "Wheat .. Rye .. Barley .. Oats Potatoes Hay .. 2,913,904 6.890,588 2,619,559 5,411.131 29,705,781 10,336.392 3,962,390 11,012,170 3,220,066 8,189,062 44,220,213 25,024,865 Per Cent 36 59 8 22 9 51 3 48 9 29 4 Production per Hectare in 100 Kg. — - 1885-1889. 1908-1912. Increase. Per cent. Wheat 15-1 20-7 37-1 Rye 11-8 17-8 50-8 Barley ... 15-0 20-1 34-0 Oats 14-1 19-0 34-7 Potatoes 101-8 133-4 31-0 Hay 32-7 42-1 28-7 During the 25 years in question, therefore, the production on the same area as regards wheat, barley, and oats has increased by more than a third, as regards our chief crop — rye — by more than half, as regards potatoes by -31 per cent., and as regards hay by 29 per cent. 58 As, however, the total area of land under these crops has increased con- siderably, these figures mean that the total increase in the production of our corn crops amounts to about 48 per cent., or that the production of corn crops which are made into flour (i.e., for consumption as bread) has increased by over 5 million metric tons or 53 per cent. The following facts result from a, consideration of these figures : — ■ If this enormous increase in production had not been obtained, our corn harvest, which according to the official Imperial statistics amounted to- more than 28 million tons in 1912, would have amounted in that year to only about 17-8 million tons, reckoned on the average of the period 1885-89. Our net import of corn amounted in 1912 to 4-7 million tons, so that the total consumption was 28 + 4-7 = 32-7 million tons, of which about 14-5 per cent, was met by imported corn. Without the increase in production which has been obtained, of the 32- 7 million tons required only 17- 8 million tons, or 54 per cent., would have been produced at home and 14- 9 million tons, or 46 per cent., would have had to be imported. Instead, therefore, of importing only 14-5 per cent, of our corn requirements, we would have had to import to-day 46 per cent. Can anybody seriously contend that under such circumstances — which would closely approximate to the present English position — the problem of feeding our people or our whole economic position could be better than it is at present : can it be contended that, if we had had to pay for corn to foreign countries during the last • ten years an average annual sum of 50 to 75 million pounds sterling more than we do at present, our manu- facturing industries, with their enormous increased production, would have found a home market with such great purchasing power, a market which at present — in spite of the doubling of our exports — absorbs more than 80 per cent, of our total production of manufactured goods? Can anybody contend that our industrial workers, who have increased by 450,000 yearly, would have obtained such remunerative employment and a total increase in wages earned of something like 30 per cent. ? Would we under such circumstances have been able to contribute about £50,000,000 yearly in aid of our State Insurance system? No ! The increase in our agricultural production was not a pleasing secondary result of our general policy of Protection, it was rather the corner-stone of our whole enormous, economic development, and, as such, it will continue.* Twenty-five years ago I expressed the opinion — an opinion that to-day I hold in still stronger measure — that the urban opposition to our system of protective duties is based less on false economic doctrine than on a simple lack of knowledge of agricultural technique and of the position which it has attained at the present time. * The author's style indicates that some German writers did " seriously contend " that the economic policy of the country was unsound. As an example of the free-trader's argument the following sentences from Brentano's Die Deutschen Getreidezolle (2 Ed. 1911, pp. 37-38) are interesting — " But what is the object of the import-duties on corn ? They are intended to increase the selling-price of corn. If, however, this result is obtained, then in the same measure the net money return from the land is increased. The minimum selling-price of the land is, however, equivalent to this return capitalised at the prevailing rate of interest. With the increase therefore in the net return the capital value of the land also rises. The farmer therefore who sells his land — and the higher his debts are the greater is his desire to dispose of his property — gets considerable advantage from the duties on corn, assuming that he retires from farming : he is released from his cares and perhaps also is able to make a monetary gain. The duties on corn are, however, not intended to assist those men who are withdrawing from agricultural pursuits, but are meant to aid those who remain on the land. The successor of the man who has disposed of his estate is soon in the same position as his predecessor was before the introduction of the corn-duties. He has bought the ground or rented it at a capital value which includes the increase caused by the corn-duties, and each time the price of corn shows a tendency to sink he is threatened by the fear of not being able to get from the land a return sufficient to cover the interest on the increased capital-value. The result, therefore, of a duty on corn which does fulfil its object and really brings about an increase in the price of corn, is to cause an increase in exactly that part of the cost of production, the high level of which prevents home-produced corn from competing with foreign corn. As the duty on corn has not altered the relation existing between the productive power of the soil and the value of the land, the cultivation of corn-crops remains as before an unprofitable undertaking. If the farmer— whether he has bought the land or inherited it — continues the cultivation of corn-crops he very soon finds himself in a precarious position. Then is heard again the cry for a further increase in the duties on corn. And so it continues. It is a screw without an end." 59 Animal Breeding. I think I have already sufficiently shown how mistaken was the opinion of Caprivi — an opinion which influenced the whole policy of that statesman and which is to-day still extensively held in many quarters — that agri- cultural production is definitely limited by the size of the area of land vmder cultivation, and that production cannot increase as is the case in manufacturing industries as need arises. But there is another technical error which not less extensively finds expression and which even to-day is employed as an argument by the opponents of our corn duties. This is the idea that the present production of corn crops cannot be maintained or increased except at the cost of a decrease in the number of animals kept on the farms. Recently a well-known member of Parliament said to me, " You can only either grow corn or breed cattle on one piece of land." In this respect our development in the last quarter of a century has been very instructive. To express the result of the 25 years' experienca in a few words, it may be said that while during this period our corn production has increased on the average by 50 per cent., our production of animals and meat, &c, has increased by over 100 per cent. The number of animals has increased as shown in the following figures: — 10 Jan., 1883. 1 Dec, 1892. 2 Dec, 1912. Increase. 1883-1912. 1892-1912. Horses Cattle Pigs Goats 3,522,545 15,786,764 9,206,195 2,640,994 3,836,273 17,555,834 12,174,442 3,091,508 4,516,297 20,158,738 21,885,073 3,383,971 Per cent. 28-2 27-7 137-7 28-1 Per cent. 17-7 14-8 79-8 9-5 The number of sheep only shows a constant decrease : — 10 Jan., 1883. 1 Dec, 1892. 2 Dec, 1912. Decrease. 1883-1912. 1892-1912. Sheep 19,189,715 13,589,662 5,787,848 Per cent. 69-8 Per cent. 57-4 As a result, however, of constant improvements in animal breeding and the resulting increase in the weight of the animals, through early maturity and quick turnover, the actual increase in the amount of meat produced is considerably greater than the increase in the number of animals would, lead the reader to suppose. Production of Meat. Unfortunately we only possess official figures respecting the production, of meat since the year 1904. According to these statistics, the available amount of meat was, on the average for the period 1904-11, 52-3 kg. per head of the population per year. For the year 1912 it was 535 kg. Of this quantity, on the average for the years 1904-11, 2-9 kg. were imported (as living cattle, meat, or fat), and in the year 1912, 35 kg. were imported. Of the total consumption, therefore, of meat and meat products, 94-4 per cent, was produced at Home during the period 1904-11, and in 1912, 93-4 per cent, was so produced. Official figures, which would serve as a basis of comparison with previous vears similar to those for corn crops, are, unfortunately, not available as regards the production of meat. In order, however, to show th& 60 approximate increase in the development of our animal production as it relates to the feeding of the people, I give here the comparative calcula- tions of Professor Bsslen of Zurich, although his figures as regards recent years are lower than those shown in the official statistics and, in my opinion, without good reason. In any case, however, Esslen's figures err on the side of being less rather than more favourable, as illustrating the development of our production of meat. According to Professor Esslen, the total weight of animals slaughtered in Germany from inland sources, that is, without counting animals imported alive, amounted to : — • 1883. 1892. 1911. Increase. 1883-1911. 1892-1911. Beef Veal Pork Mutton (Metri 456,449 76,674 688,608 113,005 j tons = 1,000 kg.) 606,797 879,300 79,849 186,900 833,350 1,941,600 108,745 50,800 Per cent. 92-7 143-7 182-0 55-0 Per cent. 44-9 134-2 133-0 53-3 Total 1,334,736 1,628,741 3,058,600 129-1 87-8 According to these figures, therefore, the total production of meat has increased since 1883 by 129 per cent., and since 1892 by 88 per cent., and in the 25 years' reign of our Kaiser it has certainly increased by over 100 per cent. The home production of meat has, therefore, not only kept pace with the increase in population, but, according to the calculations of Esslen, the yearly available amount of meat produced in Germany per head of the population is- 185 kg. greater than in 1883, and 15-3 kg. greater than in 1892. Production oe Milk. In a similar manner, but not to the same extent, has the production of milk shown an increase. Here, also, there are no official statistics, and resource must be had to estimated figures. Professor Meisehmann calculated for the year 1883, in his book on Dairying (Lehrbuch der Milch wirtschaft), on the basis of a yield of 1,800 litres per cow per year, that there was a total production of 162 million hectolitres. A census carried out by the German Agricultural Society (Deutsche Landwirtschafts-Gesellschaft) for the year 1906 showed an average production per cow of 2,400 litres. According to this, the total production in the Empire in 1907 was about 252 million hectolitres. This indicates an increase in 25 years of 55- 5 per cent. The value of the total production of milk can be reckoned on this basis as being 140 million pounds sterling, and with the addition of about 10- 5 million hectolitres of goat milk, a total value for 1912 of about 150 million pounds sterling cannot be regarded as too high a figure. As the value of our net import of milk, cream, and dairy produce (butter and cheese) averaged during the five years 1908-12 only about £8,000,000, it follows that about 95 per cent, of the consumption was covered by home produce, and only 5 per cent, by imported produce. We have now explained in broad outline the development of corn growing and animal breeding under Kaiser Wilhelm II. It would be possible to add a good deal of information respecting horse breeding, the cultivation of fodder plants and roots, the technical secondary industries connected with agriculture, the treatment of waste lands, the altered conditions in the labour market and the increased use of agricul- tural machines. The purpose, however, of these pages is to give an idea in broad and general outline only of the development of German agri- culture during the reign of our Emperor. 61 The Futdee. I think that all who read without prejudice what I have herein stated will agree with me that in spite of the extremely difficult and critical position in which German agriculture was placed in the first years of the reign of Wilhelm II., it was able to collect its strength and make a determined endeavour by the full use of the new advances in agricultural technique and improved methods of cultivation not only to overcome the difficulties which beset it but also to carry out more fully the duty which it owed to the Fatherland of producing to the greatest extent possible the food required by the German people. And it may well be said that these endeavours have been rewarded with visible success; as regards technical methods, German agriculture stands to-day — as stated in the brochure of the Dresdener Bank, referred to above — unchallenged at the head of all the agricultural countries of the world. This is sufficiently proved by the fact that, in spite of the poor quality of our soil and the unfavourable nature of our climate, our corn crops show a yield, acre for acre, considerably greater — more than 30 per cent. — than those of all other agricultural countries. Nothing could, however, be worse than for our farmers to believe that they may rest satisfied with the honours already gained, thinking that they have attained the summit of technical perfection, or that the view should be taken that, economically speaking, the highest possible produc- tion per acre has already been reached. The opposite view is the right oiie. At the present time in almost all branches of agriculture — in the proper use of artificial manures, the choice and breeding of seed, the use of machines to economise labour, the rational use of feeding stuffs, the improvement of our breeds of live stock, and the drainage and cultivation of our moors and waste land — we only stand at the very beginning of a full and universal employment in the practice of agriculture of the great scientific and technical advances which have been made during the past fifty years. It is a matter of common knowledge that these discoveries and improvements have not been adopted generally by the small farmers by whose hands the greater part of German agriculture is carried on. To bring the results of recent advances in knowledge home to these farmers is the great task which our system of agricultural education will have to carry out in the near future. Although in the last 25 years there has been a considerable increase (they have been approximately trebled) in the number of our agricultural schools, we stand in this respect too at the beginning of what must be done. The scientific and technical improvements have been evolved and they only need to become known and put into practice by all or at least the majority of our farmers in order that the great aim of our agricultural policy — the production at home of all our food — may be attained. The average yield per acre of the various crops throughout the German Empire, although much more than the average yield in other countries, is very considerably behind the yield produced on every German farm which is rationally and intensively worked and where high yields are- aimed at and regularly obtained by the farmer. The average present yields of wheat (2,070 kg. per hectare), rye fl,780 kg. per hectare), and oats (1,900 kg. per hectare) throughout the Empire are results which on our superior and intensively cultivated farms are surpassed by nearly 100 per cent. We have therefore a long, long way to go before we attain to the highest possible production in our corn crops, and a still longer way before the maximum production of meat is reached. The Principal of the Berlin Agricultural College (Berliner Landwirt- schaftliche Hochschule), in a speech at the end of the XlXth Century, stated that German agricultural production had doubled during the XlXth Century and that he had no doubt that it was well within the range of possibility for it to be doubled again during the XXth Centurv ; and, in view of the experience which has been gained during the 13 years which have passed since that date, I am disposed to go still further and to express 62 the confident hope that if we continue to make progress at the same rate as we have done during the past 25 years, it will require much less than a century in order to double again our production of agricultural commodities. In order, without recourse to foreign countries, to feed a total popula- tion of even more than 100 million, an increase of only 50 per cent, in •our agricultural production would be sufficient. It cannot be denied that, technically speaking, it is possible to achieve this end. Its actual attainment, however, is dependent on economic con- ditions which would render such an increase in our production of crops and animals profitable to the farmers. In addition to the undiminished protection of the whole of the work and labour of the inhabitants of the Fatherland, other economic conditions are essential if the desired end is to be attained, note- worthy among them being the necessity for the adoption of a really satis- factory system of dividing up land — to be obtained by continuously encour- aging the colonisation of our own country (innere Kolonisation) — and also the discovery of a satisfactory solution to the labour question; without these two requirements intensive cultivation of the land — especially as regards the smaller farms — cannot be attained. I do not propose to consider here in detail these two problems, since they are dealt with in another section of this work.* The attainment of the great aim of our agriculture, to feed the German people from internal sources, is dependent in a large measure on a, satisfactory solution being found to these problems. During the next ten years, therefore, we shall have to give them the greatest attention. In any case, however, our Kaiser was right when a few months ago he closed his speech to the German Agricultural Council with the pertinent sentence : — " There is no doubt that German agriculture is technically in a position to supply, not only the present population of the Empire but also the increased population which the future will bring, with the most important articles of food in sufficient quantity and especially with bread, meat, and potatoes. Gentlemen, we can do this and we must." German farmers will know how to put into practice this exhortation of their beloved Kaiser. For the defensive power of Germany and, with it, the future of the Empire are dependent on the way in which German agriculture carries out this obligation which it owes to the Fatherland. * That is, of the book Deutscldand unter Kaiser Wilhelm II. G3 APPENDIX II. GERMAN AGRICl'LTURAL STATISTICS.* Except when otherwise stated the figures in the following tables have been taken from Die Deutsche Landivirtschaft, published by the Imperial Statistical Office, Berlin, in 1913. As a rule the tables have been reproduced in their original form, but in the case of tables of prices English units have been adopted. It may be noted that — 1 hectare (ha.) = 2-471 acres. 1 kilogramme (kg.) = 2-205 lb. 1,000 kilogrammes = 1 metric ton = 2,205 lb. 1,000 kilogrammes per hectare = 892 lb. per acre. The data on which German agricultural statistics are based are obtained in three ways. There are (1) yearly returns of the most important crops showing area under cultivation and harvest results; (2) censuses of the uses to which the land in the Empire is put (Bodenbenutzung) — censuses of this kind were made in 1S7S, 1883, 1893, 1900, and 1913; (3) agricul- tural censuses (Landwirtschaftlichc Betriebszahhingen) — these took place in 1882. 1895, and 1907. In addition there are from time to time special censuses of animals. It will be noticed that in the following tables the areas do not always correspond : this is due to the fact that the censuses (2) and (3) men- tioned above do not deal with precisely the same area (the former includes all land, the latter only land connected with farms and forests) and are not carried out in the same way ; as a consequence the results so far as thev indicate the total area of land are somewhat different. The agricul- tural censuses (3) are more thorough than the censuses of the use of land, the figures for the latter being in some parts of the Empire obtained from estimates, while those for the agricultural censuses are supplied by the individual farmers in all cases. I. — Area of Land in Germain/ used for Various Purposes in the Years 1S78. 1883, 1893, and 1913. Thousand Hectares. 1878. 1883. ! 1893. I 1900. 1913. (1.) Agricultural Land : — Arable and Garden Land Meadows Good Pastures ... Poor Pastures ... Tineyards Total (2.) Forests and Coppices (3.) Other purposes Total 26,063 5,914 617 3,998 134 26,177 5,903 613 2,812 135 26,243 5,913 749 2,124 133 36,726 i 35.641 ! 35,165 13 873 ' 13,908 13.957 3,399 ! 4,476 4,927 53.998 54,025 54,049 26,257 26,059 5,956 ■ 5.992 795 I 1,074 1,912 1,518 135 119 34,762 14,223 5,0 1 3 54,065 54.058 * For figures relating to (1) Total Production, (2) Yield of crops per Hectare, (3) Live Stock, and (4) Meat, see pp. 57, 59, 60 of Appendix I. 64 II. — Area under Cultivation of the principal Field Crops in Germany in the Years 1878, 1883, 1893, 1900, and 1913. 1878. 1883. 1893. 1900. 1913. Crop. Thousand Hectares. (1.) Grain Crops : — Wheat, Spelt, Einkorn 2,223 2,307 2,398 2,373 2,252 Rye 5,950 5,817 6,017 5,982 6,521 Barley 1,623 1,754 1,627 1.707 1,711 Oats 3,753 3,774 3,906 4,105 4,445 Buckwheat 247 223 171 118 42 Peas 469 407 328 236 127 Beans 154 161 173 161 102 Vetches ... 229 206 269 24ff 190 Lupins ... 415 402 363 345 170 Other grain crops 524 673 740 784 691 Total Grain Crops 15,587 15,724 15.992 16,051 16,251 (2.) Boots and Vegetables : — Potatoes • 2,758 2,907 3,038 3,242 3,475 Sugar Beet ... 176 337 407 477 583 Mangolds, Beet for feeding ... 329 366 442 503 647 Carrots 34 37 37 35 31 Turnips 47 42 48 35 20 Swedes and Kohl-rabi 79 113 139 169 218 Cabbages 109 112 96 88 68 Other roots and vegetables 21 29 31 44 81 Total Roots and Vegetables 3,553 3,943 4,238 4,593 5,123 (3.) Industrial Crops : — Rape, &c. 179 133 106 73 33 Flax 134 108 61 34 17 Tobacco 18 22 15 15 16 Hops 41 46 42 37 27 Chicory ... 10 10 10 9 9 Others 36 33 27 20 10 Total Industrial Crops 418 352 261 188 112 (4.) Fodder Crops : — Clover 1,865 1,716 1,745 1,821 1,825 Lucerne ... 231 190 208 226 249 Sainfoin ... 128 107 103 86 54 Serradella 25 45 91 115 128 Rotation Grass 187 337 361 372 338 Others 12 10 11 37 61 Total Fodder Crops 2,448 2,405 2,519 2,657 2,655 Fallow and Fallow catch crops Gardens and Orchards 3,821 236 3,337 416 2,760 473 2,285 483 1,381 __ 537 Total Crops and Fallow 26,063 26,177 26,243 26,257 26,059 65 £11. -Proportion of the Arable Land occupied by Corn Crops and Potatoes in the various parts of Germany, 1906-1910. Percentage of total area of arable Total A va ril ^ and garden land (1900) und< ir various Province or Country. area. -.1.1 tt i ' ii. land. crops, average of j ears 1906-1910. (1,000 ha.) n ' \ 1 j vuv "<*•) i Rye. Wheat. Oats. Barley. Potatoes. Per Per Per Per Per cent. cent. cent. cent. cent. East Prussia 3,700 2,060 21-6 4-0 l(i-8 5-1 8-5 West Prussia 2,554 1,405 27-6 5-2 11-4 54 m Brandenburg 3,984 1,743 34-8 31 13-2 4-1 172 Pomerania 3,013 1,654 26-5 3-5 17-0 3-5 12-4 Posen 2,898 1,780 35-4 4-3 8-3 6-3 15-9 Silesia 4,033 2,122 26-0 9-3 16-7 6-9 15-0 Province of Saxony 2,520 1,472 21-1 111 14-9 9-9 13-2 Schleswig-Holstein 1,900 1,013 13-3 4-2 19-1 49 2-9 Hauover ... 3,851 1,151 33-4 6-7 19-0 1-7 10-6 Westphalia 2,021 782 27-7 8-7 19-4 16 11-1 Hesse-Nassau 1,570 540 23-0 10-3 24-1 3 8 13-8 Rhineland 2/7CO 1,018 20-6 7-6 20-9 2-4 14-0 'Prussia 34,870 16,787 26-4 6-2 15-9 4-9 12-7 Bavaria 7,587 2,786 18-6 9-4 16-3 11-7 11-8 Kingdom of Saxony ... 1,499 771 24-7 67 231 30 15-0 Wurtemberg 1,951 713 ■1-ti 4-4 17-2 111 11-5 Baden ... 1,507 472 8-9 73 12-8 9-5 15-2 Hesse ... 769 321 19-5 7-9 14-5 14-0 17-8 Mecklenberg - Schwerin 1,313 719 22-4 0-7 16-8 2-8 7-9 Grand Duchy of Saxony 361 189 13-5 11-6 18-1 123 12-2 Oldenberg 643 174 37-1 2-0 19-3 2-6 8-7 Brunswick 367 179 16-0 15-8 19-7 3-4 10-5 Anhalt... 230 130 21-5 9-9 126 12-0 14-7 Alsace-Lorraine 1,452 520 7-9 21-0 16-7 16-4 7-3 13-6 *German Empire 54,078 24,432 23-3 7-1 6-2 12-6 Including districts not separately mentioned. 80UH 66 tV. — Number and Area of Farms of various sizes in Germany in the Year 1907. Propor- Propor- tion of tion of total area Propor- Area used total used for tion of Size of farms. Number of farms. for agri- cultural Total area. number of farms agricul- tural total area falling purposes. falling in each group. purposes falling in each group. in each group. Hectares. Hectares. Per cent. Per cent. Percent Under 0'5 hectare 2,084,060 359,553 619,066 36-3 1-1 1-4 - 5 hectare and over, but 1,294,449 1,371,758 1,872,936 22-6 4-3 4-3 under 2 hectares. 2 hectares and over, but 1,006,277 3,304,878 4,306,421 17-5 10-4 10-0 under 5 hectares. 5 hectares and over, but 1,065,539 10,421,564 13,768,521 18-6 32-7 32-0 under 20 hectares. 20 hectares and over, but 202,191 9,322,103 12,623,011 4-6 29-3 29-3 under 100 hectares. 100 hectares and over, but 10,679 1,499,225 2,241,658 0-2 4-7 5-2 under 200 hectares. 200 hectares and over ... 12,887 5,555,793 7,674,873 0-2 17-5 17-8 Total 5,736,082 31,834,874 43,106,486 100-0 100-0 100-0 V. — Number of Persons on Farms in Germany in the Year 1907.* Persons engaged in Agriculture and Forestry.f Total number on 12th June, 1907. (1.) Owners, managers, directors, &c. ... (2.) Families of the above (a.) Wholly engaged in farm xoorh (b.) Partly (3.) Other workers (a.) Supervising and clerical (b.) Permanent labourers :— i. Labourers (Knechte) and maids (Magde). ii. Day labourers, workmen. &c. [Instleute). iii. Casual labourers... Total Percentage Total. 2,929,493 7,692,115 4,680,485 3,011,630 4,547,941 77,162 1,545,951 882,733 15,169,549 100 Males. 2,526,093 1,907,980 1,218,269 689,711 2,413,755 64,232 810,780 553,879 984,864 6,847,828 45-1 Females. 403,400 5,784,135 3,462,216 2,321,919 2,134,186 12,930 735,171 328,853 1,057,232 8,321,721 54-9 (4.) Highest number of casual labourers employed at one time in the previous year (13th June, 1906-12th June, 1907) :— Males 3,506,547 Females 3,098,424 Total 6,604,971 * These figures include 601,637 children under 14 years of age. t In a classification of the population engaged in particular callings (including children), the following numbers are given for 1907 :— Agriculture, 16,920,671° Gardening, 316,771 ; Forestry, 364,590. 67 t~ o CS i— t ■■d 60 3 60 »-s a 0> ^ o E-i CO fl f °D 1 *-< . ^> ^ Ph^ "4-J o V t-> zi 0J £ -h CO .-h cr r^ ro r-- (TJ ^i ~ cc P^h r r-c cm — .- 5 1 c 5 > I.J 3 ^3 13 3 rP 2 7i ri c5 U -?? ~ 2 ^ 5 a rt -_ :5 CJ ce = ei r*- -tf = tt; ' •-' » - ^ £5 — c o - .= £ ~ r 3 ~ £ "*"" d 2> rM iO r-i 'S. £ 8300 68 a S e ►h 8 e 05 e o 3 a, § S a to a? S t-i ■+» (M CO !>• OJ CO -* -* J3 CD 03 d CO ■<* ">! ,H ,1h CO Cl O o3 i—i ^j "3 fH p "3 o CD . £43 f-l -+= 03 fl p. a> r-H CO -* -* ■* -* CO CO so &H bo as o Poor asture and sheep- walks. 03 P. p, a> ;>3 w CO CI CO CI oo o CM lO CM d ft GO 03 d eg to -s CD 0-1 CD CI -* o CO CM CI 00 o o 43 d ? .d P-< ^ if Ph 8 o ^o as o en o l-H o © o CO o "2 M CyO 03 ^ > O o H^> Garden land (omittin pleasur gardens " CD **f< 00 CM CO i> o CO o - T3 03 EQ 3 o o O T-H CO 1-* o CM 03 6D -i so t- rH CO 00 t^ ^H 00 "« u -g 03 d -* o 00 CC CM as CO a ! 03 3 D-i 03 rH ^ 1-1 rt cd +3 s "B Ph be CD p3 d o lO O 1CD lO 43 - ^ CD CD t- Oi ^ -* CI r~- iO rOT! O'S a ^ 4J « dT3 " jj d -# t* -* if CO O CM tj CS c3 'S "to •* CO t^ F- c^ t> [~ ^" CD d § a =4 ft •— < ^— S o3 . • Ph ■+= r- CM I> t^ cr- ^ C7i „<" d Ph 03 OO CO CD >o co CO <^ C3^f-H O D» t- c- L~ c- c^ » O s^/ / — s o a> C- CO t- 00 CO CO CO flO n rH tr- o CD CI O SOc<3 o cT 03 > o 03 > > o C3 ' 1 CD -a » S t — i H^ -^ 8 » 1 ^3 1 a 03 03 13 d 1 s ■p O Eh J. CO CO 03 d CO ? ^ <" S ^ ^H K 45 J-S CD CD v- I § 0> HJ t3 CD 03 03 o CI 1 CO •■ 03 CO J-l B-& Fh O ^ 03 03 -h O 03 3 03J3 03 CM s rDJ O eg 03 03 O MO Ph t-h OS Hi o OS 69 C: i— < i— i cc 10 p. ti o © u • ■a a , Sa O i-« --i N CO fet| 5i x t- o ^ c o 111 PI 4) re *M C CC *t O • • ■ • 0) o ±; ZI a5S 00 OS lO -h O M CC O i-H i> • EN : a • a -^= 3 3 m a „ 5' "3, a* a: 03 rt 5| T3 . C ■a a (8 s •a »o (MOO bco a — <*- ra »-* m ■O a - h a 70 X. — Average Prices of Wheat and Oats in England and Wales and in Berlin in the Years 1881-1913. Average Price per Quarter (Wheat 60 lb., Oats 39 lb., per bushel). Wheat. Oats. Year. Berlin. Berlin. England and England and Wales. Price. Price less Duty* Wales. Price. Price less Duty* s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. s.' d. 1881 45 4 46 11 44 9 21 9 20 11 19 8 1882 45 1 43 6 41 4 21 10 18 4 17 1 1883 41 7 39 8 37 6 21 5 17 9 16 6 1884 .. 35 8 34 7 32 5 20 3 18 2 16 11 1885 • * 32 10 34 4 — 20 7 18 7 — 1886 . . 31 32 3 25 11 19 16 7 14 8 1887 .. 32 6 34 11 — 16 3 13 6 — 1888 31 10 36 8 26 16 9 17 1 12 1889 • • • 29 9 40 1 29 5 17 9 20 9 15 8 1890 ., 31 11 41 7 30 11 18 7 21 11 16 10 1891 1 1 37 47 y 37 1 20 23 17 11 1892 30 3 37 6 — 19 10 20 8 — 1893 26 4 32 5 25 18 9 21 9 18 2 1894 22 10 29 21 7 17 1 18 2 14 7 1895 ■ • . 23 1 30 G 23 1 14 6 16 9 13 2 1896 , , 26 2 33 3 25 10 14 9 17 4 13 9 1897 *• . 30 2 37 1 29 8 16 11 — — 1898 • • ,, 34 39 8 32 3 18 5 — — 1899 • • 25 8 33 25 7 17 — — 1900 26 11 32 5 25 17 7 18 5 14 10 1901 26 9 34 11 27 6 18 5 19 5 15 10 1902 . . • ,, 28 1 34 10 27 5 20 2 20 9 17 2 1903 .. • ,, 26 9 34 4 26 11 17 2 18 11 15 4 1904 , t 28 4 37 1 29 8 16 4 18 7 15 1905 29 8 37 3 29 10 17 4 19 10 16 3 1906 .* ., 28 3 38 4 — 18 4 22 2 — 1907 • * . 30 7 43 11 32 2 18 10 25 1 18 8 1908 32 45 33 3 17 10 22 9 16 4 1909 • • 36 11 49 11 38 2 18 11 23 7 17 2 1910 31 8 45 2 33 5 17 4 21 3 14 10 1911 31 8 43 6 31 9 18 10 23 3 16 10 1912 .. . .. 34 9 46 3 34 6 21 6 26 4 19 11 1913 .. 31 8 41 7 29 10 19 1 23 2 16 9 * The following Tariffs were in force in Germ my:— Duty per quarter. Date imposed. Wheat. Oats s. d. 5. d 1 Jan., 1880 2 2 1 3 1 July, 1885 6 4 1 11 26 Nov., 1887 10 8 5 1 1 Feb., 1892 7 6 3 7 1 March, 1906 11 9 6 5 Note. — The German wheat for which prices are given is similar to British wheat in quality. German oats are on the average distinctly lower in quality than British grain, and would probably fetch Is. to Is. 6d. per quarter less in the same market. The British prices are the averages for England and Wales taken from the Board's Agricultural Returns. ?1 X. — Continued. Five-Year Averages, 1884-88 to 1909-13 Average I rice per Q narter (Wheat 60 lb., Oats 39 lb. per bushel). Wheat. Oats. Year. Berlin. Berlin. England and England and Wales. Price. Price less Wales. Price. Price less Duty.* Duty.* s. d. s. d. S. d. s. d. s. .d. s. d. 1884-1888 32 9 34 7 28 1 18 7 16 9 14 6 1889-1893 31 1 39 10 30 7 19 21 7 17 2 1894-1898 27 3 33 11 26 6 16 4 17 5 13 10 1899-1903 26 10 33 11 26 6 18 1 19 4 15 9 1904-1908 29 9 40 4 31 3 17 9 21 8 16 7 1909-1913 33 4 45 3 33 6 19 2 23 6 17 1 * See footnote on page 70. XI. — Average Prices of Potatoes in various parts of Germany in the Five-year Periods 1881-85 to 1906-10. Average Price in Shillings per Ton (2,240 lb.) (without sacks). Period. Berlin (good, early red, sound, best eating). Breslau (good, sound eating Silesian). Magdeburg (full red eating Saxon). Stettin (sound, light red eating). 8. S. s. 1881-1885 ... 42 40 43 41 1886-1890 ... 35 33 33 35 1891-1895 ... 48 41 41 46 1896-1900 ... 42 37 37 40 1901-1905 ... 47 41 43 42 1906-1910 ... 48 39 42 46 72 XII. — Cultivation of Sugar Beet and Yield of Sugar in Germany during 25 years, 1886-87 to 1 911-12. Total Sugar (shown as Weight of Number of Area under Sugar Beet. Average yield Raw Sugar) Beet Campaign. Sugar Beet of Beet per obtained from necessary to Factories. hectare. Beet and produce 1 ton other Raw of Raw Sugar. Material. (1,000 ha.) (Metric tons.) (1,000 metric tons.) (Tons.) 1886-87 401 30-0 1,018 8 16 1887-88 391 26-4 959 7 26 1888-89 396 28-2 991 7 97 1889-90 401 32-9 1,261 7 79 1890-91 406 32-2 1,336 7 95 1891-92 403 28-2 1,198 7 92 1892-93 401 352 27-9 1,231 7 97 1893-94 405 386 27-5 1,366 7 79 1894-95 405 441 32-9 1,828 7 94 1895-96 397 377 31-0 1,637 7 13 1896-97 399 425 32-3 1,821 7 53 1897-98 402 437 31-3 1,844 7 43 1898-99 402 426 28-5 1,722 7 05 1899-1900 ... 399 427 29-2 1,795 6 93 1900-01 395 448 29-6 1,979 6 70 1901-02 395 479 33-4. 2,302 6 96 1902-03 393 428 26-4 1,789 6 30 1903-04 384 417 30-4 1,921 6 60 1904-05 374 417 24-2 1,605 6 27 1905-06 376 472 33-4 2,401 6 55 1906-07 369 447 31-7 2,242 6 33 1907-08 365 450 30-0 2,139 6 30 1908-09 358 436 27-1 2,079 5 68 1909-10 356 458 28-2 2,037 6 33 1910-11 354 478 33-0 2,590 6 08 1911-12 342 505 18-0 1,498 6'05 73 «5 N 1 •fl «3 t-H CO ■^ O as co co 3 .2 T-H ■* t- -# O. co m 1 ^4 O 1 1 M - 1 °- 1 1 1 ^ ^ | H 1 1 1 1 | 1 | 1 1 „ 1 1 I 1 iO 1 1 1 -^ 1 1 1 111! 1^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 II! 1 oT Sg T"H ■*a O ft n CO HH Pi O as os ^* -f w « o I ■ CM ■ OO . 1 1 NCO | | | 1 (X , tO O , , °r- ° 1-1 <° i «*-*l»»|^ I 1 ' iO ' O ' ' ' CM I'll 1 -f, 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I ' | | | | 1 -P co" c^r T-H 0> '/" S 53 r o o ■p « O GO O i-H O ^C-H*^ CI -tH ry— , Ss-S CO CO -* C-C) tr^ t^ I - cr, co -?< O .-t r~co 9| era 1 era i ^1,™ P -P, 1 'OCO^-^O j L-; j OIL- j 1 [ 1 1 | j 1 1 -OCO 1 1 1 4 O O" 1 Co" ' i-T^Ol ' rH rn oo l o ' -t> >o ' ' ' 1 ' ! 1 1 1 CO 1 ! 1 1 '-P ft sa rH CO rH rH r-t Q-l iO oo s s 1 o I O c | i — i o co »o woo ^OOTO-^oo-^ai o cm o3 Jo o^ io , cm , do , l><3 01l>0 , H , HH | . . . . . , , ,OiO, o O CO O -cH CO co t- o co co a; o co : ! (MO 1 o o iO ■ CO ' I> OS iO ' c i uQ co >a o ' co ' to co ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I 1 c-i f- 1 1 1 1 rl ^ CO CM iO OS CD tH H CM CO t-H CM CM | -p> CO 1-1 PH (M D- H ^h j a ! T) co CM CO CO H COr^CMCO O CO CO e- CO *# O 00 CO CO .O -t* in iO ri o CM CO O CI t— -^ ~j 'O CO I"~ 1 - '3-. CC HH CC H Cj •— CO -H 1 CO 1 CO 1 1 N J CO j 1 CM CO_ iO 1 1 CO CM -f -* iH rH i-H CO 1 H CI CO 1 * i *> i i i ^ ,o | .cooicfico , .HH^iHchoajiocbA .ooHHcbt^ O^ o 1 os ki ; i-t i- l>- Cj t- t- CM iCMCIHHiOT tO -O CM CO 1 i ■/ • |> ' rH ' ' ' W 1 CO ' ' CO »C CM r-t ' ' 00 O rH r-i CO ' rH 1 1 T3 HJ T-T 1 o CD 1 o g 1 " 1 -" ; s T 3 to ea.2 O t- CO CO QOOlr-CO IO X « i- 00X>HH"OO C. OHI> K CO 00 o ■H4 iO DO CI 00 CI iC l> 'C CD Oj u3 Oi Q t-h iO CO O CI ' fl 1*1^1 1 1 ^ | co^ 1 1 co co co co 1 jo ci ci c. c: it m T, j ci -t- o co ■ OS ' CM ' ' l ' r-4 ' ' oVn r-T ' 1 cT -HTcfo" ' X co" c^ -tP S3 CM 00 1 ft 1 fl I S o { Q c o CM CM W eft i>c:ho (C C-l CD CO O CC h X O CO GO .— I r- 1 | =f oH .11 iH | 1 , A o c i t*— ib -t t> . cb co c- hh o r 1 o IO X rH O O OS 'O 00 CO i-H -O CO -V >G CO OO O- i-l O O (M 1 O O r-i"jH ' CM ' CO ' ' 'CM a? ' )Q ' ' CS^t-^O^r-l ' ' CO^ „ , ~~i. r ~' ' r ~ l rH '° ' OO H CC; Ttl en* t-T co co" oTr-^ci t-T 1 I tD rH rH S cC f-> ■1.' ■ I-H O fodder tables dogs ... c. la O ! Tl . • tu ? ■■••*•„■■. t#j. . - . 5 O O Rye, wheat, spelt .. Other grain ... „ meal . Bran and other grai Straw Grain as green focld Bice . „ offal Beans, peas, &c. „ straw . ., as gree: Potatoes Sugar Other roots and veg Vegetable fat Oil cake, oil cake m Hay, &c. Fruit Honey Cocoa... Alcoholic liquors . Cattle (meat, fat) . Swine (meat, fat) . Rheep, goats, horses Poultry and game . Fish Animal meal Milk, cream, whey, Butter Cheese Eggs 74 XIV. — Area under Forests in the Various Parts of Germany in 1907. Province or Country. East Prussia West Prussia Brandenburg Pomerania Posen Silesia Province of Saxony Schleswig-Holstein Hanover Westphalia Hesse-Nassau Rhineland Hohenzollern Prussia Bavaria Kingdom of Saxony Wurtemberg ... Baden ... Hesse ... Mecklenberg-Schwerin Grand Duchy of Saxony Mecklenberg-Strelitz Oldenberg Brunswick Saxe-Meiningen Saxe-Altenburg Saxe-Coburg-Gotha Anhalt Schwarzburg-Sondershausen Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt Waldeck Reuss, older line Reuss, younger line Schaumburg-Lippe Lippe .• Tiiibeck Bremen Hamburg Alsace-Lorraine Gkrman Empire Area under Percentage of orests in 1907. Total Area. Ha. Per cent. 653,892 17-7 571,729 22-4 1,321,687 33-2 627,573 20-8 570,801 19-7 1,159,151 28-7 526,010 20-8 129,912 6-8 665,981 17-3 549,856 27-2 623,278 39-7 820,333 30-4 37,914 33-2 8,258,117 23-7 2,400,822 31-6 375,973 25-1 592,256 30-4 549,691 36-5 239,405 31- 1 249,998 190 90,679 25-1 62,689 21-4 64,360 100 111,857 30-5 109,928 44-5 34,178 25-8 57,606 291 57,037 24-8 25,384 29-4 39,784 42-3 44,781 39-9 11,815 37-4 30,576 370 7,668 22-5 33,048 27-2 4,136 13-9 84 0-3 1,743 4-2 422,029 29' 1 13,875,644 25-7 Report of the Horticulture Branch for 1913-14. [Od. 7605] of Session 1914. Price iid., post free bid. eport of Land Division for 1914 : — Part I. Small Holdings. [Cd. 7851] of Session 1915. Price 3d., post free id. Part II. Allotments and Miscellaneous. [Cd. 7892] of Session 1915. Price Sid., post free 10id. {Report of the Chief Veterinary Officer for the year 1915. Session 1916. ^jgPrice Id., post free 2d. IReport of the Meeting of Representatives of Authorities under the Sea Fisheries ' Hegulation Act, 1888. [Cd. 8018] of Session 1915. Price 3d., post free id. Report on Sea Fisheries for 1914 : — Parts I. and II. Report. [Cd. 81U2] of Session 1915. Price 8$d., post free lOjd. Departmental Committees. i Duration of Buildings for Small Holdings : — Report. [Cd. 6536] of Session 1912-13. Price 'l^d., post free 3^d. [■Equipment of Small Holdings : — Report, Evidence, and a Series of Plans and Specifications. | [Cd. 6708] of Session 1913. Price lis. 3d., post free lis. Id. | Do. (Cheap Edition.) Price Is. §d., post free Is. lOd. "Eradication of Foot and Mouth Disease : — Report. [Cd. 6222] of Session 1912-13. Price lid., post free 2d. , i Minutes of Evidence. [Cd. 6244] of Session 1912-13. Price 2*. 9d., post free 3s. Id. Mountain and Moorland Breeds of Ponies: — Report of Committee. (1912.) Price 6d., I post free Id. Public Veterinary Services : — Report. [Cd. 6575] of Session 1912-13. Price 2d., post free 2id. Minutes of Evidence. [Cd.- 6652] of Session 1912-13. Price I0d., post free Is. Oid. Tenant Farmers and Sales of Estates :— Report. [Cd. 6030] of Session 1912-13. Price iid., post free bid. Minutes of Evidence. [Cd. 6031] of Session 1912-13. Price 2s., post free 2s. id. Home Production of Food: — Report. [Cd. 8095] of Session 1915. Price 1 id., post free 2d. Land Settlement for Sailors and Soldiers : — Part 1 of the Final Report. [Cd. 8182] of Session 1916. Price 6d., post free Id. Part 2 of the Final Report. [Cd. 8277] ditto. Price id., post free bd Other Publications. Forestry. Advisory Committee on. Reports: — July to October, 1912. [Cd. 6713] of Session 1913. Price 6