1999. The difference on wheat was 2 s. 8 d., on barley 3 s. 2 d., and on oats 1 s. 9 d.?-I ought to say, on oats the difference was the least of any of the three, and it is the difference in oats that tells most on the tithe rent-charge.

2000. You have compared Scotland with England; is it the fact that the tithe in Scotland is very much less per acre than it is in England? -I should say so, certainly. I have no figures before me at the present moment, but my impression is that it is decidedly lower.

2001. If I may call your attention to what you said about the tithe rent-charge being originally apportioned to get rid of the variation in the price of money; of course, the immense fall in the price of silver did not exist in those days? It did not.

2002. Does not that make a great difference in the price of wheat coming from India and other countries?—I have no doubt that a considerable difference in value may be due to that, other factors. I do not like to pronounce among a confident opinion how much that is.

2003. That may very probably affect the price of wheat materially ?-It may, undoubtedly. I should not like to pronounce an opinion how much till we get the Report from the Gold and Silver Commission at present sitting.

2004. When you say that you would like to see the tithe changed into a fixed charge upon land, that means to say that you would like to see a scheme of redemption of tithe?-That is what I meant; when I spoke of fixity I meant connecting the fluctuating liability into an equivalent, capital sum.

2005. To pay off the tithe by some capital sum?-Yes.

2006. And you think if that could be effected that would be a satisfactory settlement of the whole question?--The only satisfactory settlement; I am now giving only my own opinion.

Mr. Rankin.

2007. I understand that your first objection on the part of the farmers was that the weighed measure by which corn was frequently sold was not properly converted into the imperial bushel; do you think that under the Act of Mr. Chamberlain in 1882 the weights there laid down were correct weights, and that that grievance is removed?-That certainly is my own opinion, and at the time of the passing of that Act I may say I had a great many communications (I have them here) from all the Chambers in England. We took opinions on the justice or otherwise of those weights, and I was consulted by many engaged on the question, and I think the general impression was that a very fair settlement was arrived at by the weights in the Act of 1882.

2008. Is it your opinion that it would be better to introduce sale by weight of all corn and do away with capacity ?-That I think would be an advantage; if we could get rid of the sale of corn by measure and adopt weight we should have a very much more uniform and certain element to make our calculation; and I instanced the case of the Scotch returns, in which weight is given as an element of value, in support of that, and 1 mentioned that when this question came before the Chambers of Agricul

Mr. Rankin-continued.

[Continued.

ture it was always connected, in the earlier stages, with the desirability of selling not only corn but of live stock and all agricultural produce by weight.

2009. I think I am right in supposing that the Central Chamber approved of my Bill in 1883 with regard to sale of corn by weight only?— Yes, certainly.

2010. Do you think that if the standard there mentioned, namely, the cental, had been adopted any difficulties would have arisen in the conversion of tithe averages?-Of course there would have been a little friction; at the moment of change there might have been some persons objecting to the calculation, but no real friction of any importance.

2011. I do not mean objections by persons unaccustomed to it, but I mean the arithmetical difficulty; would there have been any?—I see no more difficulty in making a conversion with the cental standard used than with the 60 lbs. to the bushel as a standard.

2012. Your second complaint was the increased consumption on the farm; now do I understand you to say that you do not suggest any remedy for that complaint?-I am not able to suggest, after a great deal of consideration, how the corn consumed on the farm could be brought into charge, but I think I have indicated my own opinion that there is some evidence that there is an increased amount consumed on the farm, and that the corn averages as they now exist are affected, somewhat slightly perhaps, by the increased amount withheld from the market.

2013. Then apparently you are very much of the same opinion as Mr. Read who, in answer to a question put by Mr. Stanley Leighton, said, "It does not signify what the English farmer grows nowadays; the point is not what he grows but what other people will send us ; that is to say that the price is regulated by the foreign importation?-Referring, I presume, mainly to

wheat.

2014. The question was not limited only to wheat but probably referred to that?-With reference to the other grains it is, of course, within the knowledge of the Committee that a very much larger proportion of wheat is imported than of other grains, but no doubt the foreign element is the one which mainly rules the market.

year.

2015. Have you thought whether the amount of wheat consumed on the farm is very much greater than it was in 1836 ?-I think the answer to that question is that the amount entirely depends on the You may have a year like 1879, in which you have a great deal of inferior corn which can be profitably used on the farm; but in a year like 1887, when in some cases, to my knowledge, the wheat has weighed naturally as much as 67 lbs. to the bushel, probably there would not be a single bushel so consumed on the farm at all. If there is a fairly good market and a good sample of grain, very little wheat would be consumed on the farm. I think the figures I have quoted do indicate that while only 10 per cent. of the whole crop of wheat is consumed at home, a very much larger proportion of the other grains is.

2016. Then your fourth complaint was that of the improper selections of markets; do I

understand

Mr. Rankin-continued. understand you to say that you think that has been remedied by Mr. Chamberlain's Act?— Perhaps I ought to have used the word "obsolete" rather than "improper." I meant to convey the impression that the Act of 1382 stereotyped the markets, and that we had a number of markets not representing the whole country.

2017. I understand you rather to have modified your opinion upon that point, and to say that by comparing the figures you find that the increase of markets has not made much difference in the average price?-The mere increase of the number of markets makes very little difference in the averages; but the selection of the markets with care has some influence, though not so great an influence as I originally thought.

2018. Do you think any improvement can now still be made in the selection of the markets?I think there can be no finality in the present list. A time might arrive at which changes should be made, and therefore use should be made of the Order in Council from time to time, to add or withdraw markets as the Board of Trade think expedient.

2019. Is that done at all by the Board of Trade at present?-The power rests with them by means of an Order in Council, but I think there has not been any change since 1882; probably too short a time has elapsed for full experience of the working of the Act. I would like to make a suggestion on that point; that it would be very desirable if we had an annual return somewhat of the nature of that which Mr. More moved for, showing what was the result of the business done so far as exhibited by the returns at each of the markets every year. I think that Parliament might be informed of that, and that it would enable those who are interested in the matter to

judge when the time had come for saying that some markets were obsolete, or the recording of sales specially neglected.

2020. I understand you, I think, that you agreed with the recommendations of the Royal Commission that the tithe should be a fixed charge, which should be paid by the landlord and that it should be redeemed?-That is entirely my own opinion.

2021. You mentioned the words just now "titheable produce;" might I ask you if you can

[Continued.

Mr. Rankin-continued. mention what was the titheable produce of a farm?—Yes, I think I could mention that. Of course there were three classes of tithes, Prædial, Mixed, and Personal tithes. The great tithes consist of corn and grain, hay, wood (coppice or underwood). The small tithe consists of the agistment or depasturage of cattle, fruit gardens, turnips and potatoes, furze and broom, hemp, flax, madder, woad, teazels and saffron, honey, hops, seeds, milk, wool, the young of animals, viz., lambs, pigs, calves, and colts, and the eggs of hens, ducks, geese, and other tame and domestic fowls and poultry. These are the chief headings. I mentioned titheable produce rather to distinguish between fat meat, which was not itself the subject of tithe, and young animals, or increase, which was.

Chairman.

2022. Here is my return giving the amount and quantities returned from each county; what should you say to a corn average return like this: Devon, 108,700 acres of oats; amount returned 423 quarters; out of nearly 110,000 acres, 423 quarters returned?-That return of course was for the purpose of the existing corn. averages under which there is no intention to determine the value of grain in the county of Devon; if it were intended to determine locally the value of the grain in the county of that was Devon, I should say that a very improper basis on which to go; but if Devon is taken only as one county out of the whole of England, a single defective return would not so much matter. Although the returns of oats are admittedly defective, we have 37 per cent. of wheat out of the whole of England returned, which I think gives a sufficient general average for statistical purposes. My suggestion about that return was that it should be annual.

2023. Only the amount shown?-In each market and each county; particularly in each market.

2024. You would like to have the whole of this return moved for each year?-Not the whole of the return; I think the weekly prices may be found in the "London Gazette." All I want is to have an annual return of the total transactions recorded in the markets.

Chairman.

2025. You are an extensive corn dealer in the Midlands, I believe?-Yes; resident at Shrewsbury.

2026. Your experience has extended beyond Shrewsbury?—Yes; I trade in seven counties. 2027. Have you taken much interest in the tithe question?-Yes; I have for a number of years.

2028. Are you familiar with the way in which the corn returns are taken ?-Yes; I attend several markets where returns are made, and I have to make them.

2029. You make them yourself?-Myself or my representatives.

2030. What information can you give us, and what is your opinion of the way the returns are

Chairman-continued.

made?-The returns now made are returns of all kinds of wheat, barley, and oats, that are purchased, where purchased, from whom purchased, whether from dealers or direct from the

grower.

2031. Are you speaking of your own firm?—I am speaking of my own business; I believe that is the general custom.

2032. If the returns are small it is because the custom is honoured in the breach rather than in the observance?-I speak of those who do make returns; a good many firms make no returns at all.

2033. Was much interest taken in this question formerly, do you remember, by the Wenlock Farmers' Club?-I read a paper before the

Wenlock Farmers' Club in 1882, on the way in which corn averages were taken. I was then asked to point out if each county made its own returns how far it would differ from the Imperial returns which were collected over the whole of the country.

2034. What was your experience?-Taking the purchases that had been made by myself from the growers in the county of Shropshire, I found that there was a difference of something like 13 per cent.; if the tithe had been charged on the corn sold only by the farmers, and on the prices received by them, they would have paid something like 13 per cent. below the Imperial average for the year 1879. The tithe-charge in the year 1879 was 1117. 15s. 1 d.

2035. Have you estimated what the amount of tithe would have been if estimated on the actual purchases in that county?-It would have been 11 l. 5 s. 6 d. per cent. less if estimated on the actual purchases extending over the whole of that county.

2036. Did you estimate what the value would be if it had been taken on a still smaller area?— Yes, I divided the county into two divisions, what we call the better class land and the more inferior class of land.

2037. What was the result of that?-I found then that the amount charged upon the actual purchases made on the worst land should have been 121. 7 s. 2 d. less than the Imperial average. 2038. Is there much difference in the value of grain in the different markets; in the large markets? The corn in the later districts is more inferior; there is sometimes a difference of several shillings per quarter.

2039. Do you find that the weights by which grain is sold vary?-They vary considerably, scarcely two markets having the same standard, but we have since the year 1880 abolished the custom of selling by measure in our county altogether; we now sell by weight.

2040. How was that brought about?-A discussion upon the weights and measures question was held at Oswestry, presided over by Mr. Stanley Leighton, I think, and we then advocated the decimal system of weight; we advocated the establishment of the cental. We were defeated on that point, the farmers preferring to use the 112 lbs. they were accustomed to; but out of that discussion arose a general desire on the part of those who bought corn to purchase by weight only, and do away with the more difficult system of buying by measure and by weight. 2041. Do you find it generally known which weight the Imperial averages refer to ?-I should say very few people know, either amongst farmers or dealers, the weights that the Imperial money averages refer to, because the Imperial quarter is known in various districts by different weights, and I would here remark that it would be most desirable to give to the Imperial quotations the weights in future, thus:

Chairman-continued.

[Continued.

2043. In your opinion, does that amount bear any just proportion to the amount of business done in the market?-No, it is very much less.

2044. What proportion do you think is returned; do you think that a twentieth of the wheat sold is returned ?-I think that not more than one half the wheat bought on returning markets is returned.

2045. And how about barley and oats?—The same.

2046. Is the cost of carriage extensively added to the price of grain?-When merchants purchase from other merchants, the carriage is usually added, and it is included in the returns they make.

2047. Do you know what difference that would make, taking the cost of carriage from Shrewsbury to Bristol?-The freight from Shrewsbury to Bristol would be about 3 s. 6 d. on the quarter of wheat, and 2 s. 6 d. on the quarter of barley.

2048. And would that cost be included in the return? If the merchant at Bristol who purchased the Shrewsbury grain made a return of what he bought from dealers it would be added and included in the price he paid for it there.

2049. What would be added if Shrewsbury wheat was sent to Liverpool? It would be about 2 s. 6d. per quarter to Liverpool.

2050. And what if sent to Birmingham ?About 1 s. 6 d.

2051. In all those cases the carriage would be added to the price of wheat?-Yes, if the purchaser at the other end made a return in the usual way.

2052. Is it your experience that re-sales are frequently included in the returns?—I have known grain returned three times over in several cases, when markets have been active and business quick.

2053. Would it, in your opinion, be better for each county to make its own return?-I think it would be much better.

2054. Are you of opinion that the tithe should be made a fixed charge, or independent of the corn averages; have you considered that point?

It is a point I have not considered, but it is generally thought by farmers that it should become a fixed charge on the land.

2055. Have you considered whether it would be desirable to take these returns from the county, or a larger area?—I think each county should make its own return.

2056. How would you suggest that should be done?-The fairest way would be, no doubt, to collect these returns from the grower, but there would be very great difficulty about that, bearing in mind the reluctance of farmers to make returns, or to enter into any written communications of any kind. Failing that, I would suggest that the next best way would be for merchants to make returns of what they purchased from growers only, and that those returns should be collected as they are now by the Inland Revenue officers.

2057. Do you think that if meetings were held in each county advising each farmer to make returns, and pointing out the benefit of doing so, such meetings might be attended with a practical result? They would be very enthusiastic for a time, and then I think the subject would receive less attention.

2058. Do

[Continued.

24 July 1888.]

Chairman--continued.

2058. Do you think that at the time when the tithe was first fixed it was on the right proportion of the three crops of grain ?-I think not. You see the proportion in 1836 was one of wheat, one and two-thirds of barley, and about two and aquarter of oats. The quantity of barley grown now is very much in excess of what was grown in 1836.

2059. In what other respect would you criticise it; have you any other suggestion to make? --It would be fairer, in my opinion, that wheat and barley should be put upon the same basis.

2060. Can you account for so much more barley appearing in the return from the Shrewsbury market than wheat?-During the last seven or eight years the cultivation of barley has paid better than that of wheat, and farmers have been encouraged to grow a larger quantity.

Mr. Rankin.

2061. When you said that the wheat was sold by weight at the market you meant that these weights are merely customary?—Yes. 2062. Different weights at one market from another market, probably?—Yes.

2063. But all these weights are a good deal higher than the weights taken for the tithe?Yes, a great deal; some of our weights range as high as 80 lbs. to the bushel, and they go down to 62 lbs.

2064. Is not that a great cause of discontent

to the farmer?- The farmer does not know what the bushel is; if you speak of the Imperial bushel he cannot bring his mind to bear upon what the relative difference is between the

bushel he is accustomed to in his own local market and the Imperial bushel in some other parts of the country.

2065. Is that the case with oats?-Oats are sold by a large number of weights.

2066. Any farmer would know the difference between light oats and heavy oats?-Yes; but not the monetary difference between various weights.

2067. The weights taken for corn averages to make up the tithe are very much less than what the grain is usually sold at?--Yes, in many places, I think, that oats are fixed at 39 lbs. per bushel for the Imperial averages.

2068. In your part of the world is there much discontent about this payment of the tithe?Yes, I believe there is; we have heard many discussions about it.

2069. And do you think the general view would be to have a fixed charge upon land?Yes, I do.

2070. Which would mean a redemption scheme?-A redemption scheme; and I think from what I can hear by conversing with farmers in various parts of the country it would be better if the landlord paid the tithe, and the two were included in one charge.

2071. But, of course, the landlord paying the tithe would make some difference to the rent?Yes, certainly tithe and rent would become consolidated into one charge, and would be regarded

as rent.

2072. So that the farmers' interest would be still the same?-Yes, undoubtedly.

2073. But even if this tithe were paid for by the landowner, frequently the landowners are small

2075. You said that there would be a great difficulty in obtaining the grower's price owing to the

reluctance of farmers to make returns ?-Yes.

2076. Would you be in favour of some scheme by which the returns of the merchant could be endorsed by the grower?-Mr. Duckham suggeestedthat in the evidence he gave before your Committee, but I think it would be most inconvenient; I do not see how time could be found in a busy market to get the seller to endorse every entry a dealer might make in his book.

2077. I take it your idea is that the merchant should return what he bought from the growers only?—Yes; and stop at that.

2078. By which we should avoid getting the price of the transit?—Yes; you would avoid the transit and avoid profits.

2079. You say you are in favour of a fixed tithe rent-charge; how would you determine that fixed charge?-That I have not sidered. Some practical men think it would be fair to all interests to redeem the tithe at 85.

2080. In your part of the country are there many people who are at the same time landowners and cultivate their own land?-Yes; in some districts of the country there are many small holders of land who cultivate their own farms.

2081. So that in fact any alteration of the tithe from the owners to the occupiers would not apply to them in any way?—Not in those cases to 80 great an extent as in others.

2082. And there are many of those cases in your part of the world?-There are many in some parts of the country.

Mr. John Talbot.

2083. You said that in your own market at Shrewsbury there was a considerable amount of business transacted which never found its way into the returns ?—Yes.

2084. What is the reason of that?-The reluctance of people to give themselves the trouble, or take the time to make the returns.

2085. They might be compelled, might they not, to make them?-If they were compelled to make them, no doubt they would do so.

2086. Then it is the fault of the inspectors, I suppose, that they do not see that the returns are made?-My experience of the inspectors is that since 1882 they have been very much more active than they had been before, that they follow up purchasers more closely than they did.

2087. But still though they are so much more accurate you said, I think, that one-fiftieth of the transactions that take place were all that were actually recorded?-I should say that only about 50 per cent. of the transactions that take place in the markets I attend are returned. Amongst those markets are Shrewsbury, Wolverhampton, and Market Drayton.

2088. You would apply the same remark to all the markets ?-Yes.

2089. If that be so, I suppose before 1882 the

Mr. John Talbot-continued. proportion was very small indeed?-There seems to be, according to the statements published, less difference with respect to that than I should have expected.

2090. You said, did you not, that since 1882 you had observed a considerable improvement in the amount of the returns made?-I have noticed more activity on the part of the collectors of corn returns lately in soliciting the returns from the purchasers.

2091. But notwithstanding that, the proportion is still lamentably small?-It is.

2092. If that is so, is it worth while for Parliament to make any further regulations?— If those who are supposed to make the returns knew that it was compulsory for them to do so, there would be a very much more complete return furnished.

2093. In other words that means that the inspectors do not do their duty ?-I do not think they do in many instances.

2094. Have any complaints ever been made to the Board of Trade about the inspectors?-I think not; I am not aware of any.

2095. It is no one's business to make them ?No, and no one seems to take much interest in the matter.

2096. So that the information which we have received through these means is very inadequate information?-Yes, it would be so.

2097. Then it would be rather rash, would it not, to draw much conclusion from it?-The returns are very insufficient; I do not think they have much practical bearing upon any matters connected with agriculture.

Mr. Stanley Leighton.

2098. You have given us some interesting details with regard to your own calculations compared with the official averages in respect to the tithe rent-charge, and you stated, did you not, that you had discovered that there was a difference of 13 per cent. ?-In the year 1879.

2099. You mean that if the official average was 100 yours was 87?-The official average was 113.

2100. And yours was 100?-The Imperial for 1880 was 1117. 15 s. 03 d. that year. Mine for the whole county of Shropshire was 11 7. 5 s. 6 d. less, as I stated.

2101. Your calculation is made over an average of seven years, is it not?-No, it was for that one particular year in comparison with the year 1879, as given by the Imperial average, based upon a seven years' average.

2102. That would only affect the tithes by one seventh? Yes, for that one year,

2103. Therefore you do not mean that the tithe rent-charge would be affected by that great difference, but only one-seventh of the calculation upon which the tithe average was made?-My calculations have reference only to the year 1879, in that case. I consider that each year should bear the weight of its own tithe only, and not be affected by debits or credits brought from previous ones.

2104. Your calculation refers only to one year and not to seven?-That is so.

2105. And it is based upon actual purchases made by yourself?-Yes, from the grower direct.

[Continued.

Mr. Stanley Leighton-continued. 2106. Did you include in that calculation sales made by yourself?-No; I only included purchases made direct from the grower.

2107. Do you know that the official averages are made upon sales by dealers ?-A dealer who makes a return would make a return of all his purchases, whether made from dealers, or from growers.

2108. Your returns only included the price you gave the growers?-In that particular year.

2109. Therefore, your calculation was made upon a different basis from the official averages ? Yes, it would be so.

2110. And, therefore, we could hardly compare them?-I only gave that calculation in order to show how much more the Imperial average for that year was than the average would have been had it been taken upon the actual value of corn as then received by the grower.

2111. You take barley and oats as well as wheat? Yes, the three kinds of corn.

2112. Were you purchases very large?—They were based in that year upon 1,118 purchases, extending over the markets of Shropshire.

2113. Of the three kinds of grain ?—Yes.

2114. About 300 purchases of each kind?More of wheat than of barley and oats; and the purchases of oats would be fewer than of barley.

2115. You are aware that the corn returns were not invented for the sake of the Tithe Rent Charge Commutation Act?-Yes, that is so, I believe.

2116. But the official averages, being in existence, those who arranged the commutation availed themselves of that standard in order to measure the income of the tithe rent-charge owners? -Yes, that I understand to be so.

2117. Having first of all calculated the value of the property of the tithe rent-charge owners, and having converted their money into another standard, a fixed standard, do you think it fair to alter that standard without reconsidering the whole question of what that money value was in 1835? In 1835 many more articles were titheable than those upon which the tithe is now based; but having regard to the proportions of wheat, barley, and oats, upon which the tithe is now fixed, as I explained to the Chairman just now, I consider that wheat and barley may be put upon the same basis, and oats would remain about as they

are.

2118. I know you say so, and that would have the result of considerably lowering the value of the property of the tithe rent-charge owners, would it not?-It would.

2119. Do you think that as a question of justice and fairness, it would be right to convert the money value of 100 l. of 1835 into a standard which would reduce it very much without reconsidering the whole question of whether the 100 7. of 1835 was the right sum?-Very likely there would be differences of opinion about that, I would say that it might be scarcely fair to make the alteration without taking into consideration the relative value of the other articles upon which tithes were assessed in 1836, but the condition of agriculture then and now cannot be compared.

2120. Then in fact you would say, would you not, that if we altered the tithe commutation, we must re-consider the whole question of the

amount