The Welshman

CARMARTHENSHIRE CHAMBER OF AGRI- I CULTURE. I Agricultural Holdings Act. I A meeting ,£ he Carmarthenshire Chamber of Agri- alture was tit 1; at the Boar's Head Hotel on Tuesday, Mr John Francis presiding. A communication from the Central Ci -mb-r was read by the secretary, Mr W W Prosser, asking them to forward A statement of their views '1S to the unreaiionsble charges of the railway-, and it was resolved to do so. Mr W 0 B igstocke, Parkygors, wrote regretting his inability to .,ttend through illneos, ar d suiticesting allotments as ,he next subject for discussion. The secretary WIIS asked to find some gentleman to introduce the subject. Tbe imple- ments to be distributed at the next meeting were tten chosen. At one o'clock the customary social dinner was held in the large room of the hotel, when a good substantial dinner was served under the perional supervision of the Misses Olive. The appearance of the tables was ion proved by the addition of a few winter flowers- primnlas and cyclamens-and terns. Mr John Francis presided, and the company present included Air D Prosaer, Brynderwen Mr W W Bridie Mr T H R Hughes, Nea,d ifawr Mr H H A Brgstooke, F-rryside; Mr Lewis Bisbop, Llandilo Dr Lawrence, Wauogron; Rev R Gwynne Lawrence, Mddleton Hall; Rev T R Walters, Carmarthen Rev J T Hughes, Iilaufi'-aogel-a'-arth; Mr John Williams, Poulan, Xilangmning; Mr D H Thomas, auctioneer; Mr T Davies, Castle Howell; Mr E W Francis, Penygraig Mr H Davies, Typicca; Mr J Griffiths, Llwynpiod; Mr H J Davies, Bremenda; Mr J Lloyd Thomas, Tanlan Mr J Philips, Caerlleon Mr W W Prosser, ion. sec Mr J J H Kins, Breweries, Carmarthen Mr D E Harries, Dryslwyn-fawr; Mr D Davies, Wauodrefi; Mr Columbus Jones, Bontgllrreg; Dr Bowen-Jones, Carmarthen; Mr John Bowen, Pen- fforddlas; Mr Thomas, Mieayprior; Mr W Evans, Parkyberllan; Mr David Ellis, Plough Inn, Carmar- then; Mr Hinds, Cwnin; Mr J Rogers, Nantyci Mr J F Rees, veterinary surgeon, Carmarthen; Mr Thomas Bland Da-ios, Carm-irthen; Mr J Davies, Pentre-il Mr W I-aac, Old Foundry, Carmarthen; Mr T Morris, Green Castle; Mr Tom Jeremy, Pentrehidd; Mr J Jooei, Prio-y Foundry, Carmarthen Mr James Davies, Towy Works, Cirmarthen; Mr Jonathan Phillips, Ysgybinitone; Mr W Davies, Wern Mr John Evans, Cwmduhen Mr D Walters, Bankyfelin Mill Mr W D ivies, Tynwain Mr T Riehards, Priory-street, Car- marthen Mr H Harries, Ffoesmaen Mr T W Davies, auctioneer, Carmarthen Mr J Thomas, Talog Mr J Griffi he, merchant, Cross Ion: Mr J G Morgin, iron. monger, Carmnrthon; Mr W Thomas, ir-,ocnongor, Carmarthen Mr Percy Thomas, Derllys Court Mr E J Jones, Cwmmau-ucha Mr Samuel Rees, Pound Mr W Harris, Fro >d Mr Stephens, Lan Mr Jones, Pen- lanvoss Mr J. hi Jone*, (Jwmburi, Ferryside Mr W L Thomas, Ffynonlas Mr T W A Evans, Kidwelly; Mr D Watkins, Journal Offios Mr H Williams, Tyn- coed Mr T Williams, Bontgarrrg; Mr W Thomas, Harp Inn, Carmarthen Mr George Thomas, Lleoh- dwni Mr J Davies, junr., Lletygovid; Mr John H Dviftl, Vaiodelyn; Mr W Davies, Clyngwyn; Mr W Vincent Thomas, Starling Park; Mr David DAvies, Cwmmebach Mr J Footman, Havodwen MrD Jones, Market Hall; Mr Stephens, Coedybrain; Mr W H Jones, Danyrallt; and Mr R A Brockie, London and Provincial Bnk, Carmarthen. After dinner, the toast of "The Queen and Royal Family" wa- duly honoured. The Chairman then said he had received a letter from the President, who was very unwell, and begged to be excused for not altending. There was also another letter from Mr W 0 Bri;tstocko, who read such a valuable paper at the last meeting, copies of which had been supplied to them, stating that he had tak^n cold, and was afraid to venture upon a journey, though he wou!d have been glad to be there, and to listen to what was goinq on. He thought a very good paper could be xetd on Allotments in connection with Parish Couucils, and, in committee, it was resolved that someone should read a paper at the next meeting. There were three new members to be proposed—Mr J F Buckley, junior, Bryncae ao, Mr T W Davies, auctioneer, and Mr Thos. Rogers, Priory-street, Carmarthen. These having been proposed, seconded, and elected, The Chairman announced that the next business was to listen to a p«p»r from Mr Brodie, on the Agricultural Holdings Act. with suggestions for its amendment. Mr Brodie, solici or, Llanelly, then resumed the discussion with a paper on ''The Agricultural Holdings Act, WlttJ Suggestions for its Amendment." He intro- duced tne subject as one of paramount importance, remarking thlil unless agriculturists shewed ao interest in ihsir own ndustrv and insistently pressed its claims there walil little likelihood of its grievances being attended to or removed. He went on to say that to a very great extent the Act has in this particular, so far as this county is concerned, been a dead letter: it has failed to achieve the result-expected from it, and with a view of obtaining which it was passed. One of the chief reasons f r the Act being comparatively a dead letter in thi* part of he country was, without doubt, thit the giving of a notice under it is considered by the tenant, rightly or wrongly (in very many cases quite wrongly), to be equivalent to a declaration of hostility against the landi, rd, and tbit, of course, militated very 8 ronglv, almost fatally, against its being taken advantage of. We wust all admit that agriculture, the most iooportHnt of our national industries, has not kept p ee w th the othi-r brmches of productive industry. Why ? Because there has not been that security for outlay in agriculture that a reasonable ocan requires before be cuts out his capital. He, therefore, put the matter thus: No tenant can be expected to put 011t money upon those permanent improvements which are necessaiy to be made in the proper cultivation of lind without having some such security for his capi'al as a reasonable man in anv other butiness would require. How is the security which is reasonably neoessary for the agricultural tenant as a business man to be given? A lease cannot always be obtained, and if it could, would not always serve the purpose. Wltbout creating fixity of tenure, and thereby giving the occupier a permanent vested interest in the holding, he could see no way of giving him the necessary {security for his capital but by reasonable compensation tor the unexhausted value of lOll improvements properly made. He urged the amend cent of the Act, and said that the giving to the tenant of the necessary security would have a very beneficial effect, in that it would probably result in more capit,.l being put into the land from the tenanti' side. Farther, a tenant was much more likely to buckle to and work is holding properly when he knows that the reasonable value of his permanent improvement is secured to him. This could not tut result in benefit to the landlord, for his is the property that is being im- proved. He, however, must say that, in the interest of the landlord, prop-r precautions should be taken to present compensation being made claimable in respect of anything but reasonable improvements. Muoh bad leea said up' n the basis of compensation. The true measure of compensation is the amount by which, in consequence of the improvements, the letting value of the holding exceeds the letting value which such holding, would command if the improvements had not been executed. He was not sore whether it would not be necesAry to fix a maximum limit in respect of two of the improvements, namely, the erection of buildings and drainage. He was prepared to admit that in these two cases a maximum limit of so many years' rental should be fixed, beyond which no compensation could ba paid. Wit b regard to the manner in which cospen- lation should be fixed, he concurred with the suggestion of Mr Brigstocke, ihat the county court judge should in all cases be the umpire, with two official valuers to sit with bim as assessors but he added a further sug- gestion, that there should be a definite scale of fees, so that one party should not recover from the other more than a fixed maximum amount of expesaes. Looking at this mater from an agriculturist's point of view, he thought the lawyers ought not to be allowed to make more tban a reasonable figure for costs out of it. As to one other point, be admitted that if tenants were to be compensated for improvements landlords should be able to recover for all dilapidations. To øummarise: The tenant should be secured for the capital he has expended to the extent the letting value of the holding has been increased thereby, while the landlord should be protected from loss by neglect or bad farming of the tenant to the extent the same letting value has been diminished (applause). The Chairman said they were all very much obliged to Mr Brodie tor his paper, and he hoped there would be a good dlSOI/Selon upon it. as he (Mr Brodie) had,entered upon fresh ground which Mr Brigatocke did not touch upon. Mr A Brigstocke said the paper contained propositions which were fair and reasonable. As to fixity of tenure, it was generally found aboat here that tenants were against taking farml oil a lease. With regard to ie,trictive covenants, they were not as a rule enforced. Mr D H Thomas (Llanllwch) said that the Agricul- tural Holdings Act was a very important measure so far as tenant farmers were concerned, though be confessed be did not thoroughly understand it. As to compensa. tion for unexhausted improvements, he thought that if a farm were worth X150 when a tenant entered upon it, and £ 180 if he came to leave it, he should be compen- sated accordingly. Mr Stephens (Lan) said the question seemed to touch this, what a farmer ought to have when he failed or had to leave bis firm, whereas it seemed to him that what they required was something to help them to go on. What was the use of having a doctor when the patient was deadP (heir, heat). They wanted something to assist them when they were going down hill. If it were not for kind landlords they would frequently not be able to go on, and, therefore, be loved the name of the Duke of Bedford, who, be believed, was the first to make a Substantial abatement to his tenants in times of distress (hear, hear). Mr Davies (Typicca) said the Act did not trouble him ft bit, not in the least. The Rev T R Walters noticed the particularly fair tone of the paper, but be was also in the position of no having read or studied the Act. There were two point which strock him, one with regard to nnexhaasted im I provements, and ithi other, as to dilapidation". He thought that if a farm which had been let at L180 was, when the tenant left, let at L150, the difference should be capi alized, and ordinary percentage upon it returned in a lump sum to the tenant (hear, hear). As to g ving notice of claim to compensation, be thought it would be well if it were done generally, as then it would come to be a recognised custom. While be knew no hing about artificial manures, he thought the tenant should be compensated for ;,ill unexhausted improvements. Mr Lewis Bishop (agent to Lord Dynegor) com- menced by sayisig th-t, tbongh he did not like his cabbage boiled wice. there were some new points which were not touched upon in Mr Brigstoeke's valuable paper. Standing there the representa ive of one of the best landlords in the county-one who would al- most give his life's b'ood if be could assist the agri. culturist so at to make h's business profitable (hear, bear), he entirely "greed with the reader of the p"per that what they needed was a scheme that would work, so that when a tenant had the misfortune to give up a farm he should feel it worth hi- while to do so, not band it over in a c, ippled and exhausted condition, but in such a state that his landlord would be pleased to take it back and say, You have been a true and faith- ful servant; bore is something for you, and I a-» glad to give it you." He thought Mr Brodie bad struck the keynote of the whole matter, and that what both land- lords and tenants needed was a scheme whereby the fertility of the soil might be kept up, for he knew from experience that in some cases it would hnve been better if the landlord had put his hand into his pocket and to have given a man E150 or £ 200, than to allow him to rent a farm and return it in an exhausted and worn-out condition. What did that mean ? It meant loss to the landlord, loss to the tenant, and loss to our native country. How were they to alter it 1 They could only do so by a goo I, broad, honest basis of compensa- tion (hear, hear). Saving been in the law and always lived in the county, he felt that they were centuries be- hind their neighbours in Glamorg.nahife, Why P Because we had no custom, whereas our neighbours in the next county had formulated customs which had acquired the foroe < f law, and were far better than the ornamental provisions of the defunct Agricultural Holdings Aot. He would be only too pleased to assist in framing a scheme so that tbe'r cost.,ms, so far as they were equitable and just, might in time come to be recognised as the cus,om of the country (hear, hear). Theiefore, he thought it was very difficult for them to- day to say what the tenant should be oompensa e 1 for and what he should not, and therefore he suggested that there should be a soale for unexhausted improvements framed upon what was recognised as the cusitom in other counties. As to compensntion, he would give in respect to arable land the cost the first year, hilf the second, and one-third the thitd year, when there was one crop only followed by seeds. As to gras land, he would allow a proportionate part for five years. As to artificial mtnurea, it was very difficult to "Stimate their -,alue, as in some ca-tes E20 or £30 expended upon a farm might as wll be thrown into the sea. Therefore, it was utterly impossible to lay down any rule, and that was why in the coun!y of Glamorgan compensation in that respect was a nutter for arbitration. As to haulage for buildings, be sugge ted I-15th every year, and then the tenant would receive the benefit in straw and labour for thatching. With respect to drainage, he thought from twelve to fifteen years would allow of fai- com- pensation but in the mttter of building. h., thought that no tenant should be allowed to erect what buildings be pleased without an agreement with the landlord. He agreed with Mr Brodia that the County Court would be a proper tribunal for roattf ra in dispute, but be thought that when a tenant objected to having a case tried before a judge whom he happened to know, or who might have local associations, there should be power to remove the case for trial to an adjoining circuit. Mr J Williams (Penlan) did not hold exactly the same view as his friend of Typicca, that there was no need of the Act, though personally he bad never benefitted by the Act, but he had seen cases where something like an Act was very necessary. He bad seen a case where, af er nine years' working of a farm by a good tenant, he had had to leave without a penny compensation, although the landlord had received benefit to the extent of at least LI,200 but, on the other hand, he had seen men entering upon farms who had become drunken, careless, or indolent, and so the farms had been reduced to at least one-third of the value of what they were when these men took posses- sion, and therefore there should be some protection for the landlord in such cases. There were, however, cases in which estates carne into the market, and the auctioneer (perhaps, it might be his friend, Mr John Francis) received instructions to sell without reserve (laughter), and so the tenant lost the benefit of the whole of his improvements. This had hxppened io the case of some of the oldest estates, and it was most discouraging to good t'-nants who had farmed well for many years, and expected their children to follow in their footsteps. Mr Bishop's employer was not the only good landlord there wele many but there were some who were bad, and it was against these that the tenants needed something like an Agricultural Holdings Act to afford protection. Mr T H R Hughes, M.F.H., thought that not only the tenants but the landlords also required soma pro- tection. There were some tenants who would take everything they could out of a farm, put all they could into heir pockets, and ev« n make large fortunes, and then lea.e the farms in such a state that th y bad to be let at a lower rent to the next tenant. In such cases the tenants should be made to pay for the waste (bear, hear). The Chairman said they were all very much obliged to Mr Brodie for his paper. He (the chairman) agreed with tim as to notice, and with Mr Bishop as to build- ings. He had seen what tenants had done, and had ptid some thousands of pounds in buildings, and he knew that many had bet-n erected which were of no use to the next tenant, but he thought that if they went on in Carmarthenshire and Cardiganshire for the next eight or ten years as they were goir.g on now, there would rot be much oau-e for grumbling. He agreed with what had been said as to haulage, that the tenant should be paid on a fifteen or twenty year"' scale, and as to drainage, the tenant should be paid five per cent. on the outlay, because, as a rule, from twenty to twenty-five yeartl would elapse before drains taquired renewal. Referring to the position of the landlord, the chairman remarked that as the law stood now he could not claim for dilapidations more than the tenant. He knew a case in which the landlord claimed 9250 and the tenant claimed L60, but the landlord could not recover more than the same sum. Mr Brodie, in reply, said he wished to emphasize the suggestion in the Act which provides for compensation to a tenant for any improvement done under the third schedule, that is for liming, boning, &c., although no notice had been given but in addition to those there were other improvements for which the tenant should be entitled to claim whether he gave notice or not. Something must be done to make that which was, pract cally, a dead letter of value to the farmer. There had been proposals made to change the tenure of land, but he thought there would be great difficulty attending any such change, but they ought to do the best they could to put the present relations of landlord and tenant on a good and "a broad basis. The Drawing then took place for tbe various articles for allotment, which were disposed in the following order: —Mr Rogers, Nantyci, cream separator Mr Harries, butter worker; Mr W Evans, Parkyberllan, chain harrow; Mr J G Morgan, ironmonger, wheelbarrow; Mr A Brrgstocke, Ferryside, wheelbarrow Mr N Thomas (Maesyprior), Mr John Bowen (Penffordlas), Mr H Da.it8 (Typicca), Mr Griffiths (Llwynpiod), Dr Lawrence (Waungron), and Mr Brodie (Llanelly), digging forks; Mr Columbus Jones (Pontcarreg). Mr D E Harries (Dryslwyn-fawr), Mr John Jones (Cwmburi), Mr Lewis Bisbop (Llandilo). Mr W L Thomas (Ffynon. las), and Mr D Watkins (CarmarthenI, thermometers; Mr H J Davies (Bremenda), Rev T R Walters, Mr Henry Williams (Tynycoed), Mr J Davies (Lletty- gofid), Mr ThomaiWilliams (Pontgarreg) and Mr W Thomas (Harp Inn), thrashing hooks.