Minutes of Evidence p.1401-1509 - Parliament of Victoria

R S. Grallam,
Esq.,J.P,,
· continued,
12th Mny 1883.
1498
50G10. If you add on to the cost of the cultivation of an acre 12s. for the rent of it, taking the
Yalue of your own farm, and putting 2s. 6tl. instead of 4s. Gtl. for the wear and tear or implements, it n1akes
up a total cost, according to the list you have given, of £3 lOs. per acre per annum ?-Yes.
50G11. And a return of 25 bushels per acre would give you £3 15s. in money, a profit of. 5s. an
acre?-Yes, an cl many a time we work at a loss instead of a profit.
506!2. Those then are exceptional seasons when yon lose the crop altogether ?-Yes.
50G 13. Every fal'mer of cOJn·se has to take a risk, but do you wish the Commission and the country
to believe that 5s. per acre profit is the usnal ::md normal rate of profit upon farming operations in this district?
-It varies, in some years that is all the farmers get.
50614. We have been trying to get an average year-everybody knows and admits that there are
exceptional years-there may be one year in which yon say yon woul(l get GO bushels to the ::tere-of
cOiu·se the calculation between 60 bushels and 26 makes all the additional of the 60 over the 25 clear profit,
assuming the expenses to be the same-of course some of the expenses increase and some do not, but there
may be another year in which the yield may be. only fifteen bushels, and that would be an exceptional year
in the opposite direction '1-Yes.
50615. Therefore, for the pnqrse of our investigation we asked you to name an average year?
-Yes.
50616. And I understood you to tell me, when I commenced the inquiry, that 35 bushels
per acre might be taken as the fair average yield of the district, and you afterwards reduced it to 25
bushels as the yieltl of yom own farm. Mr. Longmore's inquiries were all based upon 25
bnshels per acre :tH the yield, >tml mine upon 35-now which is the correct one to be taken in this
matter ?--Thirty-five; but there are two other matters you have not taken into consideration, that is pease
and potatoes ; tlmt Yaries quite differently from the oats. Pease will bring from 6d. to Is. more per
bushel.
50617. It woulcl take us far too lcmg to go into each individual item; we took oats as the first upon
the list from which we conlu make a fair estimate of the rest ?-Quite so.
50618. Are we to nlll1erstand that 25 bushels is the or,1iuary average yield per acre, or that 35 is?
-Thirty-five.
50619. I want you aml the gentlemen present to elearly understand the position we are in about
that malting in bond business. I am quite snre, from the contradictory nature of your replies, that you h;we
not thoroughly understood the position of the case. The position is this-after the maltsters have converted
Victorim1 barley into malt for the supply of all the Victorian brewers, they naturally look round to do a
business outside the colony ?-Yes.
600:20, After they ·have supplied the whole of the colony with your barley grown here, they look
for a business outside to keep their malt houses going, and they try to find a market in Sydney and
Adelaide, of course for your barley, in the first instance-it is yonr barley they are working with ; but
when they go to those markets they find that they are 1i1et there with malt made in New Zealand from New
Zealand barley, which can be put upon the Sydney and Adelaide markets cheaper than you can put your
barley upon the same markets. Consequently they are beaten out of tho1>e outside markets. It does not
affect you here in the lenst, nor the Victorian market, when (to enable them to compete with New Zealand
malt made from New Zealand bm·ley in Sydney and Adelaide') they ask that they may be allowed to operate
upon that same barley for those marker.s, not for your market, nor to affect you in the least. They ask
that they may be pet·mitted to bring that New Zettland barley here, convert it into malt in the time when
they are not occupied in converting your barley for om owu people, and send it away to compete with New
Zealand in Sydney and Adeluide. Now are yon under the impression that that would affect your business
as a grower of barley for the Victorian m!trket ?-No, so long as the Victorian barley is all consumed in
Victoria or elsewhere.
50621. Now let me ask you this-you say" so long as the whole of the Victorian barley is consumed
in Victoria or elsewhere" ?-Yes.
50622. Up to the present time the Victorian growers have not reacheLl that point that they have got a
surplus to send elsewhere, or it is a very small surplus. Supposing the Victorian maltsters have used up as
much of the Victorian barley as supplies all the Victorian brewers, and there is a surplus to send elsewhere,
they cannot send it elsewhere to other markets, for they are beaten by New Zealand barley-you wonkl not
get it sent there except at a lower price which will compete with the New Zealand price; because you have
a duty upon it which enables you to get a higher price in Victoria, that does not enable you to get' a higher
price abroad than other people take abroad, and your barley will not command in Sydney aml Adelaide the
same price as you get here ?-So long as it does not interfere with the Victorian barley I should not object to it.
50G23. So long as it does not affect your disposing of yonr barley to Victorian brewers at the rate
you get now ?-Yes.
50624. It is impossible for it to interfere with your price for the duty prevents that. If after
malting the foreign barley in bond that malt were to be sold in Victoria in competition with Victorian malt,
yon would luwe your prices reduced by the competition ?-Yes.
50625. But that could not possibly be put upon the Victorian market without paying dnty first.
Now under those cicenmstances have you any objection ?-No, no objection at all so long as the Victorian
barley is not interfered with.
50620. By Mr. L11clntyre.-Will you tell the Commission please, Vi' hat the 500 acres of land that
you first took up here cost you-was it taken up ?-Bought at auction.
50627. What did it cost per acre ?-Five pounds.
50628. By 111T. f.obb.-In regard to this barley, I do not think you understand the question right,
now-excuse me for saying SQ.; will you tell the Commission what is the price you have been getting for
barley, say the last three or four years-what was it last year ?-Four shilliui!s.
50629. \'Vhat was it the vear before ?-It was uot. so much the vear before.
50G30. Would not it in yonr opinion be f~tr better to preveJtt ·this malting in bond so that when
barley is a low price hero it should 110t encoumge other countries to sE>nd it here, so that our barley might
be consumed for the purpose of sending to other colonies ?-Yes, but if we have not a surplus.
V
50031. But we have a surplus sometimeti ?-But I understood the Chairman to say that it was not to
interfere.