Symud i'r prif gynnwys
Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

16 erthygl ar y dudalen hon



ABERGA¥£NNY fARr1ERS. ABMSA?M?Y FARMERS, j ISt5C235iiy ¡or Killing c? Foxes. I j PROTEST AGAINST STORE CATTLE RESTRICTIONS. A M:?? ci t? members of the A?er?ve?y brr- 'i?theFar?? Cnion was beldam the ,tM<?! I?f-1 on T.i?Jav. Mr John Rogers (chairman) presiding, .upp<?te<l by Mr. David fauiesfv? -<-hai'-??i). Mr Rickards (Live StocJ.1 Sub-co,nL-f:-r Monmouthshire), and prominent local ?rin?is. Th* balance sLeet of the working of the braudi r-ho wed that the income for the year was <6v -nsei IS IOS. 2d., and a b-,Ip-iiec of /50 4- ir.. was handed over to the county branch. The Prevalence cf Faxes. I TL<r Secretary (Mr. Philip Williams) read a letter fro u Mr. Reg. Herbert, of Clytha, with regard to die killing of foxes, stating that he was willing to assist in the matter with the authority of the Monmouthshire Hunt, provided that m- formation as to Wii^rcal)ou.LS of the foxes was suppi-ed. The ?lairman said aiat v;lLhln LU 1,?s" nine days he was informed that there were three litters of foxes at Penpergwm, and one farmer had lost rive lambs. If anyone knew of a litter of cubs they ought to inform Sir Arthur Herbert or Mr. Reginald Herbert. A member said that the best thing was for farmers to kill the fox-s theiuselves. The Chairman said that they had not got time. Father Exton said a gentleman told him that foxes did not kill lambs, and he had to admit that he had never seen one do so and had not heard of anvbodv who had. Mr. John" Frichard said that some years ago, as secretary- of the Poultry Fund of the Hunt, he had a claim at Trilev, where a number of lambs were killed and the fox was caught close by the second mght. He did not think that every fox atnckai lambs.. but some did. The Chairman said that some years ago Air. R-ulcliSe, of D any grain, saw a fox carrying a lamb across the roaG. at Crowiield. Mr. Evan Griffiths said that every farmer should do what he could to kill the foxes, and if he could not cope with them he should report the matter to Mr. Reginald Herbert. Eventually the following resolution was carried, on the proposition of Sir. Evan Griffiths, seconded by Mr. John Prichal-d Tb-at this meeting thanks Mr. Reginald Herbert for his letter of the 28th re the killing of foxes, but would state that there is still a feeling that farmers have onlv a sort of half permission to destroy litters, and a formal recognition from the M.F.H. would much encourage farmers in this work of removing toxes. In urging the need of this work it was stated that three litters of foxes are at present known to exist near Pen- p-_rgwm otu.:ioa." Tfca Killing of Sows. hlie Secretary read a letter from Mr. John Frichard suggesting the passing of a resolution that until the county was well stocked with pigs no sow should be killed unless she had had a litter of pigs. It seemed wicked, added Mr. Prichard. that millions of dogs should be allowed to live on some of the best focd when there was a shortage of pigs and poultry. Mr. Frichard "said that the Chamber of Agri- culture itad considered the matter and had passed a resolution that no sow should be killed until it had had two litters of pigs, but he thought it would be detrimental to keep a sow for the p;:mose of breeding twice. A sow might have a litter and be killed in time for salting next spring. sP.I,iúr, Gil?t-? s:id that if the sow had one litter he did not think it would be detri- mental to the bacon at ail. It was possible that they might have too many pigs, but at present they wanted to fill up the gaps. He had much pleasure in seconding the resolution. The Chairman said he was under th ira- pression that there was an order at the present time that butchers could not buy sows to kill as pork. There was great credit due to Mr. Frichard for bringing this mutter forward in a practical ma?er. c- s su(,-ested by 1 r. A resolution on the Lies suggested by Mr. Prichard was carried, and it was decided to send it to the secretary of the National Farmers Union and to the Food Controller. Ston CaWe Order LocaS Farmers' CJaims far Csnvpensaiivfl. A. long discussion took place with regaru to the recent order prohibiting the removal of store cattle out of that area. Mr. Evan Pritchard (Nancyderi) said that he thought it was very unjust that their store cattle should have been controlled in the way they were controlled, He had stock on March 4th and they were graded or marked by people who he supposed were authorised, and the result was that he sustained a great loss on the sale of his cattle. He put them under the auction and lost £ 3 153. per head en what men outside the county would have paid him for them if they had been allowed to buy them. He had to sell them at the price he gave for them, and when the order was withdrawn the price jumped up considerably. He was putting in a claim against those who were responsible for ^41 ios., which was his loss compared with the amount he would have had normally. Farmers could not succeed like people said they did if they lost money like that He was sure that farmers were patriotic and had ploughed more than they were asked to do, but when they got things tnrown at them  n t', e y coul d keep on like this he did not think they could keep on farming much longer. He thought that it was time that farmers looked after their own interests. Mr. Stephens said that he took his cattle to Raglan on the 4th of March. He did not know anything about the order, and lie lost between £ 4 and £ 5 per head on 10 cattle. He was asked to plough up moref land, and as he had no one to do the work he had no option but to sell his cattle. A fortnight or three weeks afterwards the price jumped up by leaps and bounds. The Chairman I bought two cattle that day, and I thought they were very dear. Mr. Warren Davies said the feeling was that the order was given under a misapprehension and that it was a mistake. If that w s so he thought the authorities were to blame, and those who suffered should be compensated. Mr. Evan Griffiths said that the grievance was brought up at the Chamber of Agriculture by Mr. J olm Prichard, some time ago, and he strongly supported what Mr. Prichard suggested. It was not quite right to say that cattle were not allowed to be moved out of the county. The country was divided up into certain areas, and there were several counties grouped to- gether. He did not think that Herefordshire was included in that particular area. Therefore when the sale was held at Raglan the principal buyers, who were Herefordshire men, were unable to buv, because they w- re not allowed to move the cattle after they w,re bought. The consequence was that farmers were losing £ 5 or £6 or more per head It was wry hard on the farmers who lost on their cattle. Mr. Prichard said that at the last March fair at Abergavenny there were only two trucks of catile sent to Hereford, against 28 the previous year. The Great Grievance. Mr. Evan Griffiths said their great grievance was that it was a national loss that these re- strictions were put on, seeing that their county was a rearing county. They had the cattle, but had not got the pasture to tinish them off whereas other counties had the pasture to finish them off but were unable to procure the cattle. Mr. Homfray Davies (county secretary) said that he went to Raglan on Easter Monday and took particular note of the sale, and he noticed that the highest prices were paid by Newport farmers for the cattle to go on th moors. Mr. Morgan Griffiths said that when this order was put into force everybody thought that it was to be a permanent thing, and no one thought it would be withdrawn so soon. Men like Mr. Pritchard and Mr. Stephens had ploughed more than they had been asked to do, and they thought that if this order was to be a permanent one the best thing they could do was. to take the reduced price and sell. He (Mr. Griffiths) went very carefully through the fair at Abergavenny, because he had 15 or 16 cattle which he felt he was bound to dispose of, as he was ploughing up 65 acres. He was very' much disappointed to find that the cattle were down at least £ j or £ 8 per head. The gentlemen ofi the moors who wanted to buy cattle naturally thought that this was only the beginning of the reduction, or they would have had a very much better sale. The cattle from Monmouthshire were movld much further than Herefordshire. They were taken to the rich grazing lands of Northamptonshire, and it was the people from that county who were able to give a big price for them. After they had been feeding cattle all the winter they found these restrictions put on without any warning. That was one fault he found with Government restrictions. Fanners farmed for three or four years hence, but these restrictions were put on et a month's or a week's notice, and it was very • detrimental to the farmer, because he was farm- ing for the future. The aggravating part of it was that the order was put on for a week or 10 days during which prices were falling, and after it was taken off prices rose £ 6 or £ y per head. When lie found that the prices were so low, he decided to run the cattle on for a few more weeks with some old hay and to keep them for beef. To his surprise he had no difficulty in selling them at £ 4 or £ 5 more per head than he had sold his cattle before for beef. The system of moving the cattle to the richer grazing land to finish them off had taken hundreds of years to develop, and it should not be suddenly interfered with by such restrictions as that. Sub-Commissioner's Reply to Criticisms. I Mr. Rickards, in reply, said that he had heard with much sympathy what had been said. With regard to ploughing, the cultivation orders were made by the Board of Agriculture, and the orders with regard to cattle were made by the Food Control Department. They were two different departments, and they could not expect them to always work in harmony. A good many men, mostly dealers, had come to him and said that there was no order with regard to stores going out of the area. It was not down in black and white, but at a committee meeting of that area held at Carmarthen about 10 days before the Raglan market it was decided that under the order all jurisdiction in the mode of the carrying on of the production of meat in the area should be vested in a committee of farmers for that area, and that there should also be sub-com- mittees for each county. In consequence of that he was instructed, as Sub-Commissioner for the County, to call a meeting of the County Advisory Committee, consisting "of the farmers of the various districts. At that meeting it was decided that any likely stores should be stopped from going out of that area into another area, in view of the various instructions they had had from headquarters that the industrial population of that area, consisting of the colliery valleys, were to a great extent dependant on home pro- duction, and that the CouAdvisory Com- mittee should, if they Lhoughf^J^stop any likely stores—that was cattle which would be fit for killing within the next few months—going out of the area into another area. In consequence of that the County Advisory Committee ruled I that at the first Raglan market these stores should be kept in the area, which consisted of eight counties. That was done to the loss of a lot of farmers who sent their cattle in. Some had complained that the order had been can- celled. He thought that was not worse for them, but better. They had attained their object in moving the powers that be." They were short of meat in that county, and they con- sidered that they could not obtain it unless they could stop cattle going out of the area. They attained their object in this way. In conse- quence of the complaints and representations which were made, the Ministry of Food decided I that the Devon, Cornwall and Somerset area should supply them with a certain quantity of meat to make up for what they were sending to other counties, if they would release the stores and let them go on to other lands. They were offered 642 tons of meat from the area men- tioned, and in consequence of that the order was I taken off. The Ministry of Food had to consider the whole population of England and the large body of consumers. No doubt various in- dividuals who sold at Raglan and Abergavenny suffered loss, and if anyone had any claim he supposed the only thing for them to do was to I send it in to him and he would send it forward, but he did not think that there would be any res-,ilt gained by no doing. insane Orders." Mr. Morgan Griffiths said that the Farmers' Union ought to take the matter up. Here were two cases of individuals who had suffered loss, and he thought it was high time that a stop should be put to these orders that were issued so quickly and then suddenly withdrawn. All orders should be very carefully considered by men of experience before they were issued. This was not the only order that had been withdrawn. They could not expect production to be high if these orders were issued and then withdrawn. The Chairman said that at Newport Lord R'.Ilondcl-- told them of the prices fixed for beef and warned them not to pay too much for stores, but since then the prices of stores had run wild, and there was no hope of feeding them profitably j at the prices. Mr. Pritchard's grievance was j that he did not have the full value, and that Mr. Morgan Griffiths had more than the full value. (Laughter). Mr. Morgan Griffiths said that it was better to send these cattle to Northamptonshire, even if they brought them back to the industrial districts. The areas had been grouped without practical knowledge. The rearing counties had been grouped together a?d the fattening counties | together. Mr. Homfray Davies pointed om: that every appointment in connection with the Live Stock Commission had been made by the Farmers' Union. Farmers formed the majority of the County Advisory Committee, and every cattle grader and sheep valuer in the county had been appointed by the Farmers' Union. If they were not satisfied with their graders and valuers it was for them to say so. A market committee had also been set up in various districts. At the meeting of the County Advisory Committee, cf which 35 of the 40 members were members of the Farmers' Union, a resolution was passed that it would not be advisable to allow fresh stores at Raglan on the following market to leave the area. There were at that meeting at least six representatives from that district, and whether right or wrong they passed that resolu- tion, and there were men in that room who were present on that occasion. Mr. Warren Davies said that he was present at the meeting at Newport, but the members present were under the misapprehension that this was a fixed order and that the committee had to obey it. Nevertheless, a strong protest against the order was made at the meeting, but the meeting seemed to be ruled by the auc- tioneers. They thought that they had no option but to pass it. Had they any doubt that it would not be carried into execution or would be withdrawn at short notice he did not think for one moment that the resolution would have been carried. Their land was not a playground where politicians could perform all sorts of gymnastics to the detriment of the nation. Farmers did not mind losing money in the national interest, but people did not like to lose money through insane orders and regulations which were issued from time to time. Fie said, advisedly, that they were insane regulations, or else they would not be repealed so often. They had had the cattle order, the lamb order, and then this silly order. It was nothing but silly orders, and he often pitied the gentlemen who had to carry them into effect. Mr. Evan Griffiths proposed that Mr. Warren Davies bring the matter before the County Ad- visory Committee at their next meeting, and that they be asked to do the best they could for those who had suffered. Mr. David James seconded, and the motion was carried. T e Price of Lambs. The question of the price of lambs was raised and Mr. Homfray Davies said that the Mon- mouth branch had passed a resolution urging the authorities to increase the price to iod. per Ib. live weight. On the proposition of Mr. Joseph Griffiths, seconded by Mr. Williams, it was decided to support the resolution. Mr. Evan Griffiths said that when they brought their lambs up to the weight fixed by the authorities they should be paid a fair recom- pense for their produce. It was unfair to the producer and unfair to the consumer that the price of lambs and tups should be the same. There were wealthy colliers in the district who were willing to pay for something good, and there were people in a poor position wi o I -f-:d not the money to pay for luxuries. Und r the present system the rich and the poor were, charged alike. A member asked how the resolution would affect the present system of selling by dead weight. Mr. Montague Harris said that a farmer must declare when he came into the market whether [ he wanted his stuff sold by live weight or dead weight. As far as the grading was concerned, everybody had respect for Mr. Hall's judgment. Farmers' "Screenings." Mr. Joseph Griffiths said that two members of the Farmers' Union had been convicted of un- lawfully using screenings or tailings of wheat and barley for feeding cattle and poultry. He thought they should take this matter up c i d find out what their position really W: s with regard to screenings of corn. The Bench, the solicitors, and ev ryone agreed that it was; screenings, with the exception of an outside r, who was the only one who gave his opinion th t there was a certain amount of good corn in it. The law said distinctly that farmers w, re en- j titled to use screenings and tailings, and they j ought to know what their position was. He did j not think there was a member in that rorm who could not be found guilty under similar cir- cumstances. Other members agreed, but no resolution was passed.



Abergavenny Stock Market.…


Llagattock Lingoed Presentations.…


Ewias Harold -Market!


jD JtLlf.

I - 1 i Ladies' €hoir. j

! Crickhowell Board of Guardians.


OrsskhcwsU fcsi District Council.