VARIATIONS IN PASTURES 139 



adjoining fatting field showed none, though on analysis of the 

 herbage there proved to be almost exactly the same percentage 

 of the plant in both fields. The characteristic leafiness in the 

 one case and stemminess in the other was the chief difference 

 between the good and bad fields and was quite independent 

 of the floral type. 



Three other differences more or less marked were noted — 

 in any pair of fields the good one had more clover in the 

 herbage, showed less tendency to burn in summer and probably 

 gave a slightly higher yield of grass. 



The soils next claim attention. Speaking generally, the 

 surface soil in Romney Marsh is of a heavy, close-grained 

 type (though in a few places a lighter soil occurs) and is made up 

 largely of clay derived from the heavy soils of the Lower Wealden 

 strata which has been deposited as silt. The soils differed a 

 good deal at the three selected centres in the Marsh at which 

 the investigations were carried out but as these differences 

 seemed to have no bearing on the present problem they need 

 not detain us. At centre No. 1 (Orgarswick) the soils proved 

 to be very uniform in mechanical composition to a considerable 

 depth and the fatting and non-fatting fields showed no signifi- 

 cant differences in this respect. The soil was heavy, contain- 

 ing no coarse sand and about 25 per cent, of the clay fraction; 

 below 7 ft. peat saturated with water was reached. Mechanical 

 analyses of the soils failed to reveal any reason for the 

 superiority of one field over another, poor and rich land 

 being almost identical in composition. 



The water content of the soils of both fields at different 

 dates was always practically the same, the fatting field being 

 perhaps a little more moist in early summer and somewhat 

 dryer later on. 



There was a small difference in the level of the water, this 

 being always higher in the fatting field. On the whole the soil 

 of the fatting field tended to keep a little dryer and to get rid 

 of its surface water rather more quickly and thoroughly. This 

 may probably be taken as indicating some difference in texture 

 not revealed by mechanical analysis. Differences in soil tem- 

 perature were very slight but regular, the soil of the good 

 field proving to be a little warmer than the other. 



Chemical analyses of the two soils gave very similar results ; 

 but a slightly higher percentage of nitrogen and phosphoric 



