the fwing-plongit is; Itfe being liable to fee thrdWrt 

 OutroFitsr work by fonte large flint or pebbfe, .6r by 

 iflip of the ploughrhan^s foot, wftorkamng hrs 

 <^eigKt-drt the handled, Vaifes the ihare out of* 

 tlie ground 5 but this dtfcd is foon rernedied by. 

 drawing back the plough to where it Rrft began to 

 lofe its depth, and re-entering the furrow on its 

 former level. 



On the other hahd, is not this defc(5l more than 

 compenfated by the lightnefs of the draught, the 

 fimplicity of the tackle, the immediate depth of 

 furrow, its being well turned over, clean, fquare and 

 deep, and its equality to the extremity of the ridge ? 

 'W hen • I mention a deep furrow, I mean one of 

 feven or eight inches in a flrong foil, which I have 

 never yet fcen done by any of our wheel-ploughs. 



Froni whence the ridiculous prediledlion in favour 

 of thefe ploughs fhould arifc, I am at a lofs to de- 

 termine, unlefs it be, as before obferved, from 

 cuftom, or fafliion, or prejudice, or fome fuch rea- 

 fon as frivolous ^nd unfatisfaftory. I, who have 

 tried both, and have given to each a moft impar- 

 tial obfervation, mud fairly decide in favour of thd 

 fwing, except in very particular cafes, fuch as 

 breaking up an old ley or very ftrong foil, rendered 

 hard by a long continuance of drought, or for ftir- 



Vol. V. F t ring 



