THE|FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



1G7 



decided objectioa to using; them at least ofteiicr thiu once a 

 day, iu order to have the atomach clear aa possible of the oats ; 

 my aysteui being, to give them the last feed itj the afternoou, 

 aad theu no turnips till next moruiiig. This I proved obviated 

 the danger very much ; still not altogether. It affords me 

 gteat pleasure, however, to state, with confidence, that there is 

 not the slightest fear of this hoveu from feeding with the wheat 

 and rye, or either alone. Tnere is a furtlier ricoraiue'idatiou 

 of the wheat I may meutiou— tlie cattle seeru to prefer it to 

 anything else — I mean any other grains ; and I feel quite 

 satislied your correspondent is right when adverting to the 

 improved condition of the wheat for feeding by being sprouted. 

 In conclusion, it must be patent to every one who has tried it 

 that the saving iu turnips by using oilcake at a cost of 4d. to 

 5d. a feed is trifling, while in issuing the grain it is immense. 

 By using one feed of grain, you not only get the value of the 

 nutriment it contains, but by retaining the turnips longer 

 undor the absorbent action of the lutestnies you extract more 

 nutiimcnt from them than when using them alone. I have 

 never tried the grain for young cittle, but am satisfied it would 

 suit well, and be preferable, because less expensive than the 

 oilcake you often wisely recommend, instead of full allowance 

 of turnips to young rattle. In conclusion, I will add my own 

 experieuce on hoveu. To any who may try oats or oatmealj 



and be damaged by the swelling, give two or more glass- 

 fuls of turpentine, in a half-bottle of linseed oil, taking care to 

 shike the whole well together. This, if given early, is qiiite a 

 specific. Tnis dose is suHicieiit for an animal of 50 imperial 

 stones. This subject I have once and again, for two years past, 

 desirid, throujjh your paper, to lay before my agricultural 

 brethren ; perhaps I had not yet given ray experieuce but lor 

 the article of your correspondent " S." of the 9th instant. 

 Whatever value may attach to my experience, iu making 

 daainged grain of more value to many who unfortunately pos- 

 sess it, I shall feel very thankful for that. I by no means 

 restrict its use to damaged grain, but to any, the soundest 

 of it, ranging within those limits I have spcciaed, aud beef 

 worth 7s. per imperial stone. My remarks, I feel, have 

 Unglhened out ou my hand far beyond anticipation. I only 

 fear they are too leugtliy for insertion. 



William Johnston. 

 Mill of Kincardi7ie,10lh Dec, 1857. 



P.S— From what I have said above, those conversant willi 

 fattening cattle will not need to be told that beef thus fed not 

 only is esteemed highly by butchers, but they will actually, if 

 they know, buy them higher, the internal fat being much more 

 plenty. — North British Arjricidticrist. 



SURVEYORS OF HIGHWAYS, AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES. 



Our readers are probably well nirrh tired of what is called 

 tlie " HnuiirlUon Astley Surveyor's Case," a further develop- 

 ment of wliich is recorded in our columns this week ; but 

 we must ask them to bear with us yet again for a little 

 while. The questions involved in the case are of the 

 highest importance ; and as the subject will have next 

 session to be discussed in parliament, the case before us in 

 all probability serving for a text, we are desirous that the 

 public sliould be fully informed upon its merits. 



By the Act 5 and 6 Wm. IV., cap. 50, the inhabitants 

 of all rural parishes are oblijjed to elect from among them- 

 selves every year, a person to till the office of surveyor of 

 highways. The qualification for the office is the possession 

 of freehold property to the amount of £10, a personal estate 

 of £100, or the occupation of premises worth £20 per year. 

 Every person not excused by law from serving the office of 

 overseer of the poor, is liable to be elected parish surveyor. 

 Being elected, if he refuse to act, he incurs a penalty of 

 £20. The person elected will generally be more or less in- 

 competent for the office, because the making and repairing 

 of roads is no more to be understood without previous study 

 and experience than any other business , but it is devolved 

 indiscriminately on the village blacksmith, the carpenter, 

 some one of the half-dozen farmers in the parish, or mine 

 host of the Black Lion, all and sundry of whom are by the 

 law deemed equally capable. The newly-elected surveyor 

 has his own ideas of road reform, and at once proceeds to 

 carry them into effect. Here, however, he incurs a serious 

 responsibility. The same act of patliament which obliges 

 him to accept an office for which he is utterly unqualified, 

 says that if he neglect his duties, or fail to fulfil them pro- 

 perly, he shall be liable to a fine of £5. If, in his anxiety 

 to avoid the consequences of neglect, he should overstep 

 the just medium, and, instead of doing too little, do a little 

 too much, then any ratepayer who may happen to think 

 his rate a penny in the pound too high, or who may have a 

 jjersonal enmity to the surveyor, may object to his accounts 

 when they are brought, as they must be, to be verified by 

 the magistrates. These, in the exercise of their discretion, 

 may think too much has been done, or that what has been 

 done has been paid for too dearly, and they can at once 

 disallow such items as they consider objectionable ; the 

 effect of which disallowance is, that the man who un- 

 willingly took an office for the good of the public, for which 

 he felt himself incompetent, and then tried to do his best 

 in it, is exactly the sum of those items out of pocket, and 

 from such decision, upon whatever insufficient grounds it 

 may be arrived at, however (in some cases it may be dic- 

 tated by personal ill-will), there lies no appeal to any court 

 in the universe. 



Such being the state of the law in March, 185G, Mr. 

 Thomas Pougher Greenway was elected under its pro- 

 visions to fill the office of surveyor of highways for the 

 parish of Broughton Ast'.ey. He seems to have been an 

 energetic gentleman, and to have commenced a vigorous 

 effort for the improvement of the roads which had been 

 placed under his charge. Work cannot be done for 

 nothing; and it naturally followed that a pretty heavy bill 

 was incurred. Mr. Greenway's year of office terminated 

 last March, and either himself or his friends were anxious 

 he should be re-elected ; but, whether from a feeling that 

 he had led the parish into too large an expenditure, or from 

 some other cause, be was opposed, and, as the result of the 

 poll, another gentleman named Johnson was elected, by a 

 majority of 3C. On the 9th of April Mr. Greenway 

 attended before the Lutterworth bench, represented on that 

 occasion by the Rev. J. P. Marriott and D. R. Jones, Esq., 

 to verify his accounts. They were objected to, and the 

 furtlier consideration of the subject was adjourned till the 

 20th. On that day the case was gone into : a number of 

 witnesses were examined to prove that the work done 

 under Mr. Greenway's directions was unnecessary, or badly 

 executed; evidence to the contrary was also called, and the 

 consideration of the case again adjourned till the 1st of 

 May, in order that in the mean time the magistrates might 

 see the work and judge fir themselves. Accordingly, on 

 the 2(Jth, they went over to Broughton Astley, and spent 

 two hours in inspecting the work. On the 1st of May the 

 question was again gone into at Lutterworth, when 

 evidence was given at great length in favour of Mr. Green- 

 way. The magistrates again adjourned the case without 

 coming to a decision. On the 14th they gave judgment, 

 announcing that they had come to the determination of 

 disallowing certain items in Mr. Greenway's accounts, to 

 the aggregate amount of £80 15s. 2d.' 



The accounts were then passed, with the following 

 differences in the items of expenditure : — 



,, . ,. Amount of accounts Amoimts 



Description. ^^ originally presented. allowed. 



Manual labour £10G 5 11 .... £78 4 11 



Materials 85 7 .... 77 19 7 



Tradesmen's bills 75 C 39 4 4 



Team labour 52 7 IU, .... 48 7 11.] 



Other payments 23 5 C .... 18 G 



Amount disallowed . 



£342 12 4h £342 12 4.', 



Mr. Greenway was naturally taken'somewhat aback, and 



