\/*(9 Re maris hy the ConduBor^ Nov* 



rus, and are of opinion, that few people are better qualified to 

 conduct fuch trials than himfelf. Local circumftances, with him, 

 are favourable to fuch comparative inveftigations, and we are fa- 

 tisfied with his accuracy. Bcfides, he fliould remember, that the 

 enus probandi lies upon his flioulders, and not upon the gentle- 

 men v/ho liave defended the New-Leiccfler, or improved breed of 

 flieep. 



If Epicurus^s friend, who has made a comparative trial of oxen 

 and horfes in fairm labour, will favour the public with the refult 

 of his exporiments, through the channel of our Magazine, we 

 pro n life, that he fhall pafs the ordeal without a touch from our 

 fword, though we will not engai^e for our correfpondents. Why 

 need the gentleman be afraid ? If the comparative trial is accu- 

 rate ; if it is fairly detailed ; and if his conclufions are juilly 

 drawn, he may fafely come forv/ard •, and we may add, that if 

 he annexes his name, the communication cannot fail to have weighs 

 with an impartial public. N. 



TO THE CONDUCTOR OF THE FARMER S MAGAZINE, 



An Anfwer to Ohfervations on Tithes, No. XIIL p. 6 1 — 76. 



Sir, 



In your 1 3th Number, A Friend to Improvements obferves, that 

 ♦ you did right in giving a place ' to a paper of mine on tithes, 

 in the preceding one, * as it fcrved to difplay the weaknefs of 

 the caufe. ' I thank you for that indulgence, and venture to 

 prefume on a repetition of the favour, even though your com- 

 pliance (hould aiford him additional matter for expofmg the weak- 

 nefs of my arguments. You happened, however, to give my 

 obfervations an improper title. Liitead of elef ending tithes, I al- 

 lowed the exaction of them to be unfavourable to improvements 

 in agriculture, to be often ve^catious and oppreffive to occupiers 

 of land, and attended with odium, trouble, and lofs, to the ex- 

 aftors. Thus far the gentleman and I agree \ and, confequent- 

 ly, we muft agree concerning the propriety of getting rid of 

 them in a fair and equitable Vv^ay, if fuch a way can be found. 



Two points, chiefly, are at ilTue between us — the nature of 

 the right by which tithes are held, and the extent of the evil 

 arifmg from them. To thefc two, all other fubje^ls of differ- 

 ence in our opinion are reducible. 



He feems to confider tithes, not as a real eftate, but as a tax 

 upon an eftate, which, like all other taxes, may be commuted at 

 the pleafure of the Legiflature, when the public good requires it, 



witK 



