THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



137 



anj'thiug else, if he has time to tack and reef as the wind 

 shifts to another quarter. 



The looli-out a-head would seem to threaten some 

 such a change in the weather. Agricultural Money- 

 Making lias a rather different reading to that it had 

 some little time since. Wo are not now to depend so 

 much on a fine sample and so many quarters. The re- 

 cipe is more one of heef, mutton, and wool — getting 

 the best stock, and doing the best by it — returning at- 

 tention to grass-lauds and grass-seeds — in fact, going 

 with the times, and supplying what promises to pay 

 best. There would, mortovcr, appear to be no other 

 countiy able to oppose us in this branch of trade. 

 Foreign beasts will not do, or, under almost any cir- 

 cumstances, no one can turn an animal to so generally 

 good account as the English grazier. He has, indeed, 

 a certain pride in the art. Others, with large tracts of 

 country, may vie with us in growing bread-corn, bnt 

 " beef, mutton, and wool" would seem to be the chorus 

 of a song that — as with "God save the Queen" and 

 " Rule Britannia" — no one can take up lilic a British 

 yeoman. 



HALESWORTII FARMERS' CLUB. 



The following is the lecture delivered by Mr. Robert 

 Bond, of Ipswich, at the meeting of the Halesworth Farmers' 

 Club, on the 7th December, 1859 : — 



At discussions or intended discussions at meetings of this 

 character, it is a matter of common coiajjlaint that the intro- 

 ducer too often takes so wide a field, and makes bo clear a 

 sweep of the entire subject, at the same time entering so 

 fully into detail, that nothing of impcrtance is left for the 

 members generally to discuss. Now, sentlemen, this is an 

 error into which I can assure you I shall not fall upon the 

 present occasion. It is even a matter of regret with myself 

 that ray time h»s been so fully occupied thiit I have been 

 unable to devote to so importa!:t a suhjpct that tliought and 

 consideration whi-h it deserves and requires. Fortunately 

 it is a subject upon which every gentleman present has had 

 some experieuce, or upon which he has made some observa- 

 tiou, and I trust our iudividual opinions combined will 

 form a correct basis upon which to construct first principles. 

 It muy have been the opinion of some gentlemen preseiit 

 that it was ray intei:'.io:i, in my presumption, to endeavour 

 to teach mj- seniors in age and my superiors in experience 

 the intricate art of agricultural money-making; believe me 

 I never entertained such a tho^ight. I have no panacea to 

 advance for the cure of the present pecuniary agrieultnral 

 atrophy, nor have I any high road to wealth to offer for the 

 enlightenment of the most unsuccess'ul. 



I believe such is the emulation and stimulant to advance- 

 ment in life, that, speaking in the main, each man will exert 

 every energy, strain every nerve, engross every thought, 

 plot, contrive, and plan, as far as lies within his kuowledge, 

 means, and ability, to attain f-at one object— success in 

 life ; that success is best secured by such individual ciTort, 

 varyii g according to varying circumstances, snd the infinite 

 variety of agricultural pcsitions, rather than by any general 

 law or universal princi|'le. I tbiuk thia ii a subject likely 

 to lead to misconception, at first sight, as to the probable 

 method of its treatment. It in leality embraces the entire 

 amount of profit realized frora the soil without ftny division 

 of that amount into the various shares realized by the 

 respective partners concerned, viz , the landlord, tenant, and 

 Libcurer. I think it may not be undesirable to consider the 

 division of that sum total of profit into the relative shares, 

 alter treating upon the entire subject generally. 



Agricultural money-makino;, then, embraces the entire 

 pecuniary amount of profit realized from the soil, whether 

 as rent to the landlord, or as profit to the tenant. Let it be 

 remembfred that rent, properly considered, is that share of 

 the amount of profit derived from the soil which, after the 

 exercise of the utmost skill and the necessary capital on the 

 part of the tenant, he can, in the average of years, aiford to 

 pay to the landlord as per-centnge for the use of the land. 



first deducting therefrom that just amount as remuneration 

 for time and skill which is the tenant's due. Thus rent is, 

 to a certain extent, a portion of the profits, and although 

 from the want of necessary information it is impossible to 

 draw up an agricultural balance sheet of the expenses and 

 returns of the entire agricultural kingdom, and arrive at the 

 balance of profits, yet this subject opens up a wide field for 

 comparison and inference, both continentally and relatively 

 as to our own agricultural progress. What, then, is 

 Enoland's position comparatively with continental nations.* 

 I am so imbued with the opinion that complsint and fault- 

 finding nationally are the sure incentives to improvement 

 .and increased exertion, that I generally consider it desirable 

 to endeavour to discover our weak points (and they are 

 many), and to condemn them in detail ; but when I look at 

 our position as a whole, I cannot repress my national pride 

 at our agricultural prowess, for a combinaticn ol British 

 skill, capital, and industry has made England not simply 

 the garden of the world comparatively, and the admiration 

 of the civilized world, but it has made it that favoured spot 

 which yields the largest monetary agricultural return, area 

 for area, of any land in the known globe. 'Tis not that its 

 soil surpasses, in natural fertiHty, the virgin soils of other 

 lands -, 'tis not that its climate is more genial ; but whdst 

 Russia and Poland are, comparatively, uncultivated; Italy 

 and Spain, with their agriculture receding, instead of 

 advanciui^; France, as computed, producing but 14 bushels 

 of wheat to the acre, America 15, Holland "23, Great 

 Britain produces even 2u and upwards. Yet it is not in 

 her wheat produce alone that England so far excels any 

 other country ; it is in the meat produce of her agriculture 

 that she more especially transcends— a produce which has 

 been cultured not to perfection, but to a degree which to 

 other nati. n has y.et sspired to approach to as a rival, and to 

 a standard which i^o oth;-r people can pretend to attain to 

 for mauy a long year. What are the sheep of other lands 

 when compared ? ar.d even what their beast ? Those reared 

 by English hands a'-e noted for their size and symmetry, 

 for tlieir aptitude to fatten, and their early maturity. Take 

 the Smithfie^d Christmas Show of the present hour. I yes- 

 terday saw different specimens there of bf asts, not three > ears 

 old, Weighing upwards of 100 stone of I4lhs., and of sheep, 

 but 20 months old, weighing from 10 to 12 stone of UUjs. 

 This is an indication of what vve have, attained to, whilst 

 the beast and sheep of other countries, speaking generally, 

 are miserably deficient in the quality of their meat, and 

 lacking almost every attribute which contributes to that 

 desirable end— remunerative return for produce consumed. 

 Every land combined could not produce such shows of cat- 

 tle as England now annually exhibits, whilst the acreage 

 average meat produce of England far exceeds the meat pro- 

 duction of even the most favoured spots, and spots, loo, far 

 surpassing England in the natural advantages ot soil and 

 climate. 



It is computed that France is not so advanced in her animal 

 productions as Great Britain in 1700— mere than a century 

 and a half since ; and we believe England produces in value 

 millions of pounds sterling more meat than any other country, 

 or portion of a country, taking area for area. 



France, with an area exceeding England by more than one- 

 third, produces a gross annual value of sixty-four million 

 pounds sterling, whilst the annual meat produce of Great 

 Britain is computed at no less than eighty millions of pounds 

 sterling. Thus, with 35 per cent, less acreage, Great Britain 

 surpasses France even 20 per cent, iu the annual value of her 

 animal productions. 



France keeps but one sheep to 4J seres, one beast to 13 

 acres, aud Great Britain one sheep to 2^ acres, and one beast 

 to 9^ acres ; and the British beast and sheep, it must be re- 

 membered, double in weight those of France, to say nothing 

 ot the great superiority in the quality of their meat. 



It was the opinion of the late Sir Robert Peel that upon 

 removing the import duty from live-slock, the Ran animals of 

 other countries would be freely purchastd and readily fattened 

 in this country ; but those who have had any experience in 

 grazing foreign animals, whether beast or sheep, are v.'ell aware 

 that neither early maturity nor aptitude to fatten were fea- 

 tures in the undertaking, and the transaction probably proved 

 the reverse of agricultural money-making. I have said much 

 in praise of the agriculture of England, and with all her agri- 



