THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



507 



AGRICULTURAL STATI STI CS.-MR. CAIRO'S BILL. 



Every one of us has his "hobby." We are all more 

 01" less identified with some particular project. One 

 man goes madon the currency. Another is smitten with 

 the charter. Y:'ith a third tlio panacea is education, 

 and witli a fourth universal snffrage. Here is one 

 lioarse upon church reform, while the sole reliance of 

 his neighbour is still in chui-ch and state. Even in so 

 sober straightforward a business as agriculture — as we 

 have had to show often ere now — it is the same. As a 

 rule there is no good farming without — deep draining — 

 tenant-right — long leases — improved machinery — short- 

 Lorn cattle — liquid manure — or something equally in- 

 dispensable. There is not one of these but with which 

 we might readily associate its especial champion — 

 gentlemen who have made themselves famous by a 

 cuckoo ci'y that has been enticing enough to bring 

 others to think and act with them. 



We gather from the proceedings of the Loughborough 

 Agricultural Meeting that " Mr. Caird, who has now 

 ii;ot into Parliament, is determined to ride his own 

 hobby." His hobby is Agricultural Statistics. We 

 hear this from Mr. Packe, the member for the 

 county, and president of the society. A hearty, earnest 

 country gentleman, who takes a real interest in rural 

 affairs. As we had to show only last week, he gives 

 prizes for good farming, and at this very meeting takes 

 himself the premium for the best sheep. Still, as an 

 agriculturist, or as a friend to agriculture, neither of 

 these can be considered as his hobby. As assuredly as 

 that of Mr. Caird may be advocating agricultural 

 statistics, the hobby of Mr. Packe is opposing them. 

 He takes credit that " it was mainly owing to ourselves 

 the Government Bill of the session before last was 

 abandoned;" while we have further to thank him for 

 the only discussion, on that once popular theme, in 

 the many gatherings of this autumn. 



Appropriately enough he re-introduces the subject on 

 his own ground and to his own constituents, in this wise. 

 " In the late session, Mr. Caird asked leave to bring in 

 a bill on the subject, and had given him (Mr. Packe) a 

 pledge that it should not be compulsory, upon which 

 he did not oppose its introduction. That bill had now 

 been printed, that the members of Parliament might 

 have the opportunity of taking the opinion of their 

 constituents interested in agriculture upon it. He was 

 at a loss to understand how — though it might, perhaps, 

 benefit other parties in this country — it could benefit the 

 British farmer. The present was a milk-and-water bill 

 compared with the last, for that required them to 

 give an account of everything they had on their farms^ 

 how many quarters of this, and how many quarters of 

 that — in fact, to do what it was impossible they could do 

 for every practical farmer knew he could not telf 

 what his corn would yield till he began to thrash 

 it. The present bill asked them to state how many 

 acres they had under wheat, how many under bar- 



ley, how many under green crops, and so forth. 

 For this they were indebted to Mr. Caird, the man 

 who went round as commissioner for the Times news- 

 paper, who had now got into Pai'liament, and was de- 

 termined to ride his own hobby. As soon as he got into 

 Parliament he asked leave to introduce a bill, which 

 was useless to anybody, because to suppose they could 

 know the quantity of corn in the kingdom from the 

 number of acres under each crop was perfectly ridicu- 

 lous. He held land in Dorsetshire which would not 

 produce more than six or seven bushels to the acre, 

 and if he sent returns of that to the Board of Trade, 

 together with those from land in this part of the 

 country, some of which yielded six or seven quarters 

 to the acre, of what use would it be ? A good farmer, 

 who manured his land, might get twice as much off it 

 as his neighbour on the other side of the hedge, who 

 did not. How, then, was anybody to judge simply by 

 the acreage ? He found, however, after having ob- 

 tained from Mr. Caird a pledge that there should not 

 be a compulsory clause, provisions to the efl'ect that 

 every occupier should make such and such returns ; 

 and if he did not make them, the registrar-general, or 

 the superintendent-registrar of the district, was to 

 obtain them by other means, after giving three days' 

 notice. Whenever this bill should be produced in the 

 House of Commons, he should think it his duty to rise 

 in his place, and say that he considered these clauses 

 were compulsory, as giving authority to an official to 

 go over their farms." 



If Mr. Caird, whose conduct in the House is pretty 

 certain to be watched with some suspicion, attempts 

 nothing worse than this, there will be but little to fear 

 from him. For our own part, we cannot help thinking 

 that his bill aims at just what is wanted, and all that 

 is practical. It may be "perfectly ridiculous" for a 

 Government to know the acreage in crops of different 

 kinds of grain, although we confess that we scarcely see 

 it in this light. It may be " impossible" to draw any 

 reliable or useful deduction from such inforraation, 

 although we think it might be turned to a very useful 

 account indeed. It is but seldom, so far, that we have 

 been able to support Mr. Caird. His Statistics Bill, 

 however, appears to be rather discreetly drawn. He at 

 once throws over everything that is inquisitorial or op- 

 pressive, resting content with an acreage return, in 

 favour of which farmers and farmers' clubs have over and 

 over again declared themselves. Even at the very worst, 

 Mr. Packe only makes it a "milk-and-water" affair. 



It must not be assumed that even at Loughborough 

 " ourselves" are all one way of thinking. Mr. Henrick, 

 one of the vice-presidents, "begged to say his views 

 on agricultural statistics were unchanged, although he 

 would not advocate the compulsory principle." Mr. 

 Wild, another of the vice-presidents, also replied as to 

 the possibility of making any reliable estimates : — 



