THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



213 



thereof, or Lerein-before described, or which has not been no 

 stamped as aforesaid, &c., shall, on conviction, forfeit a sum 

 not exceedinpf five pounds ; and any contract, bargain, or 

 sale made by any sucii weights or measures shall be wholly 

 null and void." 



We have thought it proper to quote these clauses from 

 the Acts to show the real position of the question, as many, 

 not being aware of the Act of 1835, have the impression 

 that to produce uniformity in the sale of grain we should 

 have another Act passed enforcing by penalty the sale of 

 grain by the imperial quarter. It will be seen from the 

 quotations that the Act of 1835 is stringent enough ; and 

 all that is wanted now is that the authorities carry out the 

 provisions of the Act. We may as well, however, mention 

 here, that though the Act of 1835 appears plaiu enough, 

 there is a discrepancy in its interpratation between the 

 English and Scotch ju Iges. In England there have been 

 decisions which appear to favour the opinion that local mea- 

 sures may still be used in transactions ; thus it was found 

 legal to sell wheat by the hobbett, a Welsh measure. In 

 Scotland, on the other hand, the reading of the Act has 

 been literally interpreted, and any bargain made by any 

 local weight or measure has been held to be null and void ; 

 as, for instance, the selling of crop by the Scotch acre, or the 

 measuring of drains by the Scotch chain, or more recently 

 the selling of potatoes by the iiU, even though in making 

 the bargain the boll should be mentioned to be of 4 or 5 cwt., 

 or any other weight. This latter case was decided by 

 Sheriti" Barclay, of Perth, the grounds of whose decision are 

 most abl3^ given, and are well worthy of a perusal. In so 

 far as Scotland, therefore, is concerned, there is no doubt of 

 the meaning of the Act, and all that would be necessary to 

 produce a uniformity of decisions in England and Scotland 

 would be a short declaratory Act. 



Such, then, is the law regarding the selling of grain and 

 other farm produce ; but what is the practice ? Let every- 

 one answer this question for hiinself by turning to the 

 reports of the sales of grain, &c., in the different market- 

 towns of England, Scotland, and Ireland, where lie will 

 scarcely find any two of them alike, and where he will 

 be puzzled at finding the names of many local weights and 

 measures of which he never heard before. And if he has 

 been studying these reports for some years, he will have 

 obaerved in them the gradual substitution of weight 

 for measure in many places, in defiance of the threatened 

 penalties of the Acts of 1824 and 1835 against all who sell 

 grain otherwise than by the iaiperial quarter. Year .after 

 year the law is becoming more and more honoured in the 

 breach than in the observance — legal enactments are 

 yielding to public convenience. Surely the lavv- must have 

 been framed on wrong principles, and its requirements must 

 be felt as irksome and inconvenient, when such a decided 

 and wide-spreading violation of it is being perpetrated in 

 such a peaceable manner. 



What are the objections of people to the statutory provision 

 of selling grain by measure? The principal objection is, that 

 it leads to disputes in transactions. Any one at all practically 

 acquainted with the subject must admit this. There cannot 

 be a more uncertain method of ascertaining the quantity of 

 grain than by measure. Even in measuring liquids, due pre- 

 cautions must be taken to arrive at correct results, by attend- 

 ing to the force of attraction between the liquid and aides of 

 the vessel. And if such difticulty is found in obtaining accuracy 

 with an imcompressible body as a li juid, how much greater 

 must it be to get correct results in measuring such an article 

 as grain, in which the pickles can be packed so closely to one 



another as to make a material increase in the quantity con- 

 tained in the measure ! Hence the quantity or weight of the 

 grain in the measure will vary according to any circumstance 

 which has a tendency to compress its bulk. Thus the greater 

 the height from which the grain is poured into the measure, 

 the greater will be its weight ; any motion causing a vibration 

 in the floor during the operation of filling the measure will 

 also cause the same bulk of grain to weigh more, by shaking 

 the pickles closer to one another ; the force with which the 

 roller is placed on the measure before the grain is rolled, will 

 also cause a variation in the weight. In short, so liable is this 

 method of selling grain to error from the trifling causes men- 

 tioned above, that seldom will the same man obtain the same 

 result with scientific accuracy, when weighing the same grain ; 

 though we admit sufticient accuracy may be reached, with 

 care, for all practical purposes. Need we be surprised, then, 

 that differences in the weight per bushel, and in the q\iantitie3 

 contained in any measure, so often occur, when the grain is 

 weighed, first, say on the stone floor of a barn, directly from 

 the fanners, and afterwards, under entirely difl"ereiit circum- 

 stances, on the wooden floor of the loft of the buyer. And 

 need we be surprised at the disagreeable disputes which 

 arise therefrom between buyer and seller ? Hundreds of in- 

 stances of this kind occur every week in the transactions be- 

 tween farmers and dealers, and between merchants 

 in the same and in diS'erent towns. Let ua take one: 

 A farmer was in the habit of sending all his barley 

 to a brewer, leaving the price to be fixed by him. Every lot 

 sent in, when tested by the bushel measure of the brewer, 

 weighed lighter than it did when measured on his farm ; he 

 sent his bushel measure to be tested by the Dean of Guild — 

 it was found to be all right, and was stamped accordingly : but 

 still the same disparity continued in the weight per bushel of 

 his barley when tested by his and the brewer's bushel, though 

 the latter was also duly stamped by the Dean of Guild. 

 Again, a farmer sold barley to a party in Edinburgh twice, 

 aud both times the weight per bushel on the farm and in 

 Edinburgh differed : the average difference was half-a-ponnd 

 per bushel, for which 43. 6d. was withheld by the buyer for 

 over-weight on the whole lot, which was IG quarters, and the 

 buyer retained into the bargain the half-pound of barley per 

 bushel which produced the over-v.'eight, aud which, for the 16 

 quarters, amounted to 64 pounds— equivalent in value to 

 43. 6d., according to the rate at which the rest of the barley 

 was sold. Thus, then, on these 16 quarters the farmer lost 

 93., or more than 6d. per quarter, for giviug what he thought 

 was the just weight and measure of his barley: for the 

 greatest attention was paid to the sacking of it. It may be 

 asked, AVhy did he submit to the loss when he was so certain 

 of being right ? The barley was tested in the presence of his 

 servants, and mixed with other lots before he was aware of the 

 difference ; and even though this had not been the caee, his 

 bushel measure was miles ofi", and there was the uncertainty 

 of producing a result, under the different circumstances, the 

 same as what he got at home, even though his own bushel 

 measure were used. These are only two out of hundreds of 

 cases that might be adduced, to show how those disagreeable 

 disputes arise in grain trausaations. Similar differences, only 

 more aggravated by their magnitude, are as liable to occur in 

 those large grain 'transactions which are daily taking place 

 throughout the kingdom, while the course of trade is at the 

 same time much impeded by the slow process of measuring 

 instead of weighieg graiu. 



Public opinion is divided as to the expediency of changing 

 the method of selling by measure for that of selling by weight 

 under present circumstances. We believe that all are agreed 



