148 THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 
The Circumstances.—B, with rare exceptions, takes neither warm 
drink nor warm food for supper. C, her sister, disapproves of the 
practice and seeks, on occasion, to increase the number of exceptions. 
M was a caller waiting for C and entertained meanwhile by B. (1) M, 
knowing that C was at supper, urged B to go and have her supper too, 
lest it should become cold. B answered truthfully, both according to 
her general practice and her particular intention for that day, that she 
takes nothing warm for supper. (2) C, when she entered the room, 
made one of her occasional attempts to alter her sister’s practice. 
CASE 26. 
The Discrepancy.—B stated concerning a farm purchased by him, 
successively, within six months, that it cost him (1) $4,000, (2) $5,000, 
(3) $4,500, and (4) nothing. 
Harmonization.—That B, in the course of the six months, succes- 
sively bought $1,000 worth of additional land, and resold $500 worth 
of land, and spent nothing on buildings or other improvements. 
The Circumstances.—B purchased the farm on October Ist for 
$4,000. The previous owner had in the granary the season’s harvest 
of grain, which he expected to sell to better advantage some months’ 
later but which he could not conveniently store elsewhere if he sold 
the farm. B accordingly took the grain off his hands at a valuation of 
$1,200. Before the grain was sold, the granary and grain were destroyed 
by fire. There was insurance of $200 on the granary but none on the 
grain. Subsequently B determined to re-sell the farm, avoiding loss 
as far as possible on the transaction. As a measure to that end he eut 
and sold $500 worth of the more mature trees on the timbered part 
of the farm; And finally he found a purchaser for $4,500. B stated 
that the farm cost him (1) $4,000, after the original purchase and 
before the destruction of the granary; (2) $5,000, after the destruc- 
tion of the granary and before the sale of the timber; (3) $4,500, after 
the sale of the timber and before the sale of the farm; and (4) nothing, 
after he found a purchaser at $4,500, an amount which closed up the 
entire transaction without loss to himself. 
‘Farmers oftener realize a part of the value of their farms by cutting timber 
than by selling a part of the land; and hence the author’s harmonization may 
seem at fault in suggesting a sale of land as the most probable reason for the re- 
duction between the second and third statements from $5,000 to $4,500. Farmers, 
however, in considering variations from the original cost of a farm, would take into 
account such cuttings of timber much less frequently than they would sales of a 
part of the land. In fact, they would consider sales of timber in such a connection 
only in rare cases, like the above, where timber was cut on an extensive scale for 
an unusual object. 
