[ s9 J 
he anfwered, there was but one objection to it: the 
ftep of the buffalo was too quick for that of the 
tame fteer. ‘‘ My friend,” faid I, “the fault lies 
* not in the buffalo, but in the fteer: what you term 
« 4 fault in the former is really an advantage on its 
“ fide.”” ‘Till this moment, the man had laboured 
under one of thofe clouds of prejudice but too com- 
mon among farmers. He had taken the ox of his 
father’s farm, as the unit whence all his. calculations 
were to be made, and his conclufions drawn:—it 
was his unchangeable ftandard of excellence, whe- 
ther applied to the plough or to the draught. No 
fooner was my obfervation uttered, than conviction 
flafhed on his mind, He acknowledged the fupe- 
riority of the buffalo. 
But there is another property in which the buf- 
falo far furpaffes the ox:—his ftrength. Judging 
from the extraordinary fize of his bones, and the 
‘depth and formation of his cheft, I. fhould not think 
it unreafonable to affign nearly a double portion of 
ftrength to this powerful inhabitant of the foreft. 
Reclaim him, and you gain a capital quadruped 
for the draught and for the plough: his activity 
peculiarly fits him for the latter, in preference to 
the ox. 
If this part of my letter, refpecting an animal but ~ 
little underftood in Europe, and not fufficiently 
noticed in America, fhould appear to you not alto- 
gether uninterefting, nor too foreign to the imme- 
diate 
