■1,79'» ■■ on. poors rate ij. r-Xf 



ly afserted by many, that large flieep, that carry mucli 

 wool, necefsarily afford it only of a coarse quality, 



,and that fine wool can be expected from small fiieep 

 alone. This, however, I venture to afsert, from 

 abundant experience, i^ not true. I have had large 



.Iheep that afforded very fine wool, and exceeding 

 small ones that produced wool as coarse as goats 

 hair. It is easy to find examples of the reverse of 

 this. A judicious set of experiments, therefore, which 



.fhould set this matter in its true light would prove 



.iiighly useful to the inquiry in which we are engaged. 

 To be concluded in our next. 



OBSERVATIONS ON THE POORS RATES. 

 Sir, To the Editor 0/ the Bee. 



jIn your review of Sir John Sinclair's statistics (Bee 

 vol.iii. No. 9-) there is an account of the poor of Dun- 

 nichan the population of which is 872, being supported, 

 and a great surplus saved of L. ao a ye^r, and this is 



.brought as a proof that the maintenance of the poor 



.may be safely left to voluntary donations. If the 

 !poor of the pari(h ab3ve named be sufficiently cloth- 

 ed and fed, it affords this proof indeed perfectly va^ 



<lid. I fhall state the amount of the annual expendi- 

 ture of the poor of the parilh of Wigton in Cumber- 

 land, where the poor laws of England are inforced, to 



.to be compared with that of Dunichen. The popula- 

 tion of the parifh of Wigton may be set at 3500, or 

 betwixt that number and 4000, and the average ex- 

 penditure on the poor is upwards of L. 500. It must 

 be remarked, that this part of Cumberland is a place 

 where provisions are cheap j and it is believed, the 

 VOL. ix. c f 



