262 On English and Scotch Husbandry. 
accuracy. However, from the calculations in both systems being 
founded upon the same data, it does not affect the comparative 
result. Yours, &c. ANDREW ScortrT. 
Though the present communication was written so far back 
as the year 1813, we have no reason to believe that the system 
which it condemns has been at all improved. In fact, the Eng- 
lish agriculturists were at that time rolling in wealth, from the 
extravagant prices then procured for their produce ; so much so 
that any thing in the shape of an ceconomical saving in the ex- 
penses of their business was beneath their notice. Or shall we 
speak plain truth, and say that they are, generally speaking, so 
ignorant, so wedded to prejudices, that hardly any thing will 
drive them from the system of their forefathers, however waste- 
ful and stupid? In their present circumstances, however, it may 
be thought, when ruin stares many of them in the face, that they 
will be inclined to profit by the experience of others. 
It is a circumstance deserving of particular notice at the pre- 
sent moment, when the distress of the English farmers is so ge- 
neral as to be avowed in loud complaints to parliament, from 
every county aud almost every parish, that no complaints of 
this kind have been received from the Scotch farmers. ‘This 
speaks volumes; and here it may not be out of place to notice 
a fact, stated in the County Herald of the 8th of March, which 
serves to prove that the practice of our farmers (at least of a 
great majority of them) continues the same as in the year 1813, 
when the above communication was made to the Board of Agri- 
culture. In the paper alluded to of the 8th of March, it is 
stated, that an experiment ‘¢ was lately tried, in order to ascer- 
tain the difference between the working of the long mould- 
boarded plough (used within 25 miles of London), with four 
horses, a man and a driver, and a common Scotch plough, with 
a pair of carriage horses, and reins. The result turned out, 
that the pair of horses ploughed, in six hours, ove acre, nine 
inches deep by twenty, walking at the rate of three miles an 
hour; the four horses ploughed half an acre seven inches deep 
by nine, stepping ¢wo miles in an hour.”’—That is, where this 
wasteful system is pursued, eight horses are required to perform 
the same work that the Scotch farmer executes with two. 
Our land-holders, who are fond enough of money, should turn 
their attention to facts such as this in granting their new leases. 
It is just as reasonable that the farmers should be tied to an 
ceconomical mode of culture as to a regular rotation of crops. 
They have no right to subject the public to the extra expense of | 
a wasteful made of culture, when a more ceconomical is not only 
recommended, but its advantages demonstrated in real practice. 
EDITOR. 
