ON DRAUGHT. 555 



The consideration of the subject of wheels naturally includes that of the 

 comparative advantages of two- wheeled and four-wheeled carriages. Upon this 

 point opinions differ as much as upon any ; and we fear that we are not likely 

 to do more than to arrange the different opinions given by others, without 

 advancing any of our own. If we succeed, however, in doing this clearly we 

 shall have done much, because we may thus enable each individual to separate 

 those arguments which apply particularly to his own case ; and combining 

 these opinions with his own judgment, he will be more likely to arrive at a 

 just conclusion, than if he were altogether unaided by the experience of others. 



The advocates of light two-wheeled carts assert that a horse working alone is 

 capable of performing more work than when forming one of a team; and that in 

 consequence of this increased effect, there is a saving of expense nearly in the 

 proportion of three to two, or one-third. 



The advocates for waggons assert, on the contrary, that it requires that each 

 horse in a single-horse cart should be of a superior quality, and therefore more 

 expensive than those of a team, where the average power only is considered ; 

 that the wear-and-tear, first cost, and expense of attendance of several small 

 carts, is greater than that of a waggon carrying the same load, and that in 

 consequence there is an economy obtained by the latter. 



Numbers of facts and the results of long experience are adduced on either side, 

 all of which convey much useful information ; and the substance of the whole 

 appears to be, that with light single- horse two-wheeled carts, good horses are 

 able to draw greater loads, and do more work in proportion than a waggon team ; 

 that these carts are easier loaded and unloaded, do less injury to the roads, and 

 that they do not require more horses in action than are sufficient for the work 

 to be performed. 



On the other hand, it is found that the horses must be stronger and better 

 fed ; that being entirely dependent on their own exertions, and doing more 

 work, they are more fatigued and sooner knocked up; that on rough roads they are 

 liable to be shaken and injured by the sudden movements and shocks of the cart, 

 all of which are conveyed by the shafts directly to the horse ; that in ascending 

 or descending hills, the whole weight being above the axle-tree, it destroys 

 the balance, and is thrown too much upon the horse in the former case, or 

 tends to raise him from the ground in the latter, which even if any alteration of 

 the balance be found advantageous, is exactly the contrary of what would be 

 necessary. 



That with a waggon the average power of several horses is obtained 

 horses of inferior quality may therefore be used ; they are not so much 

 fatigued, because by relieving each other they can alternately exert themselves 

 or relax. Greater loads can be carried with less attendance of drivers, and they 

 are less liable to accidents ; they are easier withdrawn from any hole, or forced 

 over any obstruction, because only half the load being upon each pair of wheels, 

 the whole force of the team is applied successively to each half of the load, 

 consequently in any bad road the power occasionally required is less, although 

 the draught of the carriage, properly speaking, is greater than that of a two- 

 wheeled cart. These various arguments would appear to lead to the conclusion, 

 that upon good roads, and for short distances, with good horses, two-wheeled 

 single-horse carts are the best; but that, with inferior roads and ordinary 

 horses, light four-wheeled waggons, with a team of three or four horses, are the 

 most advantageous. 



Two-wheeled carts with two horses are decidedly inferior to either of these : 

 the shaft horse suffers all the inconveniences complained of in the single- 

 horse cart, and the leader does not produce more effect that when hi a waggon 

 team. 



