170 ON FALL6W1NG. 



'* But when the expenses of cultivation wer6 

 " augmented, when new crops, as turnips, were 

 '* introduced, (which were favourable to the 

 " process of cleaning the ground by their later 

 " period of so\ving, and the hoein^s they re- 

 " quired,) and when the productions of the soil 

 *' became more valuable ; it was natural for the 

 " farmer to consider whether such great sacri- 

 *' fices were really necessary, and whether fallows 

 " might not, in many cases, be diminished, and 

 *' in others, totally given up. On this subject, 

 " a controversy has arisen between two sects, -^ 

 " the fallowists and anti-fallowists, which has 

 " been conducted with much keenness and 

 ** energy. 



*' Of late years the question at issue has been 

 *• much narrowed. It is now admitted, that 

 " on all light soils, where the turnip-culture can 

 " be practised, fallows are unnecessary ; and 

 *» that on strong lands, under a judicious system, 

 *' they are not essentially necessary more than 

 «* once in the course of a rotation. The subject 

 ** under discussion, therefore, is reduced to this 

 "short question:- — Is it for the interest of a 

 *' farmer who cultivates cold, strong, clayey, 

 *' adhesive, and wet-bottomed lands, periodi- 

 ** cally to fallow them ?" 



This is certainly reducing the eligibility of the 



