2/1 EXPERIMENTS ON WHEAT, Part II. 



" As great as this advantage is in favour of the beds, it will ap- 

 pear very Imall when compared to that which the culture in beds 

 has over the old huibandry j as the following calculation will 

 Ihew. 



" Let us firft fettle what would have been the neat produce (by 

 which we always mean that which remains after deducting thd 

 feed) of the 169 acres of the three farms, for one year; and af- 

 terwards that of the other 169 acres the next year, fuppofmg 

 both crops to be equal. 



" We have already feen that the produce of 169 acres would, 

 ■«t moft, not have exceeded 55200 pounds of wheat, in 1756. But 

 as that was a bad year, I will make the following comparifon 

 on the footing of a good crop, in order to give the old huibandry 

 every advantage that can poffibly be defired. I will therefore 

 fuppofe the neat produce of 169 acres to have been the firfl 



year . . . , 76000 lb, 



and that of the other 169 acres, the next year . . 760001b. 



For the two years . . 1520001b. 



*« We have feen that the fame 338 acres cultivated in beds, 

 reckoning their neat produce for two years only on the footing of 

 the bad crop of 1756, would have yielded 269538 pounds of wheat : 

 confequently this culture v/ould have produced in two years 1 17538 

 pounds of corn more than the old huibandry j and this difference, 

 in ten years, would amount to 587690 pounds. 



" The great advantage of the new huibandry, in general, and 

 that of laying the ground into beds, in particular, is, I think, now 

 fully proved. The difference is great indeed : but I believe it will 

 be flill much greater hereafter, when the yearly obfervations of the 

 followers^of this new way, whofe number increafes daily, fliall have 

 brought this culture to a greater degree of perfedion, which I hope 

 will in fome rneafure be the cafe next harvell." 



C H A P. 



