DISEASES OF SHEEP. 185 



mon feeding' is about fourteen or sixteen stone, and will by extraor- 

 dinary feeding arrive at about twenty-five or twenty-six stone. As 

 Vearlings they possess the striking qualification of averaging under 

 ^ood management ten or eleven stone, wliich is found to answer 

 much better than keeping them longer. These merits, in addition to 

 the great weight of combing wool they produce, has greatly increased 

 their value. It is liighly requisite to guard against breeding them too 

 fine. If they are well bred they are equally as hardy as they were 

 formerly, but if bred too fine they lose in constitution, are unable to 

 support their young, produce meat of a bad quality, and not having 

 a proportionate quantity of lean, their wool becomes short and loo 

 fine in quality, and they frequently become naked bellied, which oc- 

 casions great loss in the weiglit of their fleece." It is this " breeding 

 too fine," in otiier words too closely, that has impaired the constitu- 

 tion of the Bakewells or Dishleys, made them bad nurses, and dimi- 

 nished too much the proportion of lean meat. The true problem for 

 the sheep farmer is what breed will give him one year with another 

 the greatest profit to the acre. If pasturage be short, it is clear that 

 a greater number of sheep of smaller size will gather more in a-given 

 time than a smaller number of heavier sheep ; and we believe that 

 keeping in view the resources for maintaining sheep through the year, 

 the saler plan is to take a breed of hardy constitution and of a size not 

 so large, such as the South-down, and thus hit the happy medium; 

 and, in the general way, we have no hesitation in hazarding the 

 opinion for what it is worth, that the same principle — moderate size 

 and thriftiness of habit and hardiness of constitution — is the one on 

 which it is most expedient for American husbandmen to act, in the 

 great majority of cases, in regard not only to sheep, but to cattle, 

 hogs, horses, and even poultry. 



At a meeting of the Pennith Agricultural Society in England, in 

 1839, the awards of the judges were in favour of the middling sized 

 sheep. At the dinner, on the health of the judges being proposed, 

 Mr. Gray, the chairman, speaking on the comparative profits to the 

 grazier of large and small sized sheep, made the following among 

 other remarks : — 



" I dare say tiiat the opinion of the judges with respect to sheep 

 lias been much censured, although I declare I have not heard any 

 observations to that effect. My reasons for su])posing so is this — 

 that people who have not great experience in the qualities and niceties 

 connected with every description of stock, are apt to look principally 

 at that which fills tlie eye, and to form a favourable opinion of animals 

 upon a large scale; and this is particularly the case with respect to 

 the Leicester sheep. I have had considerable experience with sheep 

 of this description, having in former times kept a flock of between 

 nine hundred and one thousand Leicester ewes, and therefore I have 

 some title to speak upon the subject. I say, then, that the largest 

 sheep are the least profitable. If it can be ascertained, as I believe 

 it has been, that you can feed on an acre of land a greater number of 

 16* 



