THE RURAL SOCRATES, 8^ 



jndifFf* rent an opinion of the unpolifhed manners gind 

 ■u.'iclcrilanding of countrymen, to cx()e(fl any thir?g from 

 fuch a cop.fc-rence hefsdes cofifufion and diiorder. It 

 appealed to them that the modell part of the peasants 

 would be too timid, to ventnre to eKprefs their fenii- 

 mcnts with treedam in a public affembiy ; whilft the 

 bold would fall into rude and noily diiputes, cfFording; 

 neither iiiforn afion nor advantage ; and they thought 

 that every pcaiant was ;7^cefraiily included in one or 

 other of theie characters. 



This way of thinking led to a refolution of requeil- 

 ing the farmers to fend us their fentiments in writing 

 upon particular queftions in agriculture ; and to excite 

 their emulation by prizes. We ag eed that thele quef- 

 tions (hould be regularly circulated tv.'ice a year, com- 

 mencing with that recommended by KViyogg concerning 

 fences or inclolurei . It was flated in this manner. 



Qiiery i. In what cafes are fences neceffary I and in 

 what circumftances may ihey be omitted as fuperfiuous 

 or detrimental ? 



2. Where fences are agreed to be detrimental, by 

 what method, more eligible, can land be protect- 

 ed ? 



g, W^Lere fences are judged necefiary, in what man- 

 ner may they be rendered the mod ufeful. according to 

 diiferent circumftances ; or at leaU be attended with the 

 fewefl ill coniequenccs \ 



We received, before the time limited, fixteen differ- 

 ent memorials : the lolidity, perfpicuity, and regularity 

 of the arguments, railed our utmoft ailoniQiment, 



Kliyogg only was not thoroughly fatisfied. '' This 

 ^' appears excellent to thofe who underfland good wri- 

 " ting, fays he ; but it often happens that our bcfl huf- 

 ^' bandmen are leaJl ikilful in flile." — Our philofopher 

 himfelf indeed is a flrong proof of this. He returned 

 therefore feverd ti:nes to the chargef'=--and at length 



prevailed. 



