63 



beef, 9'^ d.; swine, Tfd. ; poultry, lOd. (per carcase sinking offal), and 

 with prices for meat at tliis ratio t'le said diagrams prove that cereals may 

 be grown profitably in this kingdom, even when sold at low prices. 



These facts, however, are admitted to be at variance with public 

 opinion, but they nevertheless are true. Moreover, it is admitted that 

 they might have been produced at less cost than has been shown had a 

 more skilful direction of operations on the Wilton House Home Farm been 

 observed. The aim in cultivation was intended to be synonymous with 

 that on the Kingston Lacey Estate, in the parish of Shapwick, in the 

 county of Dorset, which on an extensive scale was carried out by the 

 late Mr. Martin Small, who was the pioneer of good farming, not only 

 in that district, but through the length and breadth of the kingdom. 

 He broke up down-pasture land and exhausted old lays (valued by a 

 committee of farmers at below five shillings an acre), still he never 

 allowed the virgin fertility of the areas broken up to be diminished. 

 Between the years 1836 and 1884 he maintained the increased pro- 

 ductiveness of his farm, and harvested one of his finest crops in 1883, 

 the crops on the newly broken-up " uplands " being equal to former 

 yields on the best soils of the farm. On a large part of his holding he 

 succeeded bankrupt tenants, who surrendered to him lands in a foul and 

 exhausted condition; but, nevertheless, he ended his career as an 

 exemplary agriculturist, benefiting not only himself, but his landlord's 

 estate, through profitable farming. Should the present management of 

 the Home Farm, as regai-ds the course of cropping and the amount of 

 stock kept, be shown to be identical with that so successfully j^receding 

 it, the results enumerated in the dissection will be borne out. But let us 

 assume an alteration in the course of management, and the produce 

 scheme done away with, it will be necessary to further illustrate its 

 action, and perhaps this can best be effected through assuming that Lord 

 Herbert of Lea, by putting the rent of the farm on the produce principle, 

 placed himself in the dual position of landlord and tenant ; and by 

 expending three times the amount in manure and feeding stuffs, he was 

 justified in claiming 10 per cent, on the pivot rent (£27 per annum). 

 It might, however, appear as if he were paying it to himself, and thus 

 reduced the rent which he would have paid had he not been entitled to 

 an allowance for manure. But supposing in 1873 he had renewed his 

 engagement to hold the farm for another term of twenty years, and not 

 to have spent the required amount in manure and feeding stuffs. To the 

 detriment of the farm the rent would Ije increased by the amount of his 

 lessened expenditure, so that at the end of the second term he would 



