MULES. ' 187 



may he worth half his original value." He estimates 

 the annual decline of a horse to be equal to fifty per 

 ceHt. on his price every six years, and supposes one out 

 of twenty-live that are regularly employed in agricul- 

 ture, to die every year : constituting a charge of four 

 per cent, per annum for insurance against diseases and 

 accidents. He considers five acres of land, of medium 

 quality, necessary for the maintenance of each horse, 

 and the annual expense, including harness, shoeing, 

 farriery, insurance, and decline in value, allowing him 

 to cost two hundred dollars, to exceed that sum about 

 five per cent, which is the only difference between the 

 estimate of this illustrious and accurate agriculturist, 

 and that of a respectable committee of the Farmers' 

 Society of Barnwell district, South Carolina, who, in 

 a report published in the Charleston Courier, of 23.d 

 of February last, state, that " the annual expense oi 

 keeping a horse is equal to his value !" The same 

 committee also state, that " at four years old a horse 

 will seldom sell for more than the expense of rearing 

 him." That " the superiority of the mule over the 

 horse, had long been appreciated by some of their 

 most judicious planters — that two mules could be 

 raised at less expense than one horse — that a mule is 

 fit for service at an earlier period, if of sufficient size — 

 will perform as much labour, and if attended to when 

 first put to work, his gait and habits may be formed to 

 suit the taste of the owner." This report may be con- 

 sidered a most valuable document, emanating as it 

 does, from enlightened />?'ac^zca/ farmers and planters, 

 in a section of country where we may suppose a horse 

 can be maintained cheaper than in Maryland or any 

 State farther North. 



] am convinced that the small breed of mules will 

 consume less in proportion to the labour they are 

 17* 



