" 



" 



66 THE PRACTICE OF THE 



" hoed is almoft double to that of the hand- 

 " hoed. And as the hand-hoed has but one 

 wheat crop in three years, and one barley 

 crop, which is commonly fcarce half the va- 

 lue of a wheat crop ; and the expence in 

 three years being in feed, tillage, &c. as 

 " much as of the three wheat crops, the pro- 

 " fit of the horfe-hoed will be more than 

 " double that of the hand-hoed. 



" And this, I think, is a ftrong proof of 

 " the efficacy of deep hoeing, which, with- 

 " out a fallow, can (as in this cafe) caufe 

 " one double row to produce as much wheat, 

 " as two double rows of the mallow-hoed 

 ** did, with a fallow, in an equal quantity of 

 *' ground: which could not be, un left each 

 " row of the lefler number did produce more 

 " or greater ears, or both, than each row of 

 " the larger number. Neither could this be, 

 " if the roots did not take the greater part of 

 " their nourifhment from the pulverized in- 

 " tervals ; confidering that the rows that had 

 " no fallows muff.; without the deep pulve- 

 * 6 rization, have produced much fewer and 

 " lefler ears than an equal number of rows 

 " that had the benefit of a fallow 



" Vain therefore is the opinion of thoie, 

 * who fay the roots of wheat do not reach 

 " further than two or three inches from, the 

 44 ftalks : for if they did not, thefe horfe-hoed 

 " rows could have very little or no nourim- 

 " ment from the pulverifation of the inter- 



" vals 



