230 THE PRACTICE OF THE 



" light, than in the conteft between the ad- 

 vocates for the Old and New Hulbandry. 

 " They cannot be contented to ufe either as 

 *' circumftdnces may require, and render fit 

 " and ufeful; but one muft be eftablilhed 

 " univerially, to the utter extirpation of the 

 " other, or all is not right. In the foregoing 

 " part of this work, I have (hewn that both 

 " may be ufed occafionally to advantage ; and 

 *' that it is very wrong for a farmer to refpeft 

 ' either, becaufe it is new or old: the only 

 " confideration that (hould weigh with him 

 ' is, which is moft likely to be attended with 

 <c fuperior advantage ; and that only fhould 

 " determine his choice. I have known the 

 " drill method decried from the fmallnefs of 

 " the crop, when compared with the broad- 

 < caft on the fame land ; but that is an erro- 

 " neous way of judging. Such a comparifon 

 " affords no criterion to diftinguifh the fu- 

 " perior method; for it is not the quantity of 

 " produce, but the net profit the farmer 

 cc (hould be governed by. One field may pro- 

 " duce twenty bufhels of wheat to the acre, 

 " another but ten; the firft may be a lofing 

 " crop, the latter a gaining one. This I have 

 "*' known happen more than once; and fo muft 

 * c many others who refide in counties where 

 " a farmer cannot drefs and manure an acre 

 " properly, for wheat, under four pounds, and 

 ** where twenty bufhels is deemed a good crop. 

 " Here, if, in the drill method, a farmer can 

 2 " get 



