62 



THE author's letter TO 



nor would they acknowledge the superiority of the compound- 

 feeding system, till they had themselves reaped the profits I 

 described. Now, they are a pliant, communicative, and I wish 

 I could add a grateful, race. 



But I am richly rewarded by the testimonies of an extensive 

 and enlightened correspondence ; and it is with pleasure that I 

 answer your lordship's present inquiry. I wish, however, first 

 to observe, for the instruction of those parties who admit that 

 your bullocks are doing well, and who will not allow the cheap- 

 ness of the food upon which they are fattening," that linseed 

 can be purchased at less money per ton than the best oil- 

 cake. 



For instance, I was offered on Saturday at Norwich linseed 

 at 435. per quarter, weighing 30 st., while oil-cake was 11/. lO^*. 

 per ton. Now, where farmers are so prejudiced against the 

 new system as not to perceive the superiority of the pure seed 

 over the refuse formed into cake with all kinds of rubbish, no 

 arguments can produce a contrary conviction ; and they must 

 be left, till compelled by circumstances, like many in Norfolk^ 

 to try the experiment. 



Your lordship will discover by the above prices, that linseed 

 and cake are about \s. 5d. per stone each ; and that, if a com- 

 pound of barley and linseed is made consisting of ^ seed and 

 f barley at 9c?. per stone [at which price thousands of quarters 

 may be purchased], it will amount to 71. 7s. per ton, exclusive 

 of the water ; but, when that all-important ingredient is incor- 

 porated according to the receipts in my book, the price will be 

 reduced to 455. per ton ; and those who adopt only this part of 

 my system, obtain five tons and a half of the incompai^ahle cattle- 

 compound at the same sum which others give for a ton of com- 

 parative rubbish. 



I do not say that the same effect will be produced from a ton 

 of compound as from a ton of cake ; but I know of no instance 

 where the superiority of the former has not been acknowledged, 

 without taking into calculation the advantages derived by con- 

 suming so large a proportion of native produce. 



My Lord, 1 thank you for having instituted an inquiry into 

 this subject, which I should not otherwise have criticised so 

 minutely, and which I shall expect to turn to some further 

 use. 



