114 



THE AUTHOR EXAMINES AND REFUTES 



When selected^ which they were by lot, the six beasts to be 

 fed on compound weighed 602 stone, and those to be fed on oil- 

 cake, 590 stone. When fat, the live weight of the former was 

 725 stone ; of the latter, 705 stone, being a difference of eight 

 stone [the 12 stone overweight at the first being deducted] in 

 favour of those fed on compound. But it was in the dead 

 weight of each lot that the greatest difference was shown — the 

 compound-fed yielding 44 -stone 9 pounds of meat more 

 than those fed on oil-cake ; but, taking the loose fat and hides, 

 the difference in favour of the former was 50 stone 6 pounds, 

 — or 38 stone 6 pounds, deducting the 12 stone original extra 

 live weight. While there is this increase of produce, there is 

 a considerable decrease of expense between those fed on home 

 produce, and those fed on foreign oil-cake. The former con- 

 sumed a smaller quantity of turnips than the latter ; and the 

 cost of the compound was only 19/. 6^. 1 Jcf., whilst that of the 

 oil-cake was 2U. 14^. 9c?. 



" The public are much indebted to Mr. Postle for the great 

 care with which this experiment has been carried through ; 

 and for the pains taken to procure an accurate and satisfactory 

 statement of the result." 



But perhaps it may be asked, from what source was the 

 London journal furnished with the information ? I answer, 

 from the best of sources — the clear and exphcit report of the 

 Norfolk Chronicle. Again, it may be asked, did Mr. Richard- 

 son see this report ? I reply, that he receives the Farmer s 

 Journal. 



In concluding his letter, Mr. Richardson sagely remarks — 

 Far be it from me either to insinuate or charge any gentleman 

 connected with this matter, of pubUshing that which is untrue." 

 And yet, he accuses a committee that was never formed — a 

 party that never existed, with having "withheld information," 

 and " done themselves great discredit," that their " statements 

 are incorrect" and "accounts fallacious," evincing "a want of 

 candid, open, and honourable disclosures." 



Thus has Mr. Richardson evinced a wanton hostility towards 

 the promoters of a great and beneficial cause ; and, to use his 

 own words, " done himself great discredit." I say, a great 



