254 



2he Supplement to'Jhe Topical Agriculturist 



finish the beasts more quickly. At the farm in 

 Hertfordshire, no doubt, all sorts of care has 

 been taken, and I can see no reason why the 

 result should surprise one, as doubtless, they 

 kept analyzing the soil and thus were able to 

 feed to the soil the chemicals which it required. 

 But you must not run away with the idea that 

 the same result could not have been attained by 

 using ordinary farm manure, unassisted by 

 any artificial. You probably know that pota- 

 toes are the severest and most poisonous of 

 ordinary British crops. — (tobacco, of course, is 

 the worst of all,) well, I have been 24 years on 

 my farm, and have grown 



POTATOES 



on the same ground year after year, without 

 any artificial, but only a fair manuring from 

 the byres. One year 1 added kainit to a small 

 patch, to see what would be the result, and on 

 that spot I not only had the worst crop, 

 but scarcely a tuber at the roots. Three 

 years ago 1 broke up a 15 acre field from 

 lea, which had never got anything but cattle 

 manure from me. First year 56 bushels per 

 acre of oats ; 2nd year 58 bushels per acre of 

 oats ; 3rd year 62 bushels per acre of oats. This 

 year it got 25 loads per acre farm yard manure, 

 and the turnips now growing on it are as good 

 as I could wish. It will get no more manure 

 till the next time it is ploughed, in the course 

 of cropping. I run it out that the value of 

 manure, — price at which I could sell it at,— and 

 the carting out and labour comes to £4 7s 6d 

 per acre. To do the same with artificials would 

 be nearer £7 per acre and thd result of crop, 

 a more precarious one, not so bountiful and, 

 certainly, not so good for the animals that 

 have to eat it. The best thing that could 

 happen for farmers here would be that the price 

 of artificials and feeding stuffs should drop down 

 to £5 or £6 per ton. One more remark on the 

 article under review. Mr Prout is perfectly 

 correct when he says that : " The farm servant 

 is better off than the tenant, and' the tenant 

 is better off than the proprietor." If I was 

 presented with a property, tomorrow, the first 

 thing 1 would do would be to sell it at what- 

 ever I could get, and save myself from the 

 ruin that is falling heavily on all proprietors 

 with the present iniquitous land taxation. 

 Now with regard to 



Fkee Tbade in Holland, 

 Holland is an exporting country and should, 

 therefore, be a Free Trade one. Britain is an 

 importing one and should be for Protection. 

 When I was in Australia we exported every- 

 thing and. mostly tg Britain, consequently J, was,, 



strongly in favour of Britain being Free Trade 

 so that we could dump our surplus down on these 

 shores. But times have changed since I took 

 up my residence here, and I am selfish enough 

 to want protection against the dumping 

 policy of other countries. The Hollanders 

 do most of their trade with Britain, so 

 they naturally are pleased to let the few 

 things into their country free, so long as 

 Britain allows their huge supplies in here 

 free. I am not very particular one way or ano- 

 ther, but I do think,— although you may think 

 it selfishness on my part,— that as such luxu- 

 ries as tobacco, tea and sugar are to be taxed, 

 other things, equally luxurious such as wheat, 

 beef, oats and butter, should also be taxed. Why 

 are the litters of the soil to be the only ones to 

 give their labour for nothing, —unless you count 

 the doctors also, whom Lloyd George says 

 should be glad to give more than they are al- 

 ready giving. Britain is the only real market in 

 the world, and all other countries dump their 

 produce into it, without paying for taxes, up- 

 keep of markets and rates of all kind. I had a 

 letter from a New Zealander in which he says 

 that although he would be sorry if Britain 

 became Protection, as it would take away 

 a lot of their profit, still he cannot be blind 

 to the fact that 5s per quarter on grain, 

 or per cwt. of butter, &c, &c, would be a 

 great advantage to British farmers, and would 

 have to be paid by them in New Zealand for the 

 benefit of getting a market for their goods. The 

 Religious controversies in Holland do not trouble 

 me,but the present system of unchristianizing our 

 country which our Government has taken up, 

 will soon put churches and parsons out of fash- 

 ion. You note how the Hollanders depend on 

 their own farmers for cheap food, here the 

 Government both Unionist or Radical do all in 

 their power to drive farmers out of the country, 

 and this Insurance Act has put just a head 

 on it for farmers are working with Jess hands, 

 those who have got the sack join the ranks 

 of the unemployed, and are going abroad by 

 the hundred thousand. And lastly— you will 

 be glad !— " The adoption of Protection by 

 Britain would be a serious matter on the conti- 

 nent." Why ? because we would get the money 

 that they are getting at present. They must 

 sell their surplus, so would have to pay us the 

 duty to get us to take their goods. I have 

 written far too much, but I am sorry to see my 

 native land going into the boiling pot ; to see 

 the men who have been put into parliament to 

 protect and look after the country, making poor 

 hard-working people buy stamps to provide 



