the Farming of the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein. 359 
prevent the conveyance of obviously diseased animals have been 
attended with a certain amount of success. 
On this question Messrs. Swan and Sons write as follows t . 
" There is generally amongst tbe formers and proprietors of this country an 
outcry against free admission of foreign cattle, many of whom insist that all 
such should be indiscriminately slaughtered at the ports. The fact, however, 
is, that if they limit their outcry to countries from whence disease is likely 
to be imported, and give countries which impose restrictions similar to those 
in operation here (as in the case of Germany) free admission for their stock, 
an inducement will be held out to provide cattle adapted for this country ; 
those not adapted for slaughter will be available for stores. It is, in our 
opinion, the lessening of cattle-hreeding, and the increase in the consumption, 
which restricts the farmers' profits. • Lean cattle, as a rule, are much dearer, 
comparatively, than fat cattle. The progress of agi-iculture every year is 
cansiug land, hitherto only known as available for rearing cattle for sale as 
stores, to be farmed for grain and the production of meat ; while the great 
extent of land in the 2^orth of Scotland, especially, previously productive of 
West Highland cattle and sheep, now laid into deer-forests, coupled with high 
wages and increased consumption of meat, is a sufficient inducement for every 
encouragement being given to the foreigner who can provide us either with 
beef, mutton, or the material for farmers in this country to produce such. 
Ten years ago Professor Wilson wrote on this subject, in 
his Report on the Aarhuus Exhibition, as follows : — 
" Some few months ago it was remarked in a leading article in one of our 
Agricultural Journals,* that ' there can be no doubt that the present restrictions 
on the foreign cattle, whatever useful purposes they may serve, are doing 
English agriculture a great deal of harm. Live-stock, which is what our 
farmers want to buy, is at an outrageously high price, and the enormous 
imports of fat meat from abroad are comj^letely revolutionising the trade in fat 
beasts, which is what they have to sell. The value of that which the farmers 
have to sell is thus artificially depreciated, while the price of that which they 
want to buy is artificially exaggerated. If the store-stock of other coun- 
tries were available for our farmers as their fat stock is for our butchers, we 
should retain a fair proportion of that artificial premium which the Orders in 
Council are now putting into the pockets of foreign feeders. As the matter 
now stands, the English feeder is placed at a very great disadvantage.' And 
again, quite recently, the subject has been mooted, and the same want thus 
expressed : ' The great difBculty lies in the question of store-stock ; how 
and where are we to obtain the proper supply of beasts, and under what 
restrictions ? ' 
" If we turn to page 51,t we see that the surplus animal produce of Denmark 
comprises amongst other stock nearly 40,000 beasts, and between 500 and 
1000 calves. Although this country has long been the market for Danish 
farm-produce, the present restrictions on the import of live-stock, which draw 
no line between infected and non-infected countries, limit the trade between 
the two countries to fat stock, and thus force the export trade in store-cattle 
i into other channels. 
" The condition of Danish farming is not at present equal to the feeding of 
all the surplus cattle-produce of the country. Last year 5300 fat beasts, and 
60 calves, were all that we received ; the rest were sold in a store-condition to 
• 'Agricultural Gazette' for October 4, 1866. 
•f Of Professor Wilson's Report. 
2 L 2 
