( 218 ) 
XIV. — On the Feeding of Stock. By P. H. Frere. 
The object which I have in view in the following article is to 
speak of those modifications in the management of stock which 
the experience of the last eight years, in connexion with the 
changes of the times and the gleams of light cast upon the 
subject by scientific research, has induced me to adopt, reserving 
for a future occasion an account of those changes in the culture 
and cropping of the land which were in unison with, if not a 
necessary consequence of, the system adopted. 
This paper may be considered as the first portion of a retro- 
spect of the management of a light-land arable farm, in a dry 
part of England, better suited for the growth of corn than for 
pasture or even roots ; consequently, the conclusions drawn and 
the estimates of cost involved will at best admit of exact appli- 
cation only under similar circumstances, not only in the soil and 
climate, but also in the cost of labour both of men and horses, 
varying as these do both in the weekly wages paid or expense 
incurred for keep, and in the amount of work executed at that 
cost. 
The farm in question consists of 460 acres, running in a long 
strip from the high grounds in Cambridgeshire which border 
upon Essex and Suffolk to the old limits of Newmarket Heath. 
It is all arable, with the exception of about 8 acres of indifferent 
meadow. About 80 acres on the higher ground are slightly 
capped with clay ; 210 acres on the slope are a light chalky 
loam, and IGO are heath-land, varying from a brown sandy loam 
to a black heath sand, resting on a chalk rubble. 
My chief encouragement in taking the farm into my own 
hands in 1851 was derived from Lord Portman's account of his 
management of Shepherd's Corner Farm, in Dorsetshire, as stated 
in detail in the fourth and eighth volumes of the ' Journal.' My 
aim was not so much to reap an immediate profit, as to avoid 
loss, and look to the increased value of the stock and crop, as 
Well as of the land itself, for my ultimate reward. I believe 
that I have realised this aim. I believe likewise that more 
sanguine expectations would have met with disappointment 
In comparing my home management with the most approved 
theories of modern farming, I shall plainly state the chief points 
of conformity or divergence without always justifying my prac- 
tice. In some cases, if the master had been more at home, and 
at leisure, more of change would have been attempted. What 
was done was carried out by a practical man, responsible to his 
employer to make the farm pay its way, and consequently left to 
