508 Report on laying down Land to Permanent Pasture. 
stock on a pasture I find it is not grazing well, I apply a little 
salt, manure it, and mow for a year or two, which quite changes 
the herbage and improves the field immensely " (p. 474). 
The conversion of arable land into permanent pasture by 
" inoculation " is rarely practised. It would naturally appear to 
be an expensive system, as stated by Mr. James Howard, and to 
do best in a moist climate where land has a tendency to run 
into grass. Mr. Hodgson Huntley states the cost in his case to 
be only 11. per acre, exclusive of horses and drivers (p. 464). 
But this clearly is but a small portion of the expense, as some 
considerable allowance must also be made for the damage done 
by the removal of the strips of turf from other quarters, unless 
it is to be understood that the land from which these are taken 
is in course of being broken up. 
Those persons who have answered the questions referring to 
an altered system of rotation and an extension of the period for 
artificial grasses, are but few ; but they are favourable to the 
system, as increasing the grass-producing area of their farms, 
and consequently enabling them to keep more stock. It is 
generally admitted that land left for two or more years in grass 
has a tendency to become foul, and is at least not so clean as one 
year's grass when broken up for wheat or any other crop in the 
rotation. This difficulty, however, is not insuperable. Mr. 
C. S. Read says, " by keeping artificial grasses more than one 
year, there is certainly a tendency on light land to produce 
couch and other natural grasses. I keep my land clean by using 
the cultivator on the wheat stubbles directly after harvest, and I 
continue to pull the root-weeds about until they are turned 
under an 8 or 9-inch furrow late in the autumn. By so doing I 
never have any cause to burn or remove any couch " (p. 489). 
Admiral Eliott says, " The land does, I find, become more 
foul under this practice ; but a deep ploughing, though it may 
cost an additional 10s. per acre, cleans it effectually." 
It is certainly unadvisable, in the present state of prices of 
agricultural produce and labour, to break up any tolerably good 
pastures for the purpose of converting them into arable land. 
Pastures worth not less than 30.9. per acre had better not be 
ploughed up, but should rather be improved by manuring, and 
made to produce grass in greater quantity and of a better 
quality. The production of " corn for the million," as it is 
called, is not so important just now as the production of meat. 
Even if it were, from public or national considerations, more 
desirable to grow corn than to feed stock, it is difficult to see 
why the farmer, more than any other class of individuals, should 
sacrifice his pocket to his patriotism. He cannot be supposed 
to follow his business solely with the aim of supplying the 
