518 Beport on the Farm Prize Competition in 
These figures appear to prove the lamentable fact that the 
larger acreage of permanent grass has not resulted in an increase 
of the total number of stock in either of the counties under 
consideration, or in England as a whole. We are, therefore, 
producing less coi-n by decreasing its acreage, and probably 
diminishing its yield, whilst not at the same time making more 
meat in its place. Yet the main arguments for the change have 
been the greater profits from the production of meat, and the 
better opportunities of meeting our foreign competitors by its 
means rather than by the growth of corn. It may be right to 
suppose that it will pay better to have land under grass than 
under corn, but wrong to think that we necessarily increase our 
capacities for the breeding and feeding of stock by such means. 
A little attention to the particulars of the first and second prize 
farms, which will be given presently, will go far to show that 
the meat returns from very poor land, which is in great part 
arable, can be made much greater than those from similar land 
laid down to grass, if not indeed from those also of the richest 
pasture land of the country. 
Whilst dealing with a county in which both large and small 
holdings are so exceptionally repi'esented, the writer thinks 
that a comparison of the numbers of stock kept upon each of 
these classes respectively will be of some interest. 
The following table has been prepared for the purpose from 
Government Returns obtained in June, 1885, and shows the 
number of farm animals under their several heads per 100 acres 
of land in large holdings of above 500 acres but not exceeding 
1,000 acres, with the same particulars for small farms of above 
50 but not exceeding 100 acres of land. 
Description of farma 
Horses 
per 100 
acres 
Co\V3 and 
other 
cattle per 
100 acres 
sheep and 
himbs per 
100 acres 
Pigs per 
100 acres 
Large Farms of above 500 acres, but i 
not exceeding 1,000 acres ... 1 
Small Farms of above CO acres, but not i 
3- 33 
4- 89 
lllG 
22-83 
103-19 
60-92 
4-24 
913 
Large farmers and small, therefore, seem to keep about the 
same number of horses in proportion to their acreage. The 
smaller holders are clearly much stronger in cattle, and just 
about as much weaker in sheep, whilst the pig, of course, is a 
favourite animal with the smaller capitalist. It appears likely 
that the value per acre of the live stock as a whole would in 
each case be singularly uniform. But it is to be feared that a 
