the Royal Agricultural Society. 
33 
tations in the 4 years ending 1852 ; so that„ judging by the sup- 
plies sent to the metropolis (no bad test), it is pretty certain that 
the number of British sheep sent to market has been for the last ten 
years stationary, if not retrograde. 
The supply of meat sent by railway consists, to a great extent, 
of prime joints, and consequently represents a greater number of 
head of live-stock than an equal weight of meat sent to market 
in the ordinary way (by the carcase). This consideration, how- 
ever, cannot affect our calculation to any appreciable extent. 
Take the case of 100 sheep slaughtered at Norwich, where this 
trade is largely carried on. The fore-quarters of the whole 
100 sheep are now consumed at Norwich, and the same con- 
suming power would formerly have been supplied by 50 sheep 
slaughtered and wholly disposed of there. The other 50 would 
have been sent to London alive ; whereas now the inhabitants of 
Norwich are willing to purchase the inferior joints at a lower 
price, and the consumers of the metropolis are also willing to 
pay for the privilege of having the hind-quarters of the whole 
100 sheep loithout the inferior joints. It is, therefore, a mere 
transfer of the best parts of the animal to the best market, and 
does not of itself give any indication either of increase or decrease 
in the number slaughtered. 
The slow rate of increase of our home-grown supplies of sheep 
becomes still more striking if we compare the number sent to 
the Metropolitan Market now with the number sold in Smith- 
field Market 40 years ago. In 1822 the number of cattle sold 
in Smithfield Market was 142,043, and of sheep 1,340,160. In 
1862 the number of cattle brought into the Metropolitan Market 
was 304,741, and of sheep 1,498,500; so that whilst the cattle 
have increased 114 per cent., the sheep have increased not quite 
12 per cent! 
Strong corroborative evidence of the increasing scarcity of sheep 
is afforded by the great rise which has occurred in the price of 
mutton within the last ten years. This has also to some extent 
affected the price of beef, notwithstanding good supplies of fat 
cattle. 
The following comparative statement shows that between 1852 
and 1862 the price of mutton has advanced Is. Ad. per stone of 
8 lbs., and that the stone of beef has advanced lOrf. in the same 
time. This statement applies only to the " prime " or best 
quality of meat. Inferior mutton has in the same ten years only 
advanced 7c?., and inferior beef b\d. per 8 lbs. It is common 
when comparing the prices of meat at different periods to take 
the average of different qualities. We prefer confining the com- 
parison to the prime qualities, as the price of inferior meat is 
regulated much more by the proportion of inferior animals to 
VOL. XXV. D 
