nisloT]/ of the EnfjUah Landed Liiere.d. 731 
A history of British agriculture would in great measure 
be a history of civilisation, an important part of the history of 
the world ; it should be a review which gives back life and 
value to the dead past for the instruction and guidance of the 
living present. 
All historians may be, and should be, subjected to certain 
tests. As to the historian’s object — in ]\lr. Garnier’s case, we 
have a clear-headed man seeking to instruct his own mind on 
subjects concrete to his own professional duties. Finding as 
a professional land-agent, so much in the English land-system 
inexplicable without the master-key of history, he determined 
to give effect to a general principle, univ^ersally applicable — 
namely, a man should study especially that history which has an 
immediate application to his own position in life. We are next 
to inquire in regal’d to an historian’s sources of knowledge : a 
scholarlike and well-read man, a Bachelor of Arts of Oxford, 
!Mr. Gamier has been well taught that the education of a man 
of open mind is never ended ; as becomes a scholar he gives 
full references to his authorities — a goodly list, sufficient perhaps, 
but not exhaustive. The exactness of the historian in sifting 
and weighing evidence is to be considered together with Ids 
tendencies and bias. I tested our author in this respect by 
considering his treatment of a very vexed question, namely 
tithe : 1 think from a slightly ecclesiastical point of view he 
has treated that thorny question in a calm, just, and judicial 
manner. Further we have to consider the historian’s profession 
and his general character. Mr. Gamier modestly bases his 
qualification for the task on many years of practical experience 
coupled with much personal intercourse with all the various 
industries connected with land and employed on large estates. 
In short, the author is a rare and precious combination of 
practical experience together with scholarship. Well knowing 
the difficulties of the task Mr. Gamier has undertaken, I ven- 
ture to compliment him on having “set so stout a heart to so 
steep a brae.” 
The essential importance of full references to authorities is 
unquestionable ; in this respect, as I have observed, Mr. Gamier 
leaves nothing to be desired. Difficulty in reading economic 
history is often experienced in regard to money and prices, and 
their relation to values in our day. I do not know whether our 
author might have helped his readers in this respect, and as 
regards population by tabular statements or otherwise. Money, 
so useful in comparing present values, is a useless standard in 
estimating b 3 ’gone expenditure. Corn is only an approximate 
standard whilst people ai'e so poor as to possess only the neces- 
