388 
MESSRS. J. B. LAWES AND J. H. GILBERT OX THE RESULTS OF 
We need not forestall, or incur tlie necessity of repetition, by discussing here the 
climatic characters of the different seasons. It will be sufficient to call attention to 
the very great variation in the estimated second, as in the actual first crops, from year 
to year, under the influence of the same manurial conditions. But reference to the 
columns showing the proportion of the second crops to the first each year will show 
that it sometimes varied very considerably. It is obvious that, a deficiency of rain, 
or a relatively too high, or too low, or too great a range of, temperature, during the 
spring and early summer, would give a deficient first crop, and leave the land corres¬ 
pondingly less exhausted. If then, the summer and autumn were favourable for 
growth, the second crop would have the additional advantage of unexhausted manurial 
condition of land. If, on the other hand, the earlier period were favourable for luxuri¬ 
ant first crop, the land would be comparatively exhausted for the second, even with 
suitable climatal conditions for its growth. And if, to add to exhaustion by the first 
crop, the succeeding climatal conditions are unfavourable for second growth, we shall 
have a still lower amount, and proportion, of second crop. Again, if both first and 
second crops are heavy, or the second only is heavy, in any particular season, this will 
have some effect, not only on the botany, and the general character, of the vegetation, 
but more or less on the condition of the land also, for the growth of the first crop the 
next year. 
The results recorded in the table illustrate the great variation in the conditions 
referred to, from season to season. In regard to the amounts of second crop indicated 
by the estimates, it may be observed that, judging from the actual weights of the 
second crops obtained in 1875, 1877, and 1878, it may be concluded that the pre¬ 
viously estimated amounts were more probably too low than too high ; though it is 
true that these later seasons were more favourable for second growth than the majority 
of the earlier ones, for which estimates only were made. In fact, it was partly on 
account of the luxuriance of the second crops of these later years, that it was decided 
to cut and remove them from the land. It is probable, however, that a larger amount 
of the dry substance of the deficiently matured second, than of the better matured 
first crops of grass, would be required as food, and that therefore the estimate of 
16 lbs. of such hay consumed per head per week may be too low. 
Turning to the summaries at the bottom of the table, it is observed that, although 
without manure the amounts of produce, of both first and second crops, are small, the 
proportion of second crop to first is greater than under either of the selected manurial 
conditions; that is, it is greater where the total removal from the land is comparatively 
small, and where, especially, the variety of the herbage is the greatest, and where, 
consequently, the possession by the roots of the upper layers of the soil, and the 
capabilities of food-collection generally, will be the most varied. 
Next in proportion of second crops to first comes the mineral-manured plot (7). 
Here, again, the crops, though much larger than without manure, are not really large ; 
