1799] 
efpecially if they have a good fall-back, 
either ona found clover-ley, oron graf{s. 
I do not think it the beft management to 
winter fheep in yards, for, in my opinion, 
the litter might be made into much better 
manure by great itock, than by fheep, as I 
have feldom feen greater, or more lalting 
benefit from fheep yard dung, than from 
a good fold. Ifturnips are fown onclays, 
I would by all means advile a fall-beck ot 
clover-ley of one year’s {tanding, meant for 
beans ; it will materially benefit the crop 
and not rob the turnip-land fo much as 
drawing off : by this means [am.of opinion 
that afarmer, on {trong land, may be en- 
abled to keep his {tock with nearly equa] ad- 
vantage to thole on the lighter foil.~-But, 
by my queftion (vide Magazine for March) 
I wifhed to gain fome information of a 
fubftitute for turnips, the keep of which 
would be above ground, therefore much 
better for the fheep, and go farther than 
turnips, which on ftrong land are much 
wafted by being trod into the dirt. Ca. 
bages feem to be the beft adapted to this 
purpofe. 
With refpe&t to the Ruta-baga, your 
correfpondent allows that other turnips 
will not always ftand the froft, even if very 
carefully ftacked.—Now I can very fafely 
afhirm that no froft will injure theie, nor 
dol think they draw the land any more 
thanthe common ones would do, if allowed 
to ftand as long (from the end of May to 
the end of April), neither do I think the 
deficiency of quantity fo great as is fup- 
pore the3turnips are certainly fmaller, 
ut then they do not require to be fet out 
fo far, and the difference in folidity will, I 
think, goa great way towards making up 
the deficiency of quantity, as one cubic 
inch of the Swedifh weighs ove third more 
than the fame of the Norfolk white turnip. 
Draw them both off together, and I will 
allow the advantage to the common ones ; 
and with regard to zutriment, when raifed 
from good feed, of the yellow fort, they 
much refemble a carvot, both in tafe and 
texture. 
I have known raw potatoes given to 
milking cows, and they have confiderably 
raifed the quantity of milk. Where fuel 
is fo very dear as with us, it would hardly, 
I think, anfwer to boil them. 
As your correfpondent keeps a large 
** pig-ftock,”” he is doubtlefs able to give 
much ufeful information as to the breed, 
and their management. Yours, &c, 
April 1f?, 1799. G.A. 
Errata.—In the Magazine for March, page 
‘131, lineg, fromthe bottom, for racked read 
frocked—132, line 6, place the comma after 
§* notwithftanding,. ” 
Agricultural Remarks. 

On Taken-work. 273 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine, 
SIR, 
N your Magazine for September laft 
(vol vi. page 169) are inferted a few 
obfervations which I fent to you on the 
fubjeét of taken-work. I there ftated at 
large the reafons which then occutred to 
me for giving it a decided preference to 
common day-labour, hinting, however, 
the neceffity of taking into confideration 
one qu.ftion, which, at that time, I wholly 
omitted noticing, namely, Whether the in- 
creafed libour which taken-work invites is 
injurious to the conftitution? whether it 
produces a prematurity of cld age? It is 
of great importance that thefe queftions 
fhould be folved, and I hoped that the fo- 
lution of them might have engaged the 
attention of fome of your corre{pondents: 
it is becaufe I ftill hope fo that I revive the 
fubject, for I. really do not feel inyfelf by 
any means competent to form a decifive 
opinion concerning it: I ara, however, on 
the whole, inclined to believe that it is not 
injurious. I do not intend to affert that 
excefiive labour wil] not exhauft and wear 
out a man as wellasahorfe, or any other 
animal; ofcourfe I admit that a hufband- 
man may injure himifelf by working. But 
IT am of opinion that, from the nature of 
his employment, he is munch lefs likely to 
do fo than the manual labourer in almott 
any other occupation; and that, in the 
prefent ftate of fociety, the probability is, 
that, if he works by the piece, he will 
rather add tothe number of his. days than 
fhorten it. 
In the firft place, let us for a moment 
contemplate the nature of the hufbandman’s 
employment: but look at his face—does 
not it befpeak health and hilarity ? examine 
his limbs—do they not evince astivity and 
ftrength ? the firft impreffion which the 
countenance and general afpeét of that man 
make on you, is it not, that his work 
agrees with him? and well it may; the 
air which he breaths is pure and exhilarat- 
ing; itis the untainted air of heaven, 
His work is hard—fometimes it is no 
doubt extremely hard ; but remember this 
very important advantage which the huf- 
bandman has over almoft every other 
labourer, that 42s employment is perpetually 
varied. 
to-morrow: no fet of mufcles is exclufively 
and preternaturally exerted : by working 
over hours one day with another, he feels 
no partial debility, no peculiar infirmity, 
and in this refpect differs from almoft every 
other clafs of workmen: for they by ex- 
ceflive application, bring on fome difeafe or 
infirmity 
If he threthes to-day he ploughs 

