may be blown into their neighbours’ ground, can 
have no injustice in principle. In England, the 
petty constable might be required, by precept 
from the high constable, to give in presentments 
to the Quarter-Sessions, containing a list of all 
persons who suffered weeds to run to seed in 
their hedges or lands, such presentments to be 
particularly specified to the court. Those re- 
ferring to the coltsfoot, to be given in at the 
Ladyday sessions; and those referring to this- 
tles, rag-weed, &c., to be given in at the Mid- 
summer sessions. An order of court might then 
be made, for the immediate removal of such nui- 
sances; and if not complied with, the offender 
should be fined a sum not exceeding five pounds, 
one half to the informer, and the other half to 
go for the relief of the poor. If, in consequence 
of such a system being enforced, from four to 
five bushels of wheat, fifteen bushels of bar- 
ley, and ten bushels of oats additional, were 
raised in all the fields in the kingdom, whose 
crops are injured by weeds, the benefit would 
be well worth the labour and expense, and 
the farmers would soon find, that however anx- 
ious they may be to have their lands tithe- 
free, yet to have them weed-free is of still 
greater importance. On the whole, keeping his 
land in a clean state ought to be a principal ob- 
ject with every farmer; and if this be not care- 
fully attended to, he may rest assured of paying 
dearly for his neglect. But the losses which he 
suffers, do not remedy the injury which the pub- 
lic sustains from his slovenly conduct.” 
“Tn several countries,” says the same writer, 
“the legislature has interposed its authority for 
the destruction of weeds. By a regulation in 
France, a farmer may sue his neighbour, who 
neglects to destroy the thistles upon his land at 
the proper seasons, or may employ people to do 
it at the other’s expense. In Denmark, there is 
a law to oblige the farmers to root up the corn 
marigold, Chrysanthemum segetum. But the old- 
est regulation for that purpose, was probably in 
Scotland; a statute of Alexander II. about the 
year 1220, having been directed against that 
weed, which was considered to be peculiarly per- 
nicious to corn fields. The statute is very short, 
and ably expressed. It denounces that man to 
be a traitor, ‘who poisons the king’s lands with 
weeds, and introduces into them a host of ene- 
mies. —Bondsmen who had this plant in their 
corn, were fined a sheep for each stalk. Under 
the authority of that law, Sir William Grierson, 
a Scottish baron, was accustomed to hold Goul 
courts, for the express purpose of fining the 
farmers in whose growing crops three heads or 
upwards of that weed were found. Such a plan, 
if generally adopted, would soon extirpate weeds ; 
and as by a clause introduced into many leases, 
(and which ought to be universal,) the landlord 
is empowered to cut down these weeds, at the 
expense of the tenant, if the latter neglect to do 
it himself, it is much to be regretted that so 
useful a regulation should not be generally en- 
forced. The policy of some legislative provision 
for this purpose has been frequently suggested. 
A clause enforcing the extirpation of weeds, in 
hedges, along the sides of roads, passed the House 
of Commons, but was thrown out by the Lords. 
It is to be hoped, that so useful a measure, even 
on a more extensive scale, will soon be passed in- 
toalaw. By some it is recommended, that the 
destruction of weeds on the sides of roads should 
be done at the parish’ expense; others, by the 
road-surveyors, and the expense to be stated in 
their accounts.’ In some of the best farmed 
parts of the Continent, the authorities not only 
order the weeds on commons, public lands, and 
all road sides to be cut down, but also order all 
the leaves of trees infested with caterpillars to 
be stripped off and destroyed; and if individuals 
neglect to keep down weedsand prevent the multi- 
plication of noxious insects at the proper seasons, 
the parishes do them and charge the individuals 
with the expense,—and if the parishes neglect 
them, the districts do them and charge the par- 
ishes. Some similar law in Britain, with refer- 
ence especially to all annuals and all light-seeded 
perennials, would evidently confer vast benefit 
on agriculture, and make a great addition to the 
national wealth,—not only increasing the pro- 
duce of field crops, but appreciably diminishing 
the amount of farm labour, and correspondingly 
cheapening the market value of farm produce. 
The prevention of weeds by several means 
which are fully in every farmer’s own power, 
and which ought to hold a recognised place in 
the routine processes of every farm, is vastly 
more important than even prevention by the 
authority of some public law. All farmers, ac- 
cording to the nature of their practices, are 
either preventers or encouragers of weeds. One 
very effectual measure of prevention is to use 
care that all seeds of corn, brassicas, or other 
field crops sown upon a farm be perfectly free 
from intermixture with the seeds of weeds; for 
even a very small amount of intermixture,—such 
as may be found in many a market specimen of 
agricultural seeds, and such as will readily escape 
the observation or suspicion of a slovenly farmer 
—will, in some instances, produce an appalling 
quantity of weeds, and may so sadly befoul the 
very cleanest land that years of labour may be re- 
quisite to remedy the evil. Another measure of 
much consequence is to use care that no rubbish 
or sweepings or offal containing the live seeds 
of weeds be allowed to find its way to the farm- 
yard or the dung-heap; for weeds of many kinds, 
comprising some of the most mischievous, when 
they go into a field through the medium of ma- 
nure, take such stubborn possession as to resist 
all but the sturdiest and most persevering efforts 
for their extirpation. A third precaution is to 
keep the sides of fields, the sides of hedges, the 
sides of roads, and all waste or rubbishy spots 
about a farm in a clean condition, and on no ac- 
