mitted to the reader, it, will be seen that an inference to this ef fect may be reasonably drawn.

In the extensive farming concerns of the late Mr Curwen at The Schoose, a mode of estimating dead-weight was adopted, somewhat singular in its nature, and said to be remarkably correct in its results. Glover, the stock-bailiff, a very intelligent man, made use of what he called his "magical number" 556, by which, upon receiving the live-weight, he professed to give the dead-weight, sinking offal, of any fat animal submitted to his test *. In one instance, verified by the writer, Glover's calculation certainly approached very nearly to the truth, and gave a greater return than competent judges were disposed to allow from handling the animal alive.

The subject of experiment was an Ayrshire heifer, 18 months old, which Mr Curwen slaughtered at one of his general meetings, as a sample of his favourite system of soiling. This animal had never been a day out of a calf-pen or straw-yard from her birth, had never tasted oil-cake or corn, and was undoubtedly a very forward animal at so early an age. Her live-weight was correctly ascertained to be 55 stones, of 14 lb. to the stone, which being applied as a multiplier to the famous number, and cutting off the three figures on the right, gave the following product: 556 × 55-30-580, that is, holding the three righthand figures as decimals, about 30 stones. The weight of this heifer by measurement in Ainslie's Tables, was pretty nearly the same. The actual result gave 30 stones of meat, and 2 stones of loose fat, fine marbled beef, but by no means prime

The writer need scarcely observe, that there is nothing really magical in the number 556, nor in the manner of obtaining it. If an ox were to weigh 50 stones when alive, and the dead-weight were found to be 25 stones, the ratio of dead to live weight would be represented by the fraction, which, converted to decimals, would give 5, and this, multiplied by the live-weight, would give the dead-weight. But if Mr Glover, by a series of more correct observations, found that, upon an average of oxen, the live-weight was 50 stones, and the dead-weight 27 stones 11% lb., the proportion of dead to

mals, would give 556; which again multiplied by the live-weight, would give the dead-weight.

fat In this animal, then, which had certainly not attained a state of perfection, we have a return considerably exceeding onehalf of the live-weight

Mr Rennie of Phantassie, and Mr Curwen, with their respective adherents, differed in their estimation of the live and dead weight upon general principles. Mr Rennie would not allow more than one-half of the live-weight to be reckoned upon, except in cases of extraordinary fat, to which, certainly, the heifer in question had no pretensions, and in whose case, notwithstanding, the proportion of Mr Rennie was considerably below the mark.

The following details will still farther illustrate this subject, and may tend to excite more than a doubt, whether one-half be not too small a proportion to be assumed in estimating the live and dead weight of stock.

TABLES of Sheep and Cattle slaughtered in various Years, with the Amount of Live and Dead Weight per Stone of

According to the average in the above Table, Mr Glover's rule would give 5 stones 5 lb. as the dead-weight; but the true multiplier would be 605, instead of 556, according to Mr Glover's practice, or instead of 500 according to the common practice.

The above Table gives the same result to a fraction as the last, and this curious coincidence is deserving of notice, as occurring in the case of animals so entirely distinct in their form and character as sheep and oxen are.

The general conclusion to be drawn from these returns would seem to be, that the practice of estimating the dead-weight at one-half of the live-weight is erroneous. It would by no means, however, be safe to draw a specific conclusion as to the actual proportion of live to dead weight from the Tables now given, on account of the limited number of the returns made. It is only by means of a great number of such experiments that we can hope to obtain a just medium, and found upon it a safe conclusion. Could farmers be induced to give more attention to this subject, by keeping accurate records of stock slaughtered by themselves or their friends, much might be speedily done to settle the question of the live and dead weight, while there is good reason to believe, that many respectable butchers would concur in preserving and communicating similar details. A further purpose might be promoted by constructing such Tables. We should, by means of them, be able to discover the breeds or varieties of our different species of stock which yield the greatest returns in proportion to the offal, and thus perhaps be enabled to draw conclusions as to the relative value of different breeds.

It has been before observed, that the question of the ratio of live to dead weight seems to have been a good deal overlooked

of recent years. At one period, the attention of individuals, admirably fitted for the investigation, appears to have been awakened to the importance of the inquiry. In the able report of the county of Durham, some interesting details on the subject are given; but these can scarcely be said to do more than to open up the subject; and certainly a great blank remains to be filled up, before the farmer and the professional butcher shall be placed on equal terms, as regards their information upon this point.

Should these cursory remarks tend to recall the attention of breeders and graziers to this interesting subject of inquiry, the object of the writer will have been fully accomplished.

ON THE APPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN PARTS OF THE SCOTTISH

SYSTEM OF HUSBANDRY TO ENGLAND. By the Right Honourable Sir JOHN SINCLAIR, Baronet. In a Letter to the Editor.

SIR,

It is of great importance to ascertain to what extent the Scottish system of farming is applicable to the culture of land, and the management of farms in England, more especially as, in several instances, Scottish farmers have not succeeded in that country, I was thence induced to put several questions to Mr Dickson, who had occupied a farm near Edinburgh, which he had managed with great ability and success, and who has for some time past cultivated a farm, called Kidbrooke, near Blackheath, in Kent. During my residence in London last June, Mr Dickson happened to call on me, and seemed very well disposed to give me any information on the subject in his power to furnish. I was thence induced to draw up some queries, to which he sent me very distinct answers, which contain information well entitled to the consideration of those who either propose taking farms in England, or are already settled there, and the substance of which I think it right to send you.

Mr Dickson is of opinion that the Scottish system, as regards

the management of light lands, is applicable to the same class of soils in England, with the exception of the practice of sowing túrnips in ridged-up drills. At the season of the year when that is generally done, the soil, he conceives, dries so fast as to prevent vegetation; and the best method, accordingly, in the case of turnips, is to sow them drilled on the flat surface.

In speaking of light soils, it is presumed that Mr Dickson has had chiefly in view those thin chalky soils which cover such extensive districts, but to which nothing similar is known in other parts of the kingdom. In the county of Norfolk the turnip drillculture has been adopted with much success; and there is a vast part of the kingdom so similar in character to the northern border counties of England, where this species of cultivation is practised on a scale of the greatest magnitude, that it would be difficult to admit the force of Mr Dickson's objection, but under great limitations and exceptions.

With regard to the Scottish system of fallowing, Mr Dickson is of opinion, that it is not suited to the more tenacious clays of the southern counties of England. The fallow-land on such soils, he contends, should not be broken up before it is dry in May. If ploughed in autumn, and if the winter prove open, with little frost and much rain, it gets too firm, and retains the moisture, becomes soured, and requires much trouble to get it dried for cleaning in spring, and frequently, before this can be done, it is reduced too fine on the surface for wheat. All such clay soils require the horses to go in the furrows if the land is moist. Treading does much harm on such land before ploughing, and if the horses' feet make any impression, this will remain and hold water when taking up the last two furrows of a ridge. In ploughing stubbles, if wet or damp, the treading of the horses' feet on the land will, in a great measure, prevent the proper turning over of the furrow-slice.

In answer to a query on the difference in the expense of labour, in carrying on the cultivation of land in England, compared to the expense in Scotland, Mr Dickson observes, that the expense is fully 30 per cent greater in the former country. The poor's rates, besides, are generally 30 per cent. on the rental, and in some parishes 50 per cent. From the distressed state of the country, and the reduced capital of the farmers, the