amount expended in the improved quality of the stock. Secondly, with regard to the selection, the importance of which I think you will admit, I would most strongly recommend you to fix upon a flock or herd known to be descended from a long line of heavyfleshed and robust animals, and one whose owner has a character for careful selection of his breeding stock. Carefully avoid, however, herds bred from the light-fleshed, narrow, and delicate animals so common at the present day. In purchasing a bull for ordinary use, above all things choose a fair-sized animal, with good quality of flesh; if well descended, do not be too particular about his form. The shoulders are better well open at the top, not narrow like the withers of a horse, no matter if a little coarse, if it is a sign of constitution; the ribs should be well sprung, a most important point, but difficult to get; the hips large, even though they should be coarse; the head and neck masculine, and the horns rather thick than otherwise—a thick horn is a sign of robustness and vigour. I do not like the thin, papery hide which so many admire; you may be sure there is not much flesh under it.

ADVICE TO BREEDERS-IN-BREEDING.

As there may be some amongst my hearers who are breeders of first-class shorthorns, a few words of advice to them may not be out of place, though it must be understood that they do not in any way extend to those whom we may term "pedigree breeders." With them I have no sympathy; and though I am bound to admit that large sums of money may be and are realized by this mode of breeding, that its effects are injurious must be apparent to every unprejudiced person. What I have said in my advice to farmers, will apply here, only, if possible, with tenfold force—viz., avoid any tendency to light flesh or delicacy of constitution. A cross of this kind is often attended with most disastrous results; a case in point occurred some years ago in the herd of the late Mr Richard Booth, whose name is doubtless well known to most of you. He had for many years been breeding entirely from his own stocks, and

325

thinking that a cross was beneficial, he was induced to purchase at one of the sales of the late Earl Spencer, a bull called "Exquisite." Earl Spencer's herd, though neat in form, was wanting in flesh and robustness, the very characteristics possessed in such an eminent degree by Mr Booth's, but the cross, contrary to Mr Booth's expectation, proved a most unfortunate one, the stock from Lord Spencer's bull being decidedly inferior. Similar cases have more than once occurred in my own flock of Leicesters, and this has strengthened my conviction that unless the male be superior, or at least equal to the female, in all essential points, deterioration must take place. Let me here, again, impress upon you the importance of selecting a bull from a herd superior to your own; he should, of course, be as perfect in form as possible, but the following points should be made a sine qua non-viz., good and heavy flesh, good looks, well sprung ribs, and, above all, a pedigree without blot. Bear in mind, however, that a long pedigree is not necessarily a good one. Success in breeding, I am quite convinced, requires a certain amount of intuitive knowledge; it is this which enables one to see at a glance when an animal is likely to be a good stock getter, or whether a young animal is likely to improve or deteriorate. I cannot believe that this faculty is possessed by many of the breeders of the present day; if it were, the quality of the cattle brought under our notice at sales and shows would be very different. To quote an eminent authority (Mr Darwin):-" Not one man in a thousand has accuracy of eye and judgment sufficient to become an eminent breeder. If gifted with these qualities, and he studies his subject for years, and devotes his life-time to it with indomitable perseverance, he will succeed, and may make great improvements; but if he wants any of these qualities, he will assuredly fail." Before concluding this part of my paper, I must say a few words on the subject of in-breeding, a subject to me most interesting, but at the same time most complicated. I feel certain that, under some conditions, the experiment might be tried with

in the following order :-1. yards; 2. boxes; 3. stalls. It depends, however, in some measure on the kind of cattle to be fed. Steers will improve faster in yards or boxes, but cows, from their quarrelsome disposition, do better in stalls. Farmers, however, have not often sufficient accommodation to admit of choice in the matter. In the foregoing remarks I have pre-supposed that the stock have been fairly bred, for it is only by this means that early maturity can be secured; at the same time I would have it understood that I am speaking of ordinary stock, and not of animals intended for exhibition. Not having any definite knowledge of the system adopted by the large dairy farmers in rearing, I cannot give any information on the subject, but beg to refer you to the forthcoming volume of the Royal Agricultural Society's Journal, where you will find some valuable hints in the account of the first prize dairy farm. I may remark that the calves on this farm were economically fed, and in very good condition. With regard to the rearing and management of first-class breeding stock, I most strongly recommend that all the bull calves should, whenever practicable, be reared upon cows in the open pastures; they should suck from six to eight months, and a few weeks before weaning should become accustomed to artificial food, as a calf so soon loses condition after leaving the dam. Exercise should be given regularly, this being such an essential point. The bull calves will, of course, receive the most liberal treatment possible until sold; the

327

heifers only require to be kept in good growing condition,`which can be done by giving a very small quantity of arti ficial food and good hay. They should be put to the bull at one and three-quarters or two years old, as, if this be longer deferred, they are likely to prove non-breeders. Stock for exhibition require the most liberal and careful feeding. Only so much should be given as can be consumed at once; if any be left it should be removed. This I believe to be the most important point in feeding. Change of food is also very essential. Linseed cake should be given with judgment: if too much be given, the animal is soon cloyed. But all these directions will be useless unless the intending exhibitor have an intelligent, persevering, and trustworthy servant, as it must depend upon his exertions to bring out the animal in show condition at the right time, which is no easy matter. Economical feeding, i. e., obtaining the best results from the smallest amount of food, is of the greatest importance; but it is difficult to lay down any special rule on the subject. 1 shall not attempt to give any opinion on the different feeding-stuffs and condiments now before the public, my experience of them being very limited, malt, however, excepted. I am convinced that it is one of the most valuable foods known, not only as a condiment, but as a fat producer. Animals for exhibition are kept in better health on malt than upon any other food, milk excepted. I only hope I may live to see the day when it will be within the reach of every farmer.

we have satisfactorily shewn, from official facts and figures, that the large farms, when their owners possessed education and skill, yielded much more in proportion to the expense of the working, than the little crofter's places in the north.

Belgium has often been quoted in favour of spade-husbandry; but Belgium has a soil different from ours, and a population that lives on less money than British agriculturists, as a rule, would like to take. But farming, like all other professions, requires money to carry it out to the best advantage. Capital and skill alone can secure the utmost yield from the earth. Such has been always our opinion, and we are glad to see it confirmed, so long ago as 1811, by Mr J. Bailey, who was intimate with Mr G. Culley. In his survey of Durham, so early as fourteen years before the date we have named, Mr Bailey, who belonged to the shorthorn district which Culley, Collings, and Bates made famous, makes mention of the advantages which large farms possessed over small. He says, according to Mr Bell's "History of Shorthorns," which has just come out, that "In this" (speaking specially with reference to the breeding of cattle), "as well as in every other district I am acquainted with, the occupiers of large farms have been the first to make improvements, to introduce new

proved breeds of live stock. It is men of education and superior intelligence who travel to examine the cultivation of distant counties, and improved breeds of cattle, sheep, and other animals, and who have capital to carry into effect whatever they may think will improve their own districts. Messrs Culley and Charge were the first that led the way, and they have been followed by Messrs Collings, Mason, Taylor, Nesham, Seymour, and many others, by whose exertions and judicious selection, this district will be lastingly benefited."

Mr Bailey, besides being sound on the advantage of large farms over small ones, is equally prophetic and thorough about the advantages that would flow from the judicious selection of sire and matron in the case of cattle.

The results of this skill and care were seen even before he wrote. Mr Fowler's bull, at Mr Paget's sale, brought 400 guineas in 1793; now we can manage-entirely through the enterprise of large farmers—to bring for shorthorns treble the amount. For two animals, 2500 guineas have recently been paid, and their progeny have already about recouped the owner. Only by careful selection and strict attention to the peculiarities of each animal, could such grand results be achieved.

year after its first appearance in Great Britain. It is a melancholy fact that one of the chief articles of diet of the poorer classes should fall a prey to a disease so subtle in its character, that, despite the investigations of science, and the specifics which its devotees prescribe, its progress cannot be stayed. Authorities in this, as well as in all difficult questions, are at issue, and the more they

and unsatisfactory their findings do become. We want a specific, or a plan of working, to bar the evil day, if we cannot get a remedy. Some say, plant in a high and dry position, where the winds of heaven blow without being in any way intercepted. We have done that, and still the disease was there. It may not have been so virulent, so devastating in its action; but there it is. Like infec

tious troubles common to mankind, it is partial in its ravages. Some portions of a field may escape in a manner unscathed, while others are all but a total loss. Moreover, it comes upon us with the suddenness of a cyclone, and fields once contaminated, cannot by any alleged specific, or by any system of management, be arrested. The stealthy enemy is charged with poison, that makes insidious raids upon vitality; and first, leaves, then haulm, then tubers, are affected, and the affection is often strong and swift in its progress. In the course of twenty-four hours the enemy has done its work. It may have been acting for weeks previously; but on examination we find slight symptoms of disease during August, but on the day of the 1st September, in the field where our observations were taken from, it seemed from the number affected that the disease had spread with almost plague-like virulence, and the half of the crop was touched, and consequently is so much destroyed as an article of diet for the people.

The haulms were undoubtedly first affected. The leaves seemed as if touched indiscriminately over the plant, some not affected at all, and others so much so as to have ceased to discharge their functions. So sudden does the virus extend, that it is a work of difficulty to tell whether the tissue and cellular matter ever assumes a putridinous character. There can scarcely be a doubt, we presume, of its being the work of parasitic fungi, and if it be so, the fungal cysts in extending their area lick up the vital juices as if by magic, and rapidly arrest the circulation going on in a healthy state. Of course, the leaves are not at all of a succulent character, but in other plants, with leaves equally thin and membraneous, the same dessicating process does not go on in common with the first stages of putrefaction. It is not, however, in the leaves only where this is observable, but in the haulms. The stems get discoloured at intervals, then dry up with great rapidity, assuming the discoloured form of the affected tubers, and running in to pitted cavities, eventually to the entire destruction of that part of the haulm immediately above

329

where the virus has begun. What, however, must strike every observer, is the sympathy that exists between the ripening tuber and the tops, which grow in so rapid a state during the three months of June, July, and August. The affection is conveyed through the ordinary channels of vitality, and very partially too, else we would have tubers affected in common. We never observed the contagious process in so manifest a degree as during this season, although its partial distribution has always been a theme of comment, and has been a means of unsettling the minds of our authorities in the investigation of the disease. Potatoes that were partially affected to-day, were victims of almost complete putrefaction to-morrow. And the putrefaction was of the worst kind. The dessicating process going on was powerful enough to pump out the vital fluid of the leaves, but its agency, combined with the swift decomposing nature of the disease in the matter of the tubers, brought about such a state of putrefaction as was felt without being seen. The stench from the contaminated fields was oppressive, increasing, of course, with the bright sunny weather that prevailed; and when the diggers went to work there was proof positive that a terrible state of disease was afloat, and that the potato crop of 1871 was to the extent of at least one-half affected by disease.

The lessons we learn from all this, and from the observations that have from time to time been addressed to the political and to the scientific press, go to shew that we are all but powerless in the matter. We may have agreed that the disease is due to fungi, as was promulgated by the late Dr Lindley, and by the Rev. Mr Berkeley, one of the most distinguished mycologists of the present time, and has since been authenticated by Dr Julius Kühn, and by many others; but how about putting into the hands of the producer a prescription to act upon so as he may be able to draw a cordon for protection around him? That is the great question to solve, and, moreover, seems not only difficult to solve, but incapable of solution. And there need be little wonder when we consider that