man joined or contracted with a woman in marriage. See Marriage.

Husband-Land, a term used in Scotland for a portion of land containing six acres of stock and sey the land; that is, of land that may be tilled with a plough, and mown with a scythe.

Husbandry,

The business of a farmer, or of one who lives by cultivating the ground. In this view it includes not only agriculture, but several other branches connected with it, such as the rearing of cattle, the management of the dairy, making butter and cheese, raising flax, timber, &c., the management of bees, and a number of other articles which it is difficult to enumerate particularly.

Agriculture, properly so called, treats only of the cultivation of different soils, and preparing them for yielding the largest crop of any kind of vegetable; but it belongs to husbandry to make choice of the soil most proper. proper for each different vegetable, and to manage matters so that each soil may carry what it is best adapted for, so that on the whole the produce of the farm may be as advantageous as possible. In like manner, the husbandman must know what crops are most proper to be raised in the country where he lives, either with a view to sale or to provender for cattle. The rearing of these, indeed, constitutes one of the most essential articles of husbandry; it being requisite that the husbandman should know not only how to feed them properly, but how to keep them free from diseases, and to distinguish the best breeds, so that such as are designed for work may be capable of doing the most at least expense, and those designed for sale may with the least trouble be brought in good condition to market, and afford the greatest profit to himself as well as the best bargain to the purchaser.

It is by means of the husbandman only that all the inhabitants of a country are enabled to live; whence it ought to be a consideration with him to cultivate the ground in such a manner, as may enable him to afford the produce at the lowest price. Thus he will also consult his own interest: for cheapness of provisions is the only true means by which the population of any country can be advanced; and the greater the number of inhabitants, the greater market will the husbandman have for his goods. Indeed, by a certain mode of arguing, it may be imagined, that it would be more advantageous to keep up provisions at as high a price as possible, rather than to lower them; but however this may apply to manufactures of various kinds, it never can apply to husbandry; for by raising the price of provisions, the price of every other thing also is raised, and it becomes more difficult for the husbandman himself to live, as well as others.

Thus the business of an husbandman is not only extremely complicated and difficult, but important also; insomuch, that societies have been lately instituted in many different parts of the kingdom for its advancement, and premiums offered to those who excelled in any particular branch. Some of these premiums are held out for raising the greatest quantity of particular kinds of vegetables; others for gaining the greatest extent of ground from the sea; some for improving waste ground; others for the invention of the most useful machines for harrowing, sowing, and various operations in agriculture. But though the intention of these societies is undoubtedly laudable and patriotic, and though the invention of man has in a manner been exhausted to accomplish the purposes for which they were instituted; it remains yet a matter of great doubt and uncertainty whether they have really been productive of any public good or not. It does not clearly appear, that the means of subsistence are rendered more generally easy, or that the lives of mankind are more happy and comfortable, than before any societies were instituted, or before any considerable improvements in husbandry were made. On the contrary, provisions of all kinds, instead of becoming cheaper, have gradually become dearer, and their price on the whole is sensibly augmented every four or five years. Hence it is impossible to avoid concluding, that, notwithstanding the apparent improvements which have been made in such numbers, there is not yet any real one in the whole art.—Something of this kind has been taken notice of even by the members of these societies themselves; and on this subject Mr Wimpey expresses himself as follows:

"It is certainly clear from the average prices of corn and provisions of all kinds for 20 years past, that there is not too much land in cultivation. Prices have advanced considerably above what has been deemed, and Mr Wimpey that justly too, the medium standard. As a manufacturing and commercial country, it is properly the duty of legislature to provide, as far as may be consistently with the liberty of the subject, that the price of provisions may be kept as near as possible to their medium value. This is conceived to be very practicable, even so as to be a convenience to the grower as well as the consumer. Some writers (Locke, Montesquieu, &c.) have supposed, that the advance of commodities in price is rather apparent and nominal than real. Things are not so much, if at all (say they), advanced in price, as it is imagined. The precious metals are exceedingly increased in quantity, and proportionally fallen in value. Possibly there may be some truth in this observation, if we go back some hundreds of years; and if taken upon a scale that comprehends all Europe: but from the term of 40 or 50 years, or even from the time that Mr Locke wrote to the present hour, there is little difference in the value of gold and silver; an ounce of either being of much the same value now as then. The frequent and sudden changes that take place in the price of corn and other commodities, which are sometimes at double the price one year they were the foregoing, must be owing to some other cause than that above-mentioned, which operates slowly, if at all, and is not perceptible in less than a century.

"If the quantity of corn and provisions at market always has borne the same proportion to the demand there is for them, the price would be always invariably and unchangeably the same. The variation of the prices, therefore, is governed by the variation of the said proportion. If the demand be greater and the quantity the same, or the demand the same and the quantity less, the price must necessarily advance; and vice versa, if the quantity should increase, and the demand remain the same, the price must as necessarily fall; and it is not in the power of man to make it otherwise. But though this immutable relation is beyond our power to alter, we can by art and industry augment the quantity, and thereby lower the price; cheapness being an infallible consequence of plenty, which is the direct object of an improving cultivation. This is a matter of great consequence to the poor labourer, the manufacturer, and the merchant; and no disadvantage to the grower; because, what he would lose by the fall of price, he would gain by the increased consumption.

"It is not easy to conceive how many and how great why those the improvements are which have been made in this who have most important of all arts in the course of the present gained premiums. A patriotic spirit of uncommon ardour hath from socie gone forth; and the nobility and gentry, like the fe tics have nators of Rome, have set, as it were, their hands to the plough, and excited their tenants and neighbours to of any real practices of which they had no idea before. Yea, they have done more; they have instituted societies, and try made them receptacles and distributors of useful knowledge; they have raised subscriptions, and added marks of honour and pecuniary advantages to the rewards which naturally result from the attention and industry of..." of the ingenious artist. But it must be allowed, that though much has been done, there still remains much more to be done. Experimenters have not always (perhaps but seldom) entered into the views, and ably seconded the intentions, of those valuable institutions. Animated with the hope of obtaining the premiums held out by dint of extraordinary exertions, expensive manures, and a concurrence of fortunate circumstances, more the effect of chance than of design, they often have been the successful adventurers, though at the same time entirely ignorant to what causes they owed their success. We too often indeed ascribe effects to causes which are no way connected with them. The practice of such men is more like the nostrums of quacks, than the recipes of a regular physician. The medicine may be good; but, being ignorant of principles, they know not how to accommodate it as circumstances may require.

Considerations of this kind must certainly lead us to suppose, that most, if not all, the improvements made in husbandry for a long time past, are too expensive; and that, though by their means larger crops are now obtained than formerly, the profits are more than swallowed up by the enormous sums required to produce them. Hence we have as yet obtained only larger or more elegantly formed beets of different kinds; and whether this acquisition is ultimately to be considered as profitable, remains yet to be determined. Unfortunately this sentiment seems to be confirmed by taking a review of the agricultural improvements made during the last half-century. These are:

1. Improvements in the Art of Tillage. Improvements of this kind consist in more perfectly breaking and pulverizing the soil, and keeping it more free from weeds than formerly. Mr Jethro Tull was the author of these, and showed the advantages thence arising. By frequent turning over and pulverizing the soil, we not only destroy the weeds very effectually, but likewise grubs, beetles, worms, and maggots of many different kinds.

"Nothing (says Mr Wimpey) so effectually prevents the ravages of the several tribes of subterraneous insects as the frequent flaring and crumbling the ground: I have had large patches of several poles square in a field of beans destroyed by the grub of the cock-chafier; and many hundreds of cabbage-plants by a grey grub of smaller size. Both these execute their mischief underground. The former eat the roots of the beans even when in kid; and then they wither, fall, and die: the latter bites off the stem of the plant just under the surface, and does infinite mischief: but I have always found tillage, duly performed, capable of destroying the whole race."

2. Invention of new Implements of Husbandry, or improvements of the old. This class includes all the new invented ploughs, harrows, horse and hand-hoes, &c., by means of which it is generally supposed that the work of tillage can be performed at much less expense, as well as more effectually, than formerly.

3. Saving a great quantity of Seed in sowing, and the production of better Crops, by the more regular distribution of what is sown. This improvement chiefly consists in drilling, instead of sowing in the broad-cast way as formerly. The gain is here evident; and Mr Wimpey calculates it at a tenth or twelfth part of the whole produce: and if the community are not yet sensible of any advantage from such a considerable saving, it must be because the drilling husbandry has not yet become very general.

4. Suiting the Crop to the Nature and Condition of the Soil. The farmer is now enabled to this better than formerly, by the introduction of a number of new vegetables formerly unknown. Thus, as there are many grounds very unfit for the production of wheat, there is now no occasion for reaping scanty crops of it from such as are little adapted to the raising of that grain; because another article, for which perhaps there was formerly no demand, may now be raised with considerable profit on a soil where wheat will not grow to any advantage.

5. The Rotation of Crops. Thus a very considerable addition is made to the produce of the ground by keeping it perpetually fertile; whereas formerly it was often worn out and rendered barren by too frequent cropping, when a proper rotation was not known.

6. The Introduction of new Manures. These are principally lime and marl; of the action of which an account is given under the article Agriculture, no 20.

7. The Introduction of many new Articles into Field-Culture. These, whatever profit they may yield to the farmer, consist principally of provender for cattle. They ought, however, to have a considerable effect in producing plentiful harvests, as hereby the cattle may be supposed to do their work more perfectly, and to be maintained at less expense than before.

8. The Application of these to the rearing and fattening of Cattle. The good effects of this ought to be felt partly in the manner mentioned in the former article, and partly in lowering the price of flesh-meat, and consequently of all other kinds of provisions.

Thus we see, that in the course of half a century, little advantages resulting from the whole.

It must, however, undoubtedly depend on some miscalculation, or over-rating the profits which have arisen from the causes, those improvements; whence the landholders have uniformly been induced to raise their rents, while the farmers, finding their expenses greatly augmented, not only on account of the advance of rent, but likewise from the more costly modes of tillage, have been obliged to augment the prices of their grain beyond what the increased influx of money into the kingdom would bear.—Such miscalculations are not uncommon in every business. A manufacturer is apt to be enticed by a certainty of having an increase of his goods in a given time: but frequently, when improvements are tried, it is found that the absolute expense, or the quantity of labour requisite to produce the increase, is greater than the augmentation of profit can bear; and he is afterwards, with regret and loss, obliged to lay aside the improvements from which he had once such hopes. In like manner, we fear, it has fared with the husbandman. The improvements in husbandry originated principally among the landholders; whose principal view, we may suppose, was an augmentation of rent. The tenants were obliged to attempt improvements in order to pay the advance, as well as by the express order of their landlords. Hence they were induced to keep a great number of horses, that their lands might be tilled with sufficient expedition, and in a more perfect manner than before. The oxen, formerly made use of, and which answered the purposes both of provision and labour, were discarded, and a set of most expensive animals, useless except for the purposes of labour or pleasure, introduced in their stead. A vast quantity of grain, which ought to have sustained the human species, was thus bestowed on the brute creation: and though this might in some measure be supposed to be counteracted by the increase of crop in consequence of employing horses, it is evident that it has not answered the general expectation; since we may say, that the farmers have not been able to pay one penny of advanced rent without advancing also the price of their grain.

With regard to the rearing of cattle, the case is equally doubtful. The most extravagant prices have been given for the best breeds as they are called; but it remains yet to be proved, that these breeds are really more useful to the country than the smaller ones. The expense of keeping them is undoubtedly greater, and this expense is enhanced by the large cattle being generally less hardy than the smaller. It seems, besides, impossible that one large horse, for instance, can be equally useful with two small ones, even though he should be as strong as both; for this plain reason, that two horses, though ever so small, can be put to two different kinds of work at once, which cannot be done with the largest single horse imaginable. The like is applicable to black cattle: We cannot suppose the largest single ox to be equal to two ordinary oxen, though he may perhaps require more to fatten him than would bring to market three or four of an ordinary quality; and so of other animals.

It is much to be feared that the same reasoning extends to most of the improvements hitherto made in husbandry. The vegetative powers of the earth cannot be made always to exert themselves to the utmost, without an expense which the increase of produce can by no means balance. By a total neglect of culture, indeed, the soil will produce little or nothing; by a moderate degree of culture the product will be greatly augmented, the farmer will be enabled to pay his rent, and at the same time to afford his grain at such a price as can allow the labourers to live comfortably: but if we go on with extraordinary methods of culture, expecting to increase the produce of the soil, and to be able to exact an augmentation of rent ad infinitum, we will certainly be deceived; for thus the price of provisions must be infinitely increased also. Thus, indeed, the produce of the ground will be somewhat increased, but the farmer will ultimately be a loser; so that, to save himself from ruin, he must at last burden the public both with his advanced rent and the expense of most of his improvements, by advancing the price of grain and of all kinds of provisions.

Such seem in general to be the reasons why the country has reaped so little advantage by the improvements made of late in the affairs of agriculture and husbandry. If experiments are now to be made, it is plain that they ought to be with a view to determine that medium of culture which the ground can bear with the greatest profit, comparing the expense and produce of the two different modes together; and that mode which is the least expensive ought undoubtedly to be chosen, even though attended with no more profit than that which is executed at a greater expense. Thus, if a farmer, by laying out £5l. can produce a crop equivalent to £7l. he ought undoubtedly to prefer that to a mode of cultivation by which he lays out seven to procure nine. Nay, though by his new method he should procure £9l. 10s. by laying out £7l. it would still be evidently for the good of the community that the enrich former method were followed. The reason of this is, that every expense of the husbandman, as well as of every other, must ultimately be defrayed by the community at large. Thus if the husbandman employs a greater number of hands than would otherwise be necessary, it is plain that the expense of these must be defrayed by the community, not only because of the provisions they must necessarily consume, but because each of these, were he not employed in that particular way, might contribute in some other towards his own support and that of others; and the very same may be said of the farmer who employs a greater number of horses than would otherwise be necessary. Now, in the example just given, the farmer, or the community at large, by laying out £5l. gain £40s. which is 40 per cent.; but in the other case, viz. that of expending £7l. for a return of £9l. 10s. the farmer indeed gets £50s. instead of £40s. but the community do not gain equally, having now not quite 36 per cent. instead of 40 which they had before.

Hence it becomes evident, that by encouraging individuals to expend large sums on agriculture, and thus diminish the proportion of their own profits, the community must always suffer, and a rise of provisions will infallibly take place, whether the individuals enrich themselves or not. Evils of this nature can be remedied only by the legislature: but it is to be feared that the time is yet very distant when any certain mode of culture will be established by law; and until this happen, it is vain to think that either the speculations or experiments of individuals or of societies will be attended with much benefit to the community, whatever advantage particular persons may sometimes derive from them.—Leaving this subject, therefore, we shall now proceed to those which more immediately relate to the benefits of husbandry in its present state.

In considering this subject in its full extent, it evidently divides itself into three parts: the first, Relating to the cultivation of such vegetables as are proper for the subsistence of mankind or the rearing of cattle; as grain, grapes, cabbage, turnips, and other vegetables of that kind: the second, Such as belong more particularly to trade and commerce; as flax, hemp, hops, bees, timber, &c. Under both these are included the knowledge of various manures, of the nature of different soils, &c. The third part includes, the raising and management of cattle, poultry, of the dairy, with other adventitious articles, less connected with agriculture; of all which we shall now treat in order. Part I. Of the Vegetables most proper to be raised for the use of the Human Species, or as Food for Cattle.

Among those raised for the use of mankind, wheat has universally been supposed to hold the first place, and other kinds of grain to be the next to it; but in modern times, an author of no mean reputation has arisen, who endeavours to prove that wheat ought not to be cultivated, nor bread to be eaten. This is M. Linguet, who has written a treatise expressly upon the subject; and, ridiculous as the assertion may seem, has been thought worthy of a formal refutation by Dr Tiffot.—One of M. Linguet's arguments is, that wheat impoverishes the ground on which it grows; but in opposition to this, Dr Tiffot urges, that corn is more easily cultivated than grapes; and that consequently, in the country he speaks of (Switzerland), the best fields are appropriated to hay, and the worst to corn. "If there are some districts of very poor land (says he) almost entirely sown with corn, they are not poor because they produce only corn, but because they are not fit to produce anything else. Their soil is so bad, that they can grow but very little fodder; consequently they maintain only such cattle as are absolutely necessary for labour; and those are ill fed, and frequently perish. They have but little manure, and their crops are small; for large crops of all sorts can only be expected from lands naturally rich or strongly manured. Thus the poverty of the inhabitants is only owing to their possessing an ungrateful soil.—What proves evidently that it is the natural soil which is in the fault, and not the corn which impoverishes, is, that where there is meadow and arable land, the price of the meadow-land is much more considerable than that of the arable. In most parts of this country the proportion is nearly ten to one; and there are even some meadows, for one part of which they would give 30 of field-lands; and some of vines, for which 100 of arable would be given. Those districts where the soil will produce nothing but corn, are poor; but in those which furnish fodder, and also fine crops of grain, the inhabitants are wealthy and happy, unless they are oppressed by taxes."

M. Linguet draws another objection from the length of time required to cultivate wheat; but Tiffot, by another calculation, shows, that 48 days work throughout the year would cultivate more wheat than is sufficient for a family of six persons. The time necessary for cultivation of arable land also does not increase in proportion to its extent; but in case more is cultivated than is requisite for the subsistence of the family, a trade is formed, which might be increased to an unlimited extent. He then compares the time requisite for the cultivation of vines which are recommended by M. Linguet, and finds it to be much longer than that required for wheat. "I know very well (says he) that the one requires cattle, and the other does not; but these cattle, far from being expensive, will, if properly managed, increase the gain of the farmer; therefore they must not be looked upon as any expense. Corn is subject to many accidents, but vines are subject to many more: those which the vines suffer, sometimes spoil the vintage for several years; whereas those which happen to arable land, only spoil the crop for the season; and as the expense of cultivating vines, for which only manual labour can be employed, is much more considerable; therefore the vigneron (or person who cultivates vines), who engages more largely than the farmer, will consequently be a much greater loser if unsuccessful.—Hay is also subject to frequent and very disagreeable accidents; the securing it is sometimes very difficult; and, when it is badly made, it is very hurtful to cattle.—A single fact will be sufficient to prove the casualties to which hay is subject; viz. that it varies in price as much as grain. Accidents of hay-mows taking fire are too frequent; and this is not to be feared in corn-mows."

The other objections of M. Linguet to wheat appear to be quite frivolous; so that concerning the cultivation of this grain, Dr Tiffot draws the following conclusions: "It appears then, from what has been said, that wheat is not a commodity that is impoverishing in itself; and that this grain will grow indifferently at least in lands and situations which are unfavourable to other plants. This grain is likewise adapted to most climates; and if there are districts almost entirely sown with wheat, and yet poor, it is the fault of the soil, and not of this useful grain."

But the most extraordinary argument perhaps ever thought of on this subject is M. Linguet's assertion, that the use of wheat, or bread made from it, is detrimental to population; and that the countries where this grain is cultivated are poor and thinly inhabited, whereas those which abound with vineyards and pasture-lands are rich and populous. But this, in Dr Tiffot's opinion, shows only that one soil is more rich than another, and that a fertile soil will maintain most inhabitants. "No person (says he) is more capable of assigning the cause of the subjection of the Roman empire to the northern powers, than M. Linguet; but he cannot surely be serious when he says, that they were enabled to conquer them because those northern countries produced no corn, and that population decreased since the introduction of grain. I shall make three observations on this passage: First, the armies of Gaius Julius Caesar, Charles XII. and the king of Prussia, whose food was bread, would be as formidable against the Italians of those times, who ate less than was eaten in the days of Scipio, as their ancestors were 400 years ago against the Romans; and M. Linguet must certainly know, that those Greeks who subsisted on bread, those Romans who eat nothing but bread and vegetables in pottage, subdued all the known world, among whom were many nations who ate less bread than themselves. A Roman soldier's allowance of bread was much greater than what soldiers have at present; and by the use of this food they had much more strength than our modern soldiers can boast of. The allowance to a Roman soldier was 64 pounds of wheat per month; and this he was strictly forbidden either... either to sell or exchange. Their soldiers had very seldom any cheese, bacon, or pulse; so that wheat was almost their only food, and the proportion was double what is allowed soldiers in our days. They ate it in bread, in flour-milk, and in thin cakes; and they were not subject to epidemic or putrid disorders, which is too much the case with our modern armies. We may easily judge from the weight of their accoutrements, that the Roman soldiers were not possessed of less personal strength than those which compose the armies at this day; they were not less brave, nor did their food render them in any way unhealthy: on the contrary, where there is such difficulty in procuring a supply of good animal food to an army, as is often the case in modern times, it is probable that reducing them to the simple diet of a Roman soldier would be the most proper method of preventing epidemic diseases among them. Secondly, it is very doubtful whether those countries were more populous formerly than they are at this time; it is even probable that they were less so. Lastly, the people of these northern countries were not without wheat; it was the basis of their food and drink: without quoting other authors who attest it, suffice it to say, that "Tacitus affirms it," &c.

In this last particular, however, our author appears to be mistaken; but whatever may be in this, we apprehend that few of our readers will entertain any doubt concerning the wholesomeness of wheat, or the propriety of making it into bread after once it is cultivated. The truly important matter is to determine, whether it be a profitable crop or not for the person who cultivates it? In this respect indeed it has been condemned by the generality of farmers, and dairy-farms are universally supposed to be more profitable than such as produce corn. The vast superiority of the former is set forth by Thomas Davis, Esq; of Longleat, in the following words. "Experience sufficiently evinces the extreme difficulty of persuading tenants that they get more (generally speaking) by feeding their lands, than by ploughing them; yet it requires very few arguments to convince a landlord, that in cold wet lands especially, the less ploughed land you have, the less you put it in a tenant's power to ruin your estate. That a tenant of 60l. per annum on a dairy-farm will get money, while a corn farm of the same size will starve its occupier (though perhaps the former gives 15s. per acre for his land, and the latter only 10s.), is self-evident. The plough is a friend of every body's, though its advantages are very far from being particularly and locally felt; corn being an article that will bear keeping till the whim or caprice, or supposed advantage of its possessor, call it forth. But the produce of the cow is far otherwise. Cheese must necessarily be sold at a certain period: it is a ponderous article; and one-twelfth, or at least one-fifteenth, of its value, is often paid for carrying it to a fair 50 miles off; and the butter and skimmed milk find their way no great distance from home, as is evident by the price of butter varying frequently one-third in 20 or 30 miles. Every inhabitant of Bath must be sensible, that butter and cheese have risen one-third or more in price within 20 years. Is not this owing to the great encouragement given to the plough and to grazing, at a time when, on account of the increased demand for milk, cream, butter, and cheese, every exertion on behalf of the dairy should have been encouraged?" &c.

In some remarks on this letter by Mr Billingfley, the same superiority of dairy-farms to the arable kind is asserted in the most positive terms. "Perhaps (says he) there cannot be a stronger proof of the inferiority of the plough with respect to profit, than the superior punctuality of the dairy-farmer in the payment of his rent. This observation, I believe, most stewards who superintend manors devoted partly to corn and partly to dairy-farms, will verify; at least I have never met with one who controverts it. But perhaps the advocate for the plough will desire me not to confound the abuse of a thing with its intrinsic excellence; and say, that the generality of corn farmers are most egregious slovens; that lands devoted to the plough are not confined to such a mediocrity of profit as 20s. per acre; that the produce of artificial grasses (without which a well managed arable farm cannot exist), far exceeds that of natural grass both in respect of quantity and nutrition; that the straw-yard is a most convenient receptacle for the cow when freed from the pail. These, and many other reasons, may be adduced to show the propriety of walking in the middle-path, and of judiciously blending arable with pasture, in the proportion perhaps of three of the latter to one of the former."

On these letters we shall only remark, that for the good of mankind we hope the opinions they contain will never come into general practice; as thus the price of bread must be raised so high, that the lower classes of people would be entirely deprived of it. In the Bath Papers, vol. v. p. 43, we have a method proposed by Mr Wimpey of improving small arable farms in such a manner as to make them yield as much milk, butter, and cheese, as those which are kept continually in pasture. He agrees with the maxim already mentioned, that small arable farms do not afford the occupier so good a maintenance as dairy farms of the same value; and that the possessor of a dairy farm will do well and save money, while the former, with much toil and trouble, is starving himself and family. Notwithstanding this, he maintains, that there is an essential difference between ground that is naturally arable, and such as is by nature adapted for pasture. Land which is naturally arable, according to him, can by no means be converted into pasture of any duration. "Such as, from a wild state of nature, over-run with furze, fern, bushes and brambles, has been rendered fertile by means of the plough, must be kept in that improved state by its frequent use; otherwise it would soon revert to that wild barren state which was its original condition. A farm, therefore, which consists wholly, or almost so, of land that is properly arable, must ever continue arable; for it is not practicable to render it in any degree fertile but by means of the plough, or to keep it long in that state even when it is made so." He is of opinion, however, that by raising crops proper for feeding cattle, the possessor of an arable farm may raise as great a number of horned cattle as one who has a pasture farm; the only question is, Whether he can be reimbursed of his expenses by the produce? "To ascertain this fact..."