small farms. When situated in low and comparatively mild districts, they form useful appendages to adjoining farms. These are usually within the reach of common cultivation, but much depends upon their geological formation, on the nature of the subsoil, and on the proximity of manure and markets.

In dilating upon the comparative acreage of our grass, arable, and unimproved lands, an accurate statistical account, brought down to the present day, would be exceedingly useful; for though the importance of grass lands in our humid climate, as also to our national agriculture, is known to many, it is not to all. The prejudices in favor of the "barn-door" are yet great, and in the corn districts almost unsurmountable.

As it is the practice in many parts of England to apply the whole of the manure made upon the farm to the arable lands, enormous advantages are derived from the meadow-lands, 'equal in many districts to six loads of manure to every acre of corn. The grass-lands are thus regarded as legitimate sources of plunder to be lavished on the petted tillage fields; yet such a practice greatly lessens the value of the fee-simple of the grass lands, and only serves to ilustrate the adage of "robbing Peter to pay Paul." On the face of things, it appears that a reduction of the arable lands, by their conversion into pasture, would meet the case before us, while every improvement of the present pastures might also be made, and should most certainly be carried on. For instance, if we consider the grass-land subject LOCALLY, we have, in a majority of cases, every-day evidence of its "paying better than corn;" that is, where the climate is favorable, and grass can be grown to advantage. If POLITICALLY, we have the evidence of the past year before us, that the foreigner can, and will, supply whatever corn or breadstuffs we require, and not only so, but will take advantage of placing it under "lock" until an advantageous time arrives for bringing it in comp tition with home-grown corn in our own market! On the other hand, in the market for produce arising from the grass-lands, we have less competition from the importation of live stock and other perishable commodi ies, which must go at once into consumption. Again, if regarded as a LANDLORD'S QUESTION, there can be no doubt as to the increased and increasing value of grass-land; and if this remark app'ies generally, it is more particularly applicable to those districts where, owing to humidity or other local causes, stock farming is carried on as a rule.

Practically speaking, no occupation can excel that of a grazier; for, though it may not be over profitable, yet his animals perform their own labor, by collecting their fool; the sheep pays his own shepherd, whilst the hay-crop manures its own land, and, when allowed to do so, affords food for the winter months, only asking for fine weather, and to be laid up early in the spring! Not so with the arable farmer He must rise early, enter upon all the toils and uncertainties of a farmer's life, and then leave the chances of profit upon his crops to the everchanging elements; for as the wind rules the weather, so the weather rules the harvest Indeed experience tells us that, while supply and demand regulate prices, the cost and uncertainty of production regulate profits. It is therefore

worth consideration, even by corn farmers, how far they can change their present course of husbandry so as to have a larger percentage of the farm under artificial grasses. That it would prove a certain relief to the pocket, the plow, and the land, no doubt can be entertained; for as much good corn would be grown-the pile of wool and quantity of mutton would be increased-and a few young steers. might be run on for wintering.

Whole nations of cultivators have applied themselves to the growth of corn-a task apparently insignificant, but of immense influence on the well-being of the human race; but how far they have succeeded in "growing two blades of grass where but one grew before," is a question not easily determined. Some sixty years ago Arthur Young estimated the best meadow land to produce from 4 to 5 tons of hay per acre, per annum, at two mowings; and the bt grazing-land in Lincolnshire to feed an ox of 80 stone (14 lbs.), and one large Lincolnshire sheep per acre! In 1861, who has done more? Few only have done as much; for, although most men aim at keeping their grass-land "about up to the mark" of former years, and no more, it is not all who even accomplish that. Thousands of acres have been reclaimed, drained, and sown with grass, during the last fifty years; but taking the great body of the grass-lands of the kingdom, it is notorious that farmers, for the most part, look at their grass-land as a kind of "fixture," not to be improved. Indeed, whilst every possible exertion is put forth in favor of corn-farming, and the steam-grubber is tearing its way through the arable clays, not even a roller is used on the permanent grass! There must be a cause for this, and we believe it to arise from the fact, that as the returns from capital laid out in the improvement of pasture-land do not come back so directly to the farmer's pocket as those arising from corn, the farmer is doubtful whether it will find its way back at all! This occurs more particularly under short holdings; for, as the time will not admit of a proper return to a passing tenant, the grass land has to linger on, and be content with what the half-starved castle leave behind them. And yet the rapid increase in our population, the altered state of our labor-market, and the vicissitudes of a fitful climate, all point to the importance of increasing the acreage and making permanent improvements upon the present grass lands, and thus increasing the supplies of animal food during the

summer months.

This subject has recently been discussed by the Central Farmers' Club in London, and Mr Owen Wallis, in introducing the question, " By what means can the feeding of stock on pasture land in spring, summer, and autumn, be so increased as to supply the demand of an increasing population?" thus expressed himself: "With a population rapidly increasing in numbers, and happily also in material prosperity, the demand for meat has increased to a wonderful extent..... It is necess ry, therefore, to see in what way, and to what extent, the quantity of meat can be increased..... It is, however, by the extension of our artificial grasses, the improvement of our permanent pastures, and by calling to our aid the use of oil cake, meal, and other food (to be consumed upon them), in conjunction with the grasses, that we must look for the chief increase in the supply

during the summer months. That the productive powers of our pastures have not kept pace with that of our arable land, is only too apparent. Indeed, the latter has been very commonly manured at the expense of the former! .... I am acquainted with a good deal of land that has the reputation of having been, many years since, much better than it is at the present time. This is caused by the deterioration and waste that is going on, by the yearly abstraction from the soil of phosphates and other substances. Where land is used for dairy purposes, this is unquestionably the case. Hence the marked benefits which accrue from the use of bones in the Cheshire and other dairy districts."

The above remarks, by an eminently practical man, are not only important in themselves, but the discussion which afterwards took place amongst the members (men from all counties), went to the one grand point-that it is high time the grass-lands of England should receive their legitimate attention, and thus not only augment the standard beauties of English agriculture, by correcting those yet neglected nooks, corners, and marshes, which are so offensive to the eye, but also increase the animal food of the people by increasing the natural supplies of young growing animals for the grazing districts.

The hitherto neglected state of so large a portion of the grass-lands of England is certainly a blot which disfigures the face of British agriculture. But, now that so many arable farms are brought to a condition " above par," we may yet see a fashion set in, in favor of the grass-lands. This might speedily be done if the same energy, perseverance, and capital were brought to bear upon it as are bestowed upon the improvement of stock, the dairy, or the arable farming of this country in other words, were farmers to deal with grass as they have dealt, and are dealing, with corn. Nor would the return be found inferior, although, at the outset, the profit might appear to arrive by a much slower process than in the case of corn-growing. But the term "permanent grass" (not to be plowed) has much to do with this matter; for, in fact, every dressing such land receives ought to enhance the fee simple of the estate.

PRACTICAL DEDUCTIONS.-In entering upon some details of the effective management or extension of grass lands, it is advisable to treat each subject under its own head, viz., 1, the work of improvement upon our present pastures; and 2, the extension of grass and meadow lands upon the farm. But it may be asked, "Where shall be our starting-point?" Can we advantageously improve our grass-land, and also extend its acreage upon estates situated in different districts? If so, in what way can it be done? To this we answer :-Firstly, The improve. ment of the present lands may be effected by draining, leveling, top-dressing, and better grazing. Secondly, The extension of pasture-land may be effected by remodeling farms, making equitable arrangements with the tenants, and by the landlord giving a substantially helping hand, with a view to their remaining as permanent pastures upon the estate.

THE IMPROVEMENT OF GRASS-LANDS.

We have already glanced at the varied descriptions of grazing and meadow lands-viz, the best, second best, dry inferior, wet inferior, and moor-lands.

The best old pastures, the pride of England, are those found around gentlemen's seats, the village, or other favored localities, where our remote ancestors designed and arranged them as domains and pasture-lands for the reception of their animals at different periods of the year, as also for their safety in times of plunder. It would seem, however, that for the forcing of early roots and grasses modern culture regards the new artificial manures as better expedients than those supplied by the presence of flocks and herds. Hence it arises that immense piles of buildings, modern homesteads, have grown up, and enormous outlays of capital have been centred on a given spot. Thus, even to the present time, a majority of the grasses have gone on "in their own way," except where the hand of the husbandman has stepped in with a view to their improvement by cultivation, whether to be again laid down, or to be continued as permanent arable land.

About the year 1846 the breaking-up of inferior pasture-lands became a somewhat fashionable practice. This arose from a variety of causes; and an essay in the "Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society" (vol. vii. p. 192) contains much useful information on the point. By the writer of that essay all the light, dry, sandy, gravelly soils, cold rough pastures, strong shallow loams, peaty soils, heavy cold clays, cold sandy loams, and all pastures of a secondary character, such as those reduced by careless dairy management, &c, were condemned to the plow! A number of elevated lands, both dry and wet, sand and clay, were proposed to be planted, and the following lands, in addition to the inferior ones, were recommended to be reserved for pasture, viz: rich feeding pastures, water-meadows, and those that can by any likely means be converted into water-meadows; fine rich alluvial pastures and meadows; accommodation-lands near towns; dairyfarms near towns; lands occupied for the purpose of supplying the inhabitants with milk; lands liable to floods; lands adjoining or near to the homestead; salt-marshes; whilst as to other marshes it was admitted that doubts might be entertained on account of their locality and the facilities for draining them. To this followed a summary of the consequent advantages to the farmer in profit, the landlord in rent, the laborer in employment, and the country in food. In setting forth the advantages resulting from the additional employment for the laborer, it was seriously proposed to break up (collectively) four millions of acres of these lands!—and the writer then proceeded to show that, as three-fifths of this acreage would require draining, at an average cost of neary 4l. per acre in manual labor, it would require 9,000,000l. to be expended in labor alone. These are indeed startling recommendations, but they are less applicable now than to the period at which they were written. There was a time when farmers had unfortunately a glut of labor to contend with, which often entailed heavy parochial rates upon. them; but the state of things is now entirely altered. The labor-market has been greatly thinned. Progress in every branch of industry, conjointly with emigration, has been at work; and that great regulator of prices, "supply and demand," has placed so high a value upon manual farm labor, that but for progress in the mechanical arts, and the application of new machinery and implements to the cultivation of the soil and the marketing of its produce, it is doubtful whether at

the present time it would be possible to raise corn-crops at a fair profit to the agriculturist.

Efficient drainage is equally essential to the improvement of the pasture and of arable land. Indeed there seems no valid reason why the greater part of the pasture lands, when drained, might not be so stimulated by top-dressings that a new class of herbage might be produced upon them, which, by subsequent closefeeding, might be annually improved, and yield a better and much more certain return than under the laborious, costly, and uncertain practice of renovating them by the plow. If left in arable culture, we have the objectionable non-paying outlay for modern farm-buildings: if in pasture, no such outlay would be required. Another writer, in the "Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society" (vol. vii. p. 503), after enumerating the great benefits to be derived from "breaking up grassland," proceeds to say: "It would be disadvantageous to break up lands of first quality..... There are many lands, though not of the first quality, yet possessing a sweet nutritive herbage well adapted to the rearing of young stock. Where such are attached to breeding or dairy farms, the proprietor ought to pause before he grants permission to break them up. Even inferior lands situated near towns, or wherever required for convenience, ought to remain in pasture; also the mountain pastures, cold clay uplands, and swampy valleys." The author of this Essay assumes that the new ar ble fields will be self-supporting; if farmed in a modern way, they will be productive of general good, and, being kept in such a state as to yield a higher rental to the landlord, they will ultimately cause equalization in price of both arable and pasture lands. This conclusion might, no doubt, be applicable to the period at which it was drawn ; but in lieu of "equalization of price," we find the pasture-lands even still more in the ascendant as regards rent, and certainly more so in respect of demand, as shown by the annual grass-lettings in various parts of the Western Counties for summering-ground.

And here it should be observed that our preceding remarks apply to those soils and fields which were recommended to be plowed up; but the SELECTED GRASSLANDS-those to be spared from the plow-constitute a better class of lands, more readily acted upon, and quite certain to repay the improver.

There is a good old adage-" The better the land, the better it will pay for top-dressings." For the top-dressing of GOOD pasture-land all or any refuse manures from the yards, weeds, banks, scouring of ditches, and road-scrapings, &c., may be formed into cheap and convenient compost, and applied when most convenient. For SECOND and THIRD RATE LANDS, such as have been already treated of, we have no farm resources left, so that a different course of action must be adopted; and here it is that the real work of improvement has to be carried out. The subject then divides itself into two sections for consideration-viz: 1, the poor and hi herto neglected dry-land pastures; and 2, the rough, cold lying, wet lands. The question therefore is, Can these be improved at a profit ?—and if so, all draining and other requirements being the same, which is the better mode of doing it, by the plow or by top-dressing? To these points we now address our

remarks.