be converted into rich corn-growing and meat-producing come men of wealth and position. Assuming as near the He ways how this money is to be obtained. In the first place | dient as sewage might be turned to the good of the those who are intended purchasers or hirers of land must fit their purchase or hiring to the improved modern estimate of requirements. I will give you an instance: an acquaintance of mine purchased a nice but neglected estate of 4,000 acres, for about £140,000. He has expended some f.50,000 or £60,000 in drainage and other necessary improvements, and his rent is more than proportionately improved. Now he might have purchased 6,000 acres with the money, and thus perhaps have left nothing for improvements. See how such operations affect the welfare of the country at large, by circulating for the benefit of all large sums in industrial occupations, and thus creating additional customers for our agricultural produce. The one system means action and profit, the other stagnation and comparative loss. An active and clever land agent tells me, that by improving the residences and buildings, trimming the fences, cutting down superfluous timber, draining the land, granting leases with liberal covenants, without annoyance from an excess of game, he is overwhelmed by applications for farms from substantial tenants, at improved rents, representing from 8 to 12 per cent. on the money so laid out in improvements. No doubt this operation gets rid of feeble or unwilling tenants averse from improvements, but the country at large must rejoice in such changes on sound commercial considerations; all of us must know a good many farmers who have large sums of spare capital locked up in the funds, railway shares, banks and other associated undertakings; but I never can find one who can tell me that he has shares in a Land Improvement Company. There ought to be hundreds of such companies buying up poor neglected farms, and, after their improvement, letting them to substantial tenants at highly remunerative rentals. There are plenty of monied farmers who like a good interest for their accumulated wealth, and there are plenty of clever fellows amongst farmers themselves who, with engineering assistance, could, as directors, supervise and control the actions of such companies. There is no fear of want of tenants. Ask where I will amongst land agents, they all tell me the same story, "If I have a well-conditioned farm to let, I am overwhelmed with applications for it." Who can wonder at this? Farmers will have sons and multiply, but farms can have no children. So every year increases the one, and diminishes in proportion the other, disturbing the equilibrium of demand and supply. Do-nothing landlords must not expect, in these stirring and progressive times, to obtain substantial tenants on their dilapidated and exhausted farms, deficient in decent or proper residences for men and animals. So they must put up with an uncapitalled and an inferior tenantry. In conclusion, forgive me for this very long story, and believe me when I say that my only motive in reading these papers, is to do good to my country and to my brotherfarmers. Mr. BAILEY DENTON (Stevenage) wished to say a few words by way of starting the discussion. Mr. Mechi had referred to a subject to which he had himself paid considerable attention-namely, the application of sewage. Mr. Mechi had often talked of sewage in that room; he had often recommended its application; and if they had followed his advice, which he felt bound to say was generally very good, they would have been misled. As regarded the report of the Committee of the House of Commons, he (Mr. Denton) begged to say that he had studied that report, and particularly the evidence of Mr. Mechi, with an earnest desire that such a valuable ingre country; but he found that they were, after all, just where Mr. L.A. COUSSMAKER (Westwood, Guildford) said the im portance of the subject could not be doubted for a moment, They all knew that an immense amount of capital was employed in British husbandry; and what they wanted to know, was how that capital might be used in the most remunerative way. In order that the land of the country might be farmed to the greatest advantage, landlords and tenants must pull well together. If landlords would not purchase more land than they were in a position to improve, or tenants take more than they could cultivate in the best manner, the result would be better both for them and the country. Many a farmer who had just capital enough to cultivate two or three hundred acres made the egregrious mistake of taking five or six hundred, trusting to good luck or borrowed capital for the result; and they well knew what that result too frequently was (Hear, hear). Moreover, the possession of adequate capital did not always go hand-in-hand with the knowledge of its best application. Many a man having a considerable amount of capital went into the pursuit of agriculture without knowing how to set about it properly; or if he had the requisite knowledge as well as capital, he had many other things to attend to, and hence was obliged to leave much to others. Of course he did not mean to deny that there were trustworthy agents to be found; but in agriculture, as in other pursuits, if a man wished to succeed, he should look well after his own business (Hear, hear). It was generally men who had capital without having sufficient knowledge or time to look to its proper application who failed to make it remunerative. Mr. G. H. RAMSEY (Newcastle-on-Tyne) thought they would all agree with him that no man stood higher in their esteem than their worthy friend Alderman Mechi (cheers). His intentions were perfectly sincere; and he not only felt great interest in agriculture-an interest which he had again evinced that evening-but he had done much to promote its welfare. Still, as a practical farmer, he must say Mr. Mechi went much further than he could go along with him. He began on that occasion by alluding to the state of things in the time of their grandfathers, as if they had not quite enough to do with the present without entering into what existed fifty years ago. He supposed, however, he must regard that as a sort of prelude to the paper. Mr. Mechi was still extremely sanguine. He believed that they could produce such an immense additional amount of corn, that this country would have little occasion to obtain corn from foreigners. Now, he believed this country produced from eighteen to twenty million quarters of wheat, and that it imported about ten million quarters. How they were to increase their wheat harvest from eighteen to twentyeight millions he really could not understand. He himself grew, he believed, as large crops as almost any one, but he did not see how he was to make such a per-centage of increase as that. There was not likely to be any want of capital in agriculture for the purposes of improvement; on the contrary, capital overran produce. As to M'Culloch's tables and other tables which had been referred to, it was perfect nonsense to suppose that they applied to the present state of things, Persons who prepared such tables no doubt got their information from the best sources they could think of; but their calculations were not at all to be relied upon, especially as regarded the state of things at the present time. A great deal had been said about landlord and tenant. That was a question which he had always thought ought not to be introduced in clubs or societies like that. The landlord had to let, and the tenant to take land, and the question between them was as purely a mercantile one as any question on the face of the earth. Was it to be supposed that the landlord could bring up his estate higher than its real value, or that any tenant would pay a rent above the real value? (Hear, hear.) The tenant had corn and cattle to sell, and who would give more for them than they were worth? As regarded the question of remuneration, he thought that if a farmer kept his family, and brought them up respectably, he did extremely well; he was sorry to say there were some who could not do that. As regarded the amount of capital employed per acre in farming, Mr. Mechi had no doubt exerted himself to obtain correct information; but that was just one of those things that could never be got at. It might be got for a farm, or for a district, but it could not be obtained for the whole country. No man could say positively what was the amount of capital per acre employed in the agriculture of the whole kingdom (Hear, hear). All reasoning founded upon the acreage value of land must therefore be perfectly fallacious. He had known land let at £10 per acre, and moor land let at 6d. per acre. The man who had the latter land at 6d., generally made the most money; but it was necessary to have a good deal of it (Hear, hear). As to the amount of capital invested in farming, he thought that had nothing to do with the question. They were not taking stock every year. [A voice: "I do."] But the nation did not. On the sewage question he agreed with Mr. Denton. They had plenty of cheap sewage manure; but the difficulty was to make it pay. They all knew that the grass produce from sewage in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh was very remarkable; but the same thing had been tried in many other cases-whether in a right manner or not he could not say— and the result had never been satisfactory. Ever since he joined that club, he had felt that the basis of their discourses ought to be enlarged as much as possible. It had been enlarged very greatly; but he must say, with all deference to Mr. Denton, that he did not consider that the question of the killing of an old doe rabbit with half-a-dozen young ones was quite consistent with that (laughter). Although he had thus freely criticised the worthy Alderman's paper, he did not feel the less obliged to him for having introduced the subject in so able a manner. Mr. G. SMYTHIES (Leintwardine) said Mr. Mechi had in his very excellent paper stated the amount of capital employed in agriculture as under £4 per acre. That no doubt appeared a very startling statement to many of them; but he, for one, had not the slightest doubt of its truth, because Mr. Mechi had evidently taken immense pains to obtain reliable information. The last speaker remarked that landlord and tenant questions ought never to be introduced in that room. He, for one, did not coincide in that view (Hear, hear). Supposing Mr. Mechi to be correct as to the sum per acre employed in agriculture, the question naturally arose why was the amount so small, and he could not help thinking it was owing to the state of the relations between landlord and tenant. He thought that the arrangements-they might call them what they pleased-between landlord and tenant were such as to discourage the employment of capital in the land in such proportions as would pay. He thought, therefore, that they could not too often-provided of course it was done temperately and moderately, as it always was, he believed, in that room-bring before landlords the opinions of tenants on this subject. It was not at all desirable to find fault with landlords for the price at which they let their land, but they might very fairly recommend them to adopt a different system of management, inasmuch as that would tend to put money in their (the landlord's) own pockets. He quite concurred with Mr. Coussmaker as to the evil effects which arose from a landlord's buying land which he was not in a position to improve. Many landowners were in the hands of mortgagees, and could not do what they wished in relation to their tenants. He trusted now that a better state of things was gradually extending, and that tenants would all learn that a small quantity of land cultivated well would pay better than a large quantity with insufficient capital employed upon it. Mr. S. SIDNEY (North End, Hammersmith-gate) regretted that Alderman Mechi's paper exhibited such a paucity of material facts. It might be very true that there was only four pounds an acre invested in the land of England; but he did not know that their discussing that point could add a single pound to the aggregate amount. Every man who understood his business would invest as much capital as he thought he could obtain an adequate return for; and if Mr. Mechi wanted to teach the farmer anything, he must not confine himself to common places, which, though they might be amusing, were not at all useful. Mr. Mechi recommended that a company should be formed for the purpose of acquiring large masses of land, and cultivating it. People who heard of that scheme naturally wondered how it was to be carried out-whether all the implements and machinery which Mr. Mechi had himself bought were to be procured, and, if so, how the thing was to be made profitable. He recollected that among other of that gentleman's notions were that farm buildings should be lighted by gas and warmed by steam. At present, he believed, farmers found the hours of daylight quite sufficient for profitable occupation, and the bodies of the animals quite sufficient for warmth. Then, again, there was the question of liquid manure. He must give Mr. Mechi credit for great courage and consistency in constantly bringing forward that subject, especially as, whenever it was investigated, facts had been found against him. begged to remind the worthy Alderman that change was not always progress. For his own part, he thought farming was so completely an art, so much dependent on the individual skill and experience of the person who carried it on, that it was almost the very last thing that ought to be made the object of a joint stock company. There might be a waste piece of land so extensive that only a joint stock company could bring it under cultivation; but farming was, generally speaking, just as much an individual occupation as the keeping of a shop (Hear, hear). Mr. Mechi appeared to him to have lost sight on that occasion-and on many other occasions when making popular speeches-of an important distinction between trade and agriculture. In trade, men could turn over capital again and again, as often as they could find customers; whereas in farming they were dependent on the seasons, and however well they might cultivate land there was a limit to the produce (Hear, hear). A similar remark was applicable to any comparison between agriculture and manufactures. Such comparisons, if not invidious, tended to mislead. He made these remarks with the greatest respect to Mr. Mechi. When a paper was read which might, by its poetical exaggerations, do harm in the country-it could not do harm to those who listened to the discussionit was necessary that some one should get up and take the bull by the horns (laughter), and he felt that he (Mr. Sidney) was in such a position that he might do that with impunity. His object had been to criticise, and he hoped that if he had not done any good, he had done no harm. On that occasion they had been referred by him to the evidence and report of the committee of the House of Commons on the subject. He (Mr. Sidney) had read the whole of that report, and he must say that it was all in con. tradiction to Mr. Mechi's theory (Hear, hear). If one Mr. J. BRADSHAW (Knole, Guildford) said, notwithstandthing were more clearly established than another in that ing the remarks of the last speaker, he considered the subreport, it was that the system of underground pipes and hose ject which had been brought forward that evening worthy had been generally abandoned, and that everyone who of serious attention. What was that subject ? "The capital had used liquid manure at all successfully had reverted of British agriculture-its application and remuneration." to the old water-meadow system, which had been in use in On the last part of the subject he confessed he felt some this country for about three hundred years. In the experi- perplexity (laughter). The application of capital referred ments which the committee recommended to be carried to was, he presumed, its application by the intelligence of out at Rugby, that ancient system was to be adopted. Mr. the man who had the use of the capital. In some cases it was Mechi recommended farmers to incur an expense of from applied at a loss-a loss which no recommendation from one to eight pounds an acre in applying sewage manure to that Club could prevent: it was dependent on seasons and their lands. The Duke of Bedford and the Earl of Essex, on various circumstances over which the farmers had no having the command of large capital, had employed con- control. He knew land in his own neighbourhood which siderable sums in getting rid of a nuisance to the inhabitants 60 years ago was let at 7s. per acre and was now let at 35s. of towns, to the great benefit of those towns; but he could Why had it thus increased in value? It was owing to the not find that any of them had realized a profit (Hear, improvements of agriculture and the increased hear). That the removal of sewage was an advantage powers of consumption in the population of this country. to towns could be doubted by no one; but it was These two things went hand in hand, and the owners of the another question whether a young gentleman, who was land, or the raw material, took advantage of the competition about to embark capital in farming operations, should be for the occupation. There was then land in his vicinity recommended to invest any of it for the benefit of an which, in consequence of improvements, had risen within the adjacent town (Hear. hear). Let him imagine, for a last 17 years from 13s. or 14s, per acre to 40s. The landlord moment, that Mr. Mechi's projected company was would make the best bargain he could, and as long as there formed, that sufficient capital had been raised, and was a great competition among tenants he would avail himself that Mr. Mechi was consulted as to its proper applica of it (Hear, hear). He fully concurred in Mr. Denton's tion; he supposed that he would give the directors an ac- dislike to vermin, and had evinced his feeling on the subject count of the series of experiments which he had tried on by telling his gamekeeper that if he did not destroy them he his farm, the implements which he had recommended during would employ every lad in the village to do so. As regarded the last ten or fifteen years, including Halkett's railway. the improvement of the land, he thought landlords and tenants He would leave the meeting to judge whether or not all that would go hand in hand. There ought to be a division of would pay. The weak point of Mr. Alderman Mechi's pre- advantages on equitable terms, and where that was the case sent and past papers was that he always talked of future capital would flow freely to the land, and there would be successes, but never referred to his failures-his abandoned a proportionate improvement in the cultivation. Mr. Ramsay schemes. Now, a history of failures would be very useful had spoken of the imports of corn as amounting to 10 milmore useful than vague declamation. He (Mr. Sidney) Į lion quarters per annum. He believed that amount had only been reached within the last two years. The average importations of wheat since the repeal of the Corn Laws was four or five million quarters. Mr. J. COLEMAN (Park Farm, Woburn) considered Mr. Mechi's paper one of the most practical and sensible that gentleman had ever read. As regarded game, all farmers knew how great a nuisance it was; but he had met with several instances in which half-a-dozen of them were contending for a farm which abounded with game (Hear, hear). He thought Mr. Mechi had underrated the capital invested in the soil. When they arrived at the millennium, to which Mr. Coussmaker alluded when he spoke of every landlord purchasing just that quantity of land which he was able to hold with advantage, and of no tenant occupying more than he was able to cultivate properly, the whole nation would be in a very different position (laughter). At present a large portion of the capital employed in the land did not belong to the owners or the occupiers; and a larger sum was often paid for the use of it than should be, considering the value of the security. He admitted that farmers could not fairly be expected to bring the sewage to their land; but let a company or the town's people convey it there, and he ventured to say they would gladly make use of it. No one could doubt that the application of sewage would be beneficial if the inhabitants of towns would get rid of a nuisance to themselves by placing sewage at the farmer's disposal. As to farming profits, though many seemed to regard them as a myth, profits were made, and in some instances were large profits. As a class, however, none were so secret or so careful, lest others should know what their profits really were, than the British farmer (Hear, hear). Having been brought up as a farmer, and having since managed farm property for others, he knew what were the feelings of both parties concerned. He knew that many landlords wanted particularly to know what the tenants' profits were. Some of them thought them much higher, others much lower, than they were in reality. He had been asked to work out-by the quantity of stock a tenant kept, and the quantity of corn he grew, and the average price of both-the amount of profit which he realized; and the conclusion at which he had arrived was that of Mr. Mechi, namely, that with ample capital the profits of farming were about 10 per cent. Mr. J. SANDERSON (Cannon-row, Westminster) thought the tenant's capital in the land might be divided into three parts-first, that which he invested in stock and crops; secondly, that which he gave his predecessor for the unexpired interest left by him in the soil; and thirdly, what he expended in permanent improvements. Passing over the first as not requiring any observation, he came to the second, namely, the claims of the predecessor. Now he regarded that as a worthless expenditure of capital. The in-going tenant had often to pay for labour which was injurious to him and for supposed advantages. That custom was most injurious to British agriculture, as it absorbed at the outset a large portion of the tenant's capital, and crippled him as regarded the carrying out of profitable improvements. He knew that some supposed it to be essential to good farming. No such thing: heavy out-goings were often found in connection with inferior cultivation. He knew large farms in Roxburghshire and Berwickshire which had changed hands without anything of that kind, and the style of farming in those counties was quite equal to the best cultivation in this country. As regarded permanent improvements, he considered it the landlord's place to effect drainage but where he failed to do so, there was no outlay of the tenant's capital which would prove more profitable to the tenant himself. He had come to the conclusion that drainage yielded 12 per cent. for the outlay. Next to drainage, liming was generally the most profitable expenditure on the part of the tenant. Lime yields good interest the second and third crops, and a profit the fourth crop after it has been spplied. He had, he might remark, observed a deficiency of lime on Mr. Mechi's farm, and he could not agree with him that lime was not as necessary in Essex as in other counties. With respect to manuring, which might almost be considered a permanent improvement, he thought there was a great deal of misapplied capital. When farmers applied artificial manures to grain crops, there were strong grounds for suspecting that they did not understand as they ought to do the preparation of home-made manures. If green crops were properly managed and cared for, grain crops would take care of themselves. (Hear, hear.) With reference to labour, also, there was much useless expenditure of capital. How often did they see on one farm a pair of horses drawing a plough; while on an adjacent farm, with exactly the same kind of soil, they saw a plough drawn with three or four horses, and a boy to guide them! (Hear, hear.) Another point of great importwhich was alluded to by Mr. Mechi, was the capital invested by farmers in the land. He was sorry to hear that gentleman introduce works which were now quite obsolete as authorities on this subject. Mr. Mechi stated the average amount of capital invested at £4 per acre. He (Mr. Sanderson) had consulted a great many persons on the subject, and arrived at the conclusion that the average was £5. He was surprised to hear him state the rental of the lowlands of Scotland as low as 11s. per acre. ance, Alderman MECHI said, that figure was applied to the lowlands of Scotland and Wales together. Mr. SANDERSON: The two countries could not be classed together, as their soils and style of farming were widely different. He thought the average rental of the lowlands of Scotland was 88s.; and the gross average yield £6 5s. per acre. As much as £12 per acre was, in his opinion, required to farm land properly, now that they had steam cultivation, artificial manures, and so many other improvements. He knew many farmers in Scotland who had spent more than that per acre; and he would mention four cases in the counties to which he had alluded-Roxburghshire and Berwickshire. A tenant-farmer, who farmed 600 acres, applied in four years 4,800 tons of lime; another, who occupied a farm of 500 acres, expended in seven years £2,500 on lime, and £3,500 on drainage; a third, who occupied about 700 acres, had in five years expended on drains £4,040, upwards of £5,000 on lime, and nearly £2,000 on stable and artificial manures; a fourth, who farmed 900 acres, in one year only, laid out £3,500 on lime, and £2,520 on drainage. Alderman MECHI: They had, I suppose, 21 years' leases? Mr. SANDERSON: Yes. The remumeration of individual farmers was almost problematical, as storms, bad seasons, and other evils might overtake any one; but he believed that in general farmers obtained a very fair remuneration, and that it was usually those farmers who spent the largest amount on the land that got the largest amount of remuneration. (Hear, hear.) He regretted that Mr. Mechi had not once referred to the question of security of tenure, which lay at the foundation of agricultural improvement. (Hear, hear.) He should be sorry to dictate to that club, but as long as it confined itself to such questions as town sewage, arterial drainage, and steam cultivation, it would fall short of its mission. Were it |