Land Tenure papers full of advertisements of farms to let for twenty-one years, upon offer, and it seemed to him like a sort of auction. He knew a great many tenant-farmers whom this arrangement would not suit, because they would rather go on under a large landlord year after year, than have their farms advertised in the papers, and have to bid for them by auction, as it were, for twenty-one years, for they could often go on under a landlord for a much longer period. There was another objection that was felt against leases. If a tenant held a farm from year to year, he might leave to get a better under a larger landlord; and on his (Mr Neville's) own estate, for instance, if a farm of 200 or 300 acres was vacated, and a tenant who had hitherto held only 50 or 100 acres was able to take it, he always let it to him in preference to a stranger, and so on. It was a sort of promotion. Men of enterprise and capital would not like to tie themselves for twentyone years to a farm of 100 acres or so, because they were hoping to get larger and better farms. Another disadvantage of a lease was, that it necessarily involved some agreement as to cropping. An able landagent would say to a landowner, if you part with your land for twenty-one years, you ought to have a strict agreement as to cropping, to provide for the due cultivation of the farm. He had heard that this had been admitted by tenants to be just and reasonable; but still, his tenants being from year to year, he had no occasion to do this. He let them crop as they pleased, with dition, namely, that they do not injure the estate. If they did not injure him or his family, the more money they got the better for him. In this matter a good agent was of great use, but he should only act as an impartial mediator between landlord and tenant, doing equal justice to both. He told his agent, Mr Bartholomew, at the last rent day, "I think you are a good agent, for if anything you rather go against me, and that is a good fault." If a tenant was not injuring his farm, it was a great advantage to him to be able to crop as he pleased, and he had never heard how it could be arranged under one con 85 a twenty-one years' lease. He granted a lease was absolute security, but there were those disadvantages, and he had set them forth for their consideration. TENANT-RIGHT-SECURITY TO THE FARMER. To pass on to the question of tenant-right, they had carried this so far in Ireland, that now, when a man took a farm he must have two capitals, one to buy the tenant-right and another to stock his farm. It was con sequently no uncommon thing for a man to exhaust all his capital in buying the tenantright, and then have none to put stock upon the farm. He considered it was quite right for a tenant to be compensated; but several gentlemen had put the matter in this way : suppose a farmer had two or three sons, and placed them upon farms, and the tenantright on one was £6 or £7 an acre, and on another £8 or £10, he had great difficulty in fixing his sons. Therefore, in the management of his estate, he endeavoured to keep the tenant-right as low as he possibly could; and in order to do this, he had adopted a principle which he had not the smallest doubt whatever would be the best for both landlord and tenant, and it was this, that he always advised a tenant not to invest a single farthing in the permanent improvement of his farm. He ought not to say that he did not allow it; but he told his tenants, ever since he came to the property, twentyfive years ago, never to spend a farthing on building, draining, or any really permanent improvement. If they wanted any building or draining done, he did it himself at his own expense, and told them they must pay him interest by way of rent at the rate of five per cent. on the outlay. The tenant thus kept his capital to work his farm with instead of burying it in his landlord's estate, and when he quitted his farm he was able to put his money in his pocket. He had proposed to Mr Gladstone, some six months before that gentleman introduced his Irish Bill, that a Court of Equity should be established for the adjustment of these matters, as things seemed to be in such confusion in Ireland. He suggested that whenever a landlord gave a ten ant notice to quit, he should have the power of calling in a Court of Equity, or an arbitrator, or some one to judge whether he really had a claim or not. It was a thing which he, as a landowner, would be quite willing to do himself if the tenantry desired it. A running lease of three and a-half or four years had also been suggested, so that when a tenant received notice to quit, he should have the opportunity of having a course of cropping before leaving, and should thus be able to get back what he had spent on the land. The objection, however, which would strike everybody to this arrangement was, that if a tenant was farming badly, the landlord would be injured by giving so long a notice; and then, again, if a tenant had a chance of getting a better farm, he would be three or four years before he could leave, and might thus lose it. Some arrange ment might, perhaps, be made for a landlord to give his tenant six months' notice to quit, and then to keep his farm on six months longer, and the tenant to be able to quit in six months-an arbitrator to be called in to give a just award to either party. A Court of Equity would obviate the cost of a trial at the assizes if the matter should ever be pressed so far as that, but if the landlord was willing to have an arbitration, and they could not agree as to who should be the man, he would leave the selection to the chairman of the Council of the Chamber of Agriculture in the county. He did not want Acts of Parliament, his plan was entirely voluntary, but if some amicable arrangement could be made to grant the tenant greater security, he was perfectly confident that in the long run it would be for the interest of both parties. I GARDENING AND FARMING. By Mr J. J. MECHI. COULD never understand why there should be any difference between the two as regards draining, deep cultivation, and abundance of manure and produce. I have asked why there should be any difference, and I am told by farmers :-1. That it would not pay to treat the garden as they do the farm-they would not grow enough. 2. When I say that is the strongest argument for gardening the land, I am told by the same parties that they have neither manure nor capital enough; they don't mean acreable capital enough, but, in plain English, they admit that they hold too much land in proportion to their capital. Now, there is nothing so easy as to double a farmer's acreable capital. I often say to my farming friends who have 600 acres of land, and complain of want of capital, "Take a farm of only 300 acres, and you will at once double your acreable capital, and from my practical experience I can assure you that you will thus considerably increase your per centage of profit." That question of increased acreable farm capital is one of the questions of the day, undergoing revision and solution, and the time is fast approaching when the important question will be, not how many acres do you farm, but how much is your acreable capital. I am daily more and more convinced that from £16 to £30 per acre is not too much on arable farms. I know several who have that amount, and thus make farming pay more than the common rate of profit. A cottage gardener who fattens his one hog on 20 rods of ground, absolutely makes at the rate of 640 lb. of meat per acre, or eight times as much as an ordinary farmer, therefore he also thus makes eight times as much manure. The result must be obvious. Therefore the quantity of meat a farmer makes on his farm, especially with food not the production of his own land, is a measure of his crop-producing powers. Britain is not half farmed, nor will it be until the acreable capital of landowner and tenant is increased. The Country Gentleman's Magazine 87 MR THE EDUCATION OF AGRICULTURAL PUPILS. R George Fanshaive of Charlton Manor, Foulsham, Norfolk, has written a very sensible letter to Bell's Weekly Messenger, headed "A Few Thoughts on the Training of Agricultural Pupils." At the outset the writer shews that few professions or trades are more erroneously estimated in public opinion than that of agriculture. To many it presents a most pleasant picture of sweet country walks and rides, the possession of various domestic animals, and the simple cultivation of the soil with modern agricultural implements, which, in their opinion, make the business of the farmer a mere sinecure. Take, for instance, a youth of sixteen or seventeen years about to leave school, who, in consequence of sundry pleasant recollections of a fortnight which he spent at a farm a short time before, pronounces, on being asked, in favour of farming as an occupation. His ideas of a farmer's life are something of the following order—that he never rises before breakfast time unless he feels inclined, which is only on glorious summer mornings, when the pearly dew hangs on the grass, and a stroll before breakfast seems particularly inviting. He imagines that the thought of work never troubles him. Has he not plenty of men who do all the manual labour on the farm, and several teams of horses to do the heavier sorts of work? The youth adheres to his opinion, and his friends, yielding to his wishes, find a situation for him with one Mr Broadacres, whose reputation as a farmer is very good, but who is known by his more intimate friends as being a little quick-tempered. The writer leaves him for twelve months, at the end of which time he asks him what he thinks about the profession he has chosen. How his tune is changed! Very little is said now about field sports, still less about unrivalled happiness. And Mr Broadacres, too, he tells you that he knew from the first that his pupil would never make a farmer. He expresses unbounded confidence in his own knowledge, you are told he is forgetful, and dislikes working with his own hands. Three years afterwards, when the pupil has become a young man of twenty-one, you ask whether his experience has not increased since you last saw him, and he admits it; but also tells you that just in proportion as his experience increases, so does his responsibility, and that the management, work, &c., which, apparently satisfied his master at that time (since it elicited no grumbling or abuse), is far from doing so now; and that, try as he will, he seems never able to give him satisfaction, let alone please him. You ask him whether he has not a good deal of time on his hands to improve his mind by keeping up his old studies; and he tells you that the greater part of his evenings are spent in making out his accounts, and, worst of all, in casting up his land-measuring. "Landmeasuring!" you say. "Does not the bailiff do that?" "Oh! no," he replies; "Giles used to do it, I believe, but Mr B. said that was the duty of every pupil; and Giles, who was very slow at figures, was only too glad to hand it over to me." Of course you cannot help feeling for your young friend, and agreeing with him that he does not complain without a reason; but you also wish to see Mr B., and inquire what he thinks of his pupil after four years' tuition. He seems to think but little better of him than when you last saw him; he admits, perhaps, that he is less forgetful than he used to be, and that he may be a little more up to the mark in planning out men or horses for a day's work; but that as to making a farmer, bah! He knew from the first he never would. "Why, he depends upon me entirely to originate all the work, and even then he does not always carry out my plan. Ah, well, when I had had half his experience I managed a whole farm for my employer without any assistance from him. And the idea of as ignorant as that youth who has just come him farming a field !" Your steps are now turned to the house of a Mr Claysoil, who lives some distance off, as you lately heard that he had taken an agricultural pupil, and you wish to hear his opinion of this much abused class of young men. He, after hearing your question as to what his own personal experience had been on the subject, almosts gets angry as he recounts a tale of misdemeanours and shortcomings. "Though of good family," Mr Claysoil tells you, "and well supplied with money, his associates were chosen from the lowest classes. His evenings were spent at the village ale-house, from which he did not return till late in the evening, frequently the worse for drink, and in such a condition, of course, was utterly unable to make a single entry in his account books, besides being entirely incapable of rising early the next morning. I have almost made up my mind that this shall be my last farming pupil; and really I must be greatly in need of money if I ever take another, even on higher terms. I sincerely hope there are very few young farmers like him in the country, or else our profession would soon go to the bad." Mr Fanshaive proceeds :-And now, as we have taken a little look at two kinds of young farmers, may I be allowed to address a few words of exhortation to those who are teaching their sons, or perhaps pupils the art of farming. Pray, remember that you were once to you for instruction; that the whole thing seemed as strange and curious to you as it does to him; and that your father, master, or instructor, had to bear with a great deal of seeming stupidity in you; and though you may never have had such an unreasonable instructor as old Broadacres, yet that his impatience often surprised and annoyed you. Do not ever be afraid of letting him have an occasional holiday, or half-day, to enjoy himself. Then, how sad it is to hear some farmers abuse their pupils, in most severe terms, for the most trifling neglects or mistakes. One would think that at least a large sum of money must have been lost through their instrumentality, when it is nothing, perhaps, but the most frivolous fault, which can be corrected with no trouble at all. And now I may, by way of finish, say a few words of caution and advice to the very young man in whose defence I have been writing. Never give way to any degree of laziness; strive always to be at your post punctually in the morning; by so doing, you will gain the respect of your men, and the goodwill of your instructor. Be very careful to thoroughly understand his orders when receiving them, and do not mind asking him to repeat them to you, even though it may lead to a hasty word or two, and when giving these orders to the men, always be sure that they comprehend them well; for I have always found that if labourers can misunderstand your orders they will. WE PRESERVING FOOD IN PARIS. E copy the following interesting acknowledged. However, for so large a article from Engineering: The Appert process, which for a long time past has supplied the marine with salt provisions that will keep for several years, was extensively used. Better still were the ready prepared viands of Messrs Ozouf & Couder, the excellent quality of which was universally population, the authorities preferred preserving the meat raw, so that each consumer might cook it according to his fancy. The preparation of cooked meat was left to private enterprise, and these preserved meats were welcomed by the people in spite of their high price, indeed, it is with a feeling of grateful Preserving Food in Paris 89 remembrance, not unmixed with solemnity, agreeable flavours generated by this process, it was absolutely necessary, before cooking, to soak it for half an hour in luke warm water, and afterwards to expose it to the air for one or two days. that we recal the opening of the tin boxes containing beef a la mode or roasted sirloin on those days when friends unexpectedly dropped in, or the rations of horse meat, far too small, were eked out with those occasional luxuries. To preserve the raw meat three processes were employed. The first was simply salting, such as is employed in seaport towns for the use of the marine. M. Cornillet organized special works near the slaughter-houses of Grenelle, for the application of the salting process. Meat thus treated will last long unchanged, but before cooking it must be thoroughly soaked, and even then it cannot be considered as very nourishing. The process of Mr Wilson, an Irish inventor, consisted in salting the meat to a smaller degree, sufficiently, however, to preserve it for a considerable time, and it formed a satisfactory mean between the fresh and salt provisions. Other works were established in the neighbourhood of the slaughter-house of La Villette, the staff of which was brought from Ireland. The animals were allowed to rest some time before being slaughtered, and after they had been killed the greatest care was taken to prevent any germ of decomposition being deposited upon them. The meat was first dried by a moderate salting, and salt was also placed in incisions, which were made in the thickest parts; it was then placed in the curing house, where the temperature was maintained below 10 deg. centigrade by means of ice. These two modes of salting were applied to the best of the cattle and the horses, but they were not found suitable for mutton, which adds to the salt a large quantity of liquid, and completely destroys the meat. For preserving mutton, the process of M. Gorges was employed, which consists in submitting the meat, after it has been cut in pieces, to a bath diluted with chloric acid, and then to a second bath containing sulphate of soda. The meat is packed in tin boxes, sprinkled with sulphate of soda, the boxes are then soldered down. It is the sulphuric acid, generated by the mixture of the acid and the sulphate of soda, that preserves the meat. To remove all dis The slaughtered animals supplied many valuable products in addition to their flesh, which it was necessary to turn to account. In the first rank, were the bones, of which the greater part are generally sold for utilization in different branches of industry. When bones are exposed to the action of chlorohydric acid they lose their calcareous element, and there remains only a soft elastic substance, the primitive form of bone, that is to say, gelatine. It was a long subject of discussion whether this substance afforded nourishment or not. Some, relying on the fact that it contained 50 per cent. of oxygen, maintained that it would supply the place of meat, while others contended that all alimentary value was lost, and brought forward, as example, instances of animals which died of inanition, yet had been allowed unlimited quantities of gelatine. The general opinion was that this substance was available for food, but that it did not contain sufficient nourishment, when used alone, to support life, but it was necessary to utilize to the utmost the enormous quantity of bones and cartilage furnished by the animals slaughtered by the siege. The Ministry invited special attention to this question, and four manufactories were put in operation to form the bones into gelatine, and to furnish the soup obtained from them for distribution to the poor at the municipal canteens. The bones were steeped in chlorohydric acid, to which four or five times the quantity of water had been added. The lighter bones lost their calcareous properties in two or three days; the larger and thicker ones required steeping eight or ten days; after being drained and washed, the bones were placed in a weak solution of soda, then washed freely with water, the sulphuric acid preserving them from decomposition. It was unnecessary to dry the softened results. MM. Badois and Duchesne, struck with |