? GBIOUL TUBAL LABOB 4?9 plough, (3) the shape of the furrow is known. It is only when (if this be possible) the results are reduced to a constant depth, and to a constant shape of furrow, and the corresponding area which would then be covered by a man ploughing of a day be calculated, that figures comparable at all. Thus, ?for instance, done by a man with modern iron plough it is necessary the furrow in the former case is while in the latter at a similar depth in the course can be made in comparing, the day's wqrk a country plough, and with a to recognize that nearly triangular rectangular-- hence of soil moved the furrow is the amount
be very much greater in the latter case.
figures which follow I have tried records to the area which would will In the to reduce be covered day by a plough giving a rectangular furrow, in.ches deep. One more difficulty the results. In the bullocks and arises most cases guides all the in It four in the interpretation of one man both drives the plough; in a few, a the animals. If this is the efficiency of the man I have the figure, I am boy as equal to my figures boy is employed to drive needed, it is obvious that is less than if he does the whole operation. taken,--how far I am justified in not sure--in my 'calculations a three-fifths of a man, and have reduced accordingly. Again, in certain cases, a plough requires two pairs of bullocks, while another plough in the same land works with one. In comparing the work done by the laborer, should this be taken into account? Mter careful consideration, I have ignored it, and the day's work which I have recorded is that done by one average good ploughman, with the animal equipment which he thinks is necessary. With this explanation, I may give the figures I
