an admission very damaging to the advocates of the small farm system; but though in some respects there may be a saving of labour, over extensive areas, as compared with very diminished ones, the necessary difference will be found far less than is supposed;—within certain limits, economy of labour, though not of buildings or of machinery,[1] is as practicable on reasonably small farms as on large. If a proof were wanting, we need only again refer to the table, when we shall see that the tillage lands of Ulster and Leinster, the two provinces from which the largest rate of produce per acre is obtained, are cultivated by a fewer number of hands than are crowded into the husbandry of
- ↑ "The large farmer has some advantage in the article of buildings."—Mill's Political Economy, p. 180.
"It has been suggested that machines and horses should be held in common by small farmers, but the practical execution of such arrangements are very difficult. In an uncertain climate like that of Ireland, it may be of the most vital importance to take advantage of the few days of fine weather which after weeks of expectation may afford a transient opportunity of reaping a crop already compromised, or of ploughing a field still saturated with moisture at the end of April. All the co-proprietors of the plough horses and machines would require the use of them simultaneously."—Ibid. p. 180.
"Some soils, however, are unsuitable, for spade husbandry; as, for instance, heavy wet lands liable to inundation; stony, gravelly, or shallow soils, more especially if incumbent on chalk. Manual labour is also inapplicable where the climate is precarious, and it is necessary to be expeditious in tilling the land, and in sowing and harrowing for a crop. On these accounts, spade husbandry cannot be universally resorted to with advantage either to the agriculturist or the community." Macdonald's Estate Management, p. 261.
