ge aids the other,
and suggests to it means of still further benefitting practical
agriculture.

One of the most interesting, and not the least important, of those
practical discussions which have arisen since the establishment of
the Royal Agricultural Society of England, has been in regard to the
relative merits and lightness of draught of the Scottish
swing-ploughs, and of certain of the wheel-ploughs made and
extensively used, especially in the southern counties. It is admitted,
we believe, on all hands, that a less skilful workman will execute
as presentable a piece of work with a wheel-plough, as a more
skilful ploughman with a Scotch swing-plough. This is insisted upon
by one party as a great advantage, while the other attaches no
weight to it at all, saying, that they find no difficulty in getting
good ploughmen to work with the swing-plough, and therefore it would
be no advantage to them to change. Still this greater facility in
using it is a true economical advantage, nevertheless; since that
which is difficult to acquire will always be purchased at a dearer
rate; and in an improving district, it is some gain, that it is
neither necessary to import very skilful ploughmen, nor to wait till
they are produced at home.

But it is also conceded, we believe, that the swing-plough, in
skilful hands, is more easily or quickly managed than a wheel-plough;
that it _turns more readily_, and when doing the same kind of work,
will go over the ground quicker, and consequently do more work in a
day. Theoretically, this seems undeniable, though it does not appear
to be as yet clearly established in what precise proportion this
theoretical acceleration ought to increase the extent of ground gone
over by a diligent ploughman in the ten hours of his daily labour.
It is said that, with the wheel-plough, three-fourths of an acre is
an average day's work, while with a swing-plough, an acre is the
ordinary and easy work of an active man on soil of average tenacity.
The _pace_, however, must depend considerably both upon the horses
and their driver; and to whatever extent such a difference may
really exist--and opinions differ upon the subject--it is clearly an
argument in favour of the swing-plough.

But a third and equally important element in the discussion, is the
relative draught of the swing and wheel-ploughs. This element has
been lately brought more prominently forward, in consequence of some
interesting experiments, mad