1805] Or the Price of Barley, Gc. 377

the notice of one or two of your correspondents in the two Jast numbers of your Magazine. 1 Should most assuredly have paid an earlier attention to the remarks of your friend, the Scotch farmer, at page 255, had I not been particularly engaged in business of another nature; bis letter contains many Sensible and Just reflections, as well as useful informa- tion, for which he is entitled to the thanks of all your readers. But be will allow me, Mr. Editor, to point out an error in one of his arguments, which has escaped his notice, and which appears to me to have been occaszioned by his adopt- ing false premises.

He remarks first, that from the Sparing cultivation of bar- ley last ScaS0N, and fhe almost equally Sparing produce of that grain, an higher price might naturally have been expected by the growers of it. It 1s true, man's expectations are not easily Satisfied: the imagination, particularly where Self-in- tereit takes the lead, is very apt to roam. 1 cannot, how- ever, give up my opinion, that every farmer in Great Britain will haye abundant reason to 5ay, that the average price of barley of last year's orowth kas been far greater than his ut- most expectations, at or S00Nn after last harvest,(for it 1s pret- ty well known by bare inspection, at that ume, whether 4a field will yield well or ill) could have anticipated.

The next ground of his argument, and which, with all due deference to the judgment of your Scotch friend, 1 conceive to be ill-founded, is, that barley has not borne its futl and zSual proportion in price to every other Species of grain, If any grain has been below its due rate in the scale of prices, this year,[ Should name oats, as bearing the least value. Oats of the very best quality, have been Sold in Mark-lane zinge Michaelmas last at twenty-four shillings per quarter, and in the Norfork markets even lower, at the very time when barley was fifty-four Shillings per quarter. According to the Evening Mail of the 28th January last, the best price of each grain in London was as follows: wheat 120s. rye 588.' barley 538. oats 375. 6d. per quarter. Here, your correspondent will certainly allow tbat barley cuts no mean figure; and the Same may be observed to have been the case, very nearly, through all the Season. At the Same time, the markets in the North may have been considerably at variance with me above ztatements.|

But taking the average of England, the argument which is adduced in his next paragraph,(t0 prove, it I understand its force rightly, that the Corsumptin of barley is dinunisſed) falls to the ground, Since the minor proposition in the syl- 1o9g1sm, viz. that the proportionate price with rTespect to other