Untitled

Lyttelton Times, Volume LIII, Issue 5951, 23 March 1880, Page 6

• The Melbourne SlxtiMtioh bhUdibgs can be seen from Mount Maoedon, a distance of forty miles, without the aid of a glass.

THE ENGLISH CROP RETURNS.

WUi'i i J <„,<»■> 1 >j ,• >i (ATarfc LamExpruu.) ■ j : The, extremely disheartening, tele, told by (he Crop EoburnS which ve, published last week cannot (be fully appreciated .by e consideration .of the abstracts ! showing the proportions of tho over-average, everegb, and under-average: reiawms. ’ It. is. not enough to say of the crops that they were chiefly, and in most cases neatly-all under-average, because that does inob determine whothir they were little or much, under the usual stimdard of yieldj norsdoes it; give apy indicaitiou of -the quality and condition of the grain.| Only aoareful examination of the returns iia’their extended form can enable, anyone to) form a correct judgment on those important points; Withaview, then, to assisting .'towards' a more oomplete understanding of the reports of our Correspondents ae » ■ whole, let us pass in review some, of the most striking of their remarks.

One of the most peculiar features of the returns'on the wheat crop it the striding similarity of the reports from the different :counties. * From Northumberland to Cornwall, and from Sdffolk to Shropshire there |s hot a county inwhioh the wheat is not saidtobe bad in Quality, and generally in condition also, as well ai defloient iui yield;- Indeed, after, -a' careful examination of the reports, yre are quite unable to say which county or had tholeast unßatisfaetory orops of wheat. It will'not do to take'the-few-counties which, had one“ average ?' report side, by side with' these tolerably favourable estimate* we find the 1 most disparaging remarks on tjhe crop of neighbouring districtsof r tne tame county; except in the case of little Anglesea, for which there ; was only one return-r‘f ;8 , quarters, average.’ ’ If three quarters Ore considered an average crop in Anglesea it is clear that the oountyls not of much account with respect to wheat growing.- Of ■ the great wheat-growing counties wo find ■ that only Yorkshire and Sent oab claim the distinction of having one average return. The general burthenof the reports from -these as well as the other counties’, is; one of.mad; complaining. To show how hbavy the loss of farmersi must ’ be, iin ‘ at -deast portions of the several 5 countiesof England we will quote afew of the. worst reports.; Bedfordshire y‘‘2s'(ji», 70. per cent under.ave<; rage, poorandlightabdut‘ 20 buahels, weight 601 b ,! Under average, I Berkshire : “ Veryibadj 1 only fit for,pigs’}?’! 7 sacksß, sacks,5 thin~ in'berry* condition bad” Buckinghamshire :• “Never; know worse—the little there Vis, inferior j” “.15 bushels per acre, half an average worst I, ever know—some only I qr." Oambcidg-. shire: .‘‘About2sqrs; inferior quality, condition badj?’ other reports, to same | effect. Cheshire Halfacrop;” “ under average, in’bad conditior, soft and ill-fed.?’ Cornwall: “ Quite a failure“ wretched—very little, marketable.?’; Cumberland;: ‘f.2 qrs* quality bad.’.’. Derbyshire : ‘‘ Half ad average; got in. very poor condition}?.’ ' 50 per cent under average.??; Devonshire i : “ Worst ever xeme inhered*- blighted, shrivelled,; and i almost ( useless“ worst : ever known.?’ Dorsetshire: “ Three sacks per acre, v e’j inferior quality ;’’ , “ not half a crop, very, inferior, one third, unsaleable}” “worst ever known—B to 10, bushels; blighted;’?; other reports to ( similar effect." Durham: “Half an; averagelt, qrs per;acre}’? •“ half a orbp, 2> qri, condition and sample pdor.?’.« Essex :Jißucb.Ah«cw»t : nev8 * atfsZu siußsT3CTEf£h 0£ man}’? “the worst crop I : ever, knew-;”' “ not half a crop .—the 1 worsteverr tknown’}’? ri“ not ?half a crop;’’ “ worst I: ever; grew.” jOlbdcester-,, ■hire.:; a crop in yield—quality worst; known. for-years “ about half: a drop.’’? Hampshire:; ‘f Three;; to' four.sacks of very/ bad. quality, much gives! to pigs 5?’,“ qJ>oa¥'a.’ | | qrs, very thin, and condition bad}’?: “ generally 2 socks per acre, exceptional cases at 8.” Herefordshire :. “IVom. 50 to 70 per cent under average } .?’ “not’ half an average, quality inferior.’’ } Hertford: shire i ?‘;Not half a crop • ‘? worst ever known here.*? Huntingdonshire: “ About the worst crop ever known —12 bushels;” “ under; average, about 2 qrs.” j Kept: “About half a crop;” “25 qrs, one-thiri unsaleable}” “25 qrs, three-fourths millers do not care to buy; ” “ only 2 qrs, one-third unsaleable; ” some other reports much less unfavourable. Lancashire: “Two-thirds of a crop, but not a good sample; ” “ little above half a crop, three-fourths very inferior.” Leicestershire: “ Many crops yield only I qr per acre; ” “ 15 qrs 5 ” “ about 2 qrs inferior; i quality, bad condition.” Lincolnshire,: “ Much under average—2 qrs in' bad conditionsome other reports to the; same effect. Middlesex: “ Yery much,Under; average—2 to 8 sacks per acre.” Monmouth- ; shire: “ Far under average—soma,ls qrs; ” “ under average, 2 qrs, condition bad.” Norfolk:, The worst report for this: County is “ 2 to 45 qra, much blighted } ” other reports less unfavourable, ' but, not one up to average.” Northamptonshire!: “Two quarters, bad quality ;’? “ half usual yield, qualifcy.and condition bad.” Northumberland ; “ Two quarters per acre, and bad , quality •” “ 50 per cent in yield, 25 in quality, about 2 qrs.”' Nottinghamshire : “ One quarter “ about half a crop” (twice.) Oxfordshire : “ Worst we ever had j” “ 1 qr 4 bus, bad condition, thin in berry.” Eutlandshire : “ Much under average.” Shropshire,: “Far under average, about 25 qrs, badly, harvested “ 25 qrs, half unsaleable.” Somersetshire : * Yery much under average, condition bad “ not more than one-third of average—hundreds of acres only one sack.’?; Staffordshire : ,“ Poorest crop known;?’, “ about a quarter of a crop, gathered-badly.” Suffolk : “ Onethird under. average, generally bad, ; about sGlb per bushel“ hardly 25qrs, bad, very little saleable.” “ Surrey ; Two quarters, in bad condition ;?’ “half a crop.” Sussex : “ Some as low as 4 bushels, bad and light; 40 per cent under average—a great deal only fit for pigs.” Warwickshire: “Yery much under average, about 2 qrs, condition bad j” “15 bushels, quality bad.” Westmoreland: “ Under average.” Wiltshire: “Half average;” “ worst crop on record. Worcestershire: “ Yery bad, not over 12 bushels, condition bad“2 qrs, scarcely ahiy fit for market.” Yorkshire: “ The worst produed for forty years;” on the whole a miserable failure,?’ From Wales our returns are summarised; but with one exception the reports are unfavourable, generally as respects condition as well as yield,.: It will be noticed that correspondents in several counties concur in the testimony that the wheat crop of ,1879 was the worst ever grown, which mentis, we presume, the worst that-they have known. ; , : With respect to the barley crop we find more variation in the reports from different parts of the country. For instance, Cumberland, with eleven reports*-has four average reports, and two out of five that mention the condition put it as “ fair.” From Cambridgeshire, again, a third of the reports are average. Out of twenty-one reports from Kent there are- five average and one over-average returns. The quality and colour, however, are generally badly spoken of; In Lancashire a third of the reports are favourable, in Somersetshire three out* of eleven, and in Westmoreland four out of seven. From Yorkshire about a third of the returns are tolerably favourable. Most of the other counties in England and Wales only one average report each, and there are numerous statements to the effeots that the barley crop of 1879, as well as the wheat' crop, wasthe worst ever’ known. All through the counties we see, too, such remarks as “ light,” “ condition bad,” “ damaged by weather,” discoloured,” and “ unfit for malting.” ~ ®?e Counties most favoured with respect to the oat crop were the'Northem, North-eastern, -Western, and South-western Counties, Some of the. Eastern, Midland, and Southern Counties had bad crops. From Cumberland no fewer than seven , out of eleven reports are over average, the remainder being average, From Cornwall all the reports, and from Devonshire all but one, are either up to or over average. From Cambridgeshire,, Dorsetr Bhn;e, Herefordshire, Huntingdonshire/Kent, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, Middlesex, Norfolk, Norihtoumberland, Shropshire, . Somersetshire, Staffordshire, Westmoreland, Wiltshire, Worcestershire, Yorkshire,, and Wales,, the are mainly favourable, . ..... , .... There is ,bu 6 little, variation inr the -reports a sinde Oountj-haying;, a good crop; oh the whole, of either beans or peas. A comparison of the numbers of returns on these crops, in proportion to the

tots! tftmWfoC our returns in different year*, 1 ■hpwi »" gridual and' constant dimumtioa in their gTowtlrih tHc country, ~ ltJ i In the report* of our correspondents on tW rootcrops, »uChrem*rh*<*» “a>nfcone-fourth of Afirop,’* "about half • crop,” ?‘ almott a failure,'’ " the wont crop known for yean,” ; and gimilarlr depreoiatory statements frequently recur -with respect to turnip* and mangeualike. 'A'JH •- , i Nearly all the ■ report* on the hay crop de*oriibe the> quality «nd condition ae very 'poor, on- account of damage from the wot weatheri ' i ?rc\r

tokoMihlffDk wtutnw powbb, Ju*t os th* ndaiiaed limb needs a reliablesupport. Thefroots of agoindioAte thewanimt of that vital flame,..that btffps .with Intenast «o. w inieawter periods of Ufa,,' It.'-ls to. keep, the, spark laextingalthed, that then becomes an Imperative necessity, and thtoanimal heat requires .for Its sustenance some active and potent tonic, udoipho .woitn’s Schiedam, Abokatic Bchhaspb to, as it were, tha '•Promethoantorohthat can the light reltime.’'MA»W.l i; ' ' : - ; Mesne Qriniault end Co.—lsm happy, to inform you that fny eon. brought close te hie grave through consumptive disease, has been completely cured by the use of your Syrup of Hypophosphlte of lime. He ha* regained' .flesh, and his appetite to better than ever.—Edwin Gbbbvwood, Cepe Negto Island, Shelburne.—[Adtt,3 * PEEFKOTiOK.—M'rs S. A,’ Allen's World Bair Bertprer (the . .Genuine only in Pink Paper Wrappers) nevcT fails to restore ' grey hair to its youthful colour, imparting to it new fife, growthaud. lustrous beauty. Its action is certain And thi ’rough, quickly banishing greyhes*. It to not a dye.. It • ever proves itself the natural strengthens? of the hair; : Iti. supeHoHty rand excellence are established throughout the world.:, Wholesale of Messrs Kbkp*h6bmb, Ebqsbbb akd, Co, l Dunedin and Auckland; - and Memn Vzhrov,' GBistwAbn akd : Co., i Wellington j and retail of all . Chemists and Perfumers throughout the Colonies, [Advt.l Obikauxt A Co.’s GnABAKA owes its curative virtues to the great ' quantity of cafleln which it ' Contains. : Dr Wilks; of the Guy's Hospital, da-, Clares in the “ British Medical Journal '' that the Quaraua acts ” like a charm." Guaraua powders are a certain remedy , for. the sick headache.—Tha "Lancet," August 81,1872.~['Advt,1 i We owe it to truth to state that all the physicians who have prescribed to their patients Grunault and Co.’s Indian, Cigarettes ace. unanimous in telling that'/their effect in asthma, chronic catarrh, and inflammation of the mucous membraceofthe nose, palate, and bronchia,inmost surprising.—“ Vienna Medical Gazette” (Austria).—[Anvi.i "Berkeley, Sept., 1839.—Gentlemen, I feel it a duty I owe to you to expressway gnultudefor the . great benefit I nave derived by taking ' Horton’s Camomile Pills.', I applladtqyouragant, Mr Bell, Berkeley, for the abovenamedPillß.forwnMl in the stomach; from which I suffered eicruoiating painter a length oftimeihaving tried nearly every remedy prescribed, .but without- deriving any' benefit at-all, .After taking two bottles Of your valuable Pills I was quite restored to iny usual state of health. Please'give this ' for thp benefit of those . who; may thus' be;aißioted; —Lam, sir. youra truly, Hekrt AllpaSA.”—To the Fro-, prietora of Nobtok’ Camomile Pills.—[Aavr. I ' £1 Fbxb Gifts.—Theproprietors of Womb's Abomatio Sckibdaic Sokkapts to induce! the destruction and prevent the improper nee of their wrappers and labels, and thos farther protect the public against 'fraud and deception,' have inclosed In the wrappers or under the label on the quart bottles, sim}e Oot. X, 1878, and: continue to inclose IK 'EVEBT DAT’s PACDBO THBOCGHOtIX THE TEAS, T- H BEE £ I O E D B E 8, whloh are 'drawn upon the' undersigned, and which will be cashed by their agents. secure these, gifts the public must be careful to. ask ter and a’ccept nothing hut the G*Hcrax ,tl Dbxrno Wolfe's Schnapps with om'namenpoh the top label. M. Mossand Co., Wynyard Lane, Sydney; Budget? and Compy., agents, Christchurch.— |Advt.l !" , .