The Sun.
London, England, 1842-11-19 00:00:00

LONDON :
SATURDAY MORNING, NOVEMBER 19, 1842.

The agriculturists just now are making a great
stir about draining the soil, and we might sup-
pose, from their pother, that this practice had
been heard of fur the first time within the
last year. The fact, however, is, that draining
was strongly recommended and practised in
many places, to our personal knowledge, more
than a quarter of a century ago. All that has
latterly been invented is, that draining has been
more generally recommended, and we believe
more effectually done. In the List number of
the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of
England, Mr. PusEy, M.P., says :

,
It is only seven years since we keard in England,
chiefly through the present Speaker a the House of
Commons, that a manufacturer in Scotland, now well
known as Mr. Smith, of Deanston, had found the
means of making all land, however wet and poor it
might be, warm, sound, and fertile, and that this change
was brought about by two processes, thorough draining,
and sub-soil ploughing. His rule of draining was this :
That we are not to endeavour merely to find out
hidden springs, and to cut through them by a single
drain, which in some of our books appeared to be
regarded as all that was necessary ; but that, as the
whole surface of retentive soils' is rendered wet,
not by accidental springs, but by rain, the whole
surface of the field must be made thoroughly dry by
under-drains, running throughout at equal distances.
Any field, he said, however wet, might be so dried,
provided these under-drains were cut sufficiently near
to cult other,- This was the principle of thorough or
frequent draining, asserted by Mr. Smith, of Dean-
ston, in 1835 ; and this principle, which was then
new and startling, may now be regarded as firmly
established."

In further speaking of Mr. SMITH, who
has many claims on public esteem, Mr. PUSEY
—do not let us forgot that he is an M.P.—said:

"In proving that Mr. Smith's system is not new, I
do not lower his claims to our thanks ; for he proba-
bly invented it also, ands at all events carried it out
with an energy which made it new in his hands ; but
I think the fact of its previous practice in Suffolk and
Essex—[he might have added, Kent]—worth no-
tice for two reasons ; one, that any new method, how-
ever highly recommended, 'must be received with
doubt as long as it continued new, and that conse-
quently the best praise by which any method, can be
recommended to practical farmers, is, not that it is
new, but, on the contrary, that it is old and tried; the
other reason is this, that here was a plan of drainage
which was regarded as novel, yet had been employed
and established for half a century, at no great distance
from London ; and this is by no means a singular
proof how little the farmers in one part of
,England
knew, until lately, what the others were doing."

This statement is of far less importance to
prove the value of under-draining, and the
length of time it has been practised, than to
prove the worthlessness of the landowners, and
the inestimable advantage even to them of com-
petition. Would any man believe, after the
century, nearly, of talk and writing we have
bad about agricultural improvement and en-
couragement of agriculture, after the patronage
of GEORGE 111., the establishment of scores of
Agricultural Associations and Royal Agricul-
tural Societies, after all the labours of the late
Earl of LEICESTER and several other friends of
agriculture—would any man believe, if it were
stated in The Sun on our authority, or stated
on any less exalted authority than an agricul-
tural M.P., that the farmers in one part of Eng-
land knew little or nothing, until lately, of what
the farmers in other parts knew, and were doing ?