3/14; a fat sheep, 1/1.

1196.

Importation was prohibited, under

1336.

Wheat, 6/1 per quarter; a Pig,

per day.

labourer's hire, /3 per day.

1435.

Wheat, 11/3, observed to be the usual price at this time.

1446.

Arable land, /61 to /81 per acre; meadow land, 1/84; wages of a baily for husbandry, £.27 per annum, with diet and clothes; a chief carter and shepherd, £.2 with ditto; a common husbandry servant, £.1 11; a woman servant, £.1 " 0" 7.

1451.

Red Herrings, 3/2 per hundred; white herrings, £. 18 per barrel; fine woollen cloth, 7/5 per yard. 1444 and 1445.

Wheat, 2/4 to 2/ per quarter.
1463.

Wheat, 2/8 Importation prohibited under 11/ and barley under 5/ 1486. Wheat, £.1197. This price caused an insurrection.

1494. Bay salt, /10 bushel; cost of keeping a horse, £.3.1 5 7.

1514.

Wheat, 5/6; master workman's wages, /8, common, ·/5.

1527.

Average price of wheat, £1"12"3. Interest of money, 83 per cent. Land sold at 14 years purchase. Ale, /4 per gallon; small beer, '/2; a foot-soldier's pay /8. 1621-1645.

Average of wheat, £.11934.Interest of money, 8 per cent. Land at 10 years purchase. A goose, 2/. a pullet, 1/6; a pigeon, /6; a partridge, 1/ a pheasant, 5/6; a turkey, 3/9; a footsoldier, 1/ per day; a horseman, 2/6. 1641-1660.

Average of wheat, £.1" 16" 34; interest, £.766 per cent.; sea coals, £.14 per chaldron; hay,

£.1 " 12 per load; horse, £.5 » 10; ox, £.3" 6; cow, £.2" 15; sheep, 11/.; hog, 14/; goose, 3/; turkey, 4/; cock, 1/3; hen, 1/3; pigeon,

mutton, 1/4; strong ale, /8 per gallon; small, /24; butter, /4; cheese, 2; labour, /10; a foot-soldier, /5. 1690-1697.

Wheat, £.19 54 per quarter. Beef and mutton, 2/ per stone; veal, 2/6; perk, 2/8; horse, £.10; cow, £.7 7; ox, £.8; sheep, £.1 " 6; hog, £.115; goose, 3/6; turkey, 4; cock, 1/3; hen, 1/3; pigeon, 21; butter, /9; cheese, /3; footsoldier, /5; seaman, /9; labour, 1/8 per day.

FROM the frequent exhibitions of a Reaping Machine, which Mr Jas. Smith of the Deanston Cotton Works, Perthshire, has lately made before some respectable Societies, many have been led to consider him as the first inventor of the new cutting principle, now applied to the reaping of corn. In this, however, they are mistaken: Mr Smith is not the inventor, as will appear from the following extracts from the Dalkeith Farming Society. A model of a Reaping Machine, on the same principles, was shewn to that Society in May 1811, and it was tried on a large scale in the harvest of the same year.

Excerpt from the Minutes of the
Dalkeith Farming Club, April

11th 1811.

"Mr George Fernie (one of the members) having mentioned that "he had seen a very ingenious model "of a Reaping Machine, which the "inventor, Mr Kerr, Mathematical "Instrument - Maker in Edinburgh, "was desirous to exhibit to the Club, "for the purpose of securing to him"self the priority of invention in the " event of an effective machine being "afterwards constructed on the same "principles; the meeting agreed that "the Secretary should acquaint Mr "Kerr, that the Club'would examine "his model at next meeting."

The model was accordingly presented at the meeting in May following, and a committee delivered their report, which is inserted page 39th of the minute-book. Mr Smith has ful ly admitted that the machine he is now exhibiting is constructed

66

on

the same identical principle" with the model referred to in the extract above, so that there is no dispute as to the principle being the same in January 1816.

both machines; but a question having arisen with regard to prury, it now becomes necessary to put the public in possession of dates. In order to determine this question with fairness and impartiality, I apprehend it will be necessary to begin with the time that the drum and circular cutter attached was first put into shape. We cannot commence with the time that we first thought of a Reaping Machine; for we may have thought many years on the subject, and, in the course of experiments, may have employed many different plans to no purpose. I shall content myself in the meantime by referring to the date of the extract above, although my model was completed long before.

As many of your readers may be ignorant of what has already been done, it may be proper to mention, that as soon as it was discovered that munication was strongly recommendthe machines were identical, a comed by Mr Smith's friends. The cooperation thus urged, could not however alter the facts with regard to priority of invention. No agreement betwixt Mr Smith and me could have been of any avail in this respect, for the public were already in possession of the facts, and these were also recorded in the books of one of our first Agricultural Societies. Desirous, however, to meet as far as possible the views of these gentlemen, I commenced the correspondence, not without my own fears, that this might be construed into a concession on my part, and lead to an unfavourable prepossession of the public mind. This correspondence was continued, till an affair took place which justified my apprehensions, and which rendered it absolutely necessary to refer to Mr Smith's own admission, and to the records of the Dalkeith Society. The result was completely favourable to my claim, and I was publicly recognized as the first Inventor. This put an end to the corres

pondence

pondence on the part of Mr Smith, who perhaps felt disappointed that he was not allowed quietly to carry off the merit of the invention. Since that time I have experimented without any communication with Mr Smith, and have made material improvements on the construction of the machine. With regard to the idea of an effective machine, on which Mr Smith seems to found his claim even to the invention, I would observe, that this may mislead those who are altogether ignorant of these subjects, but the thinking part of the public, and the mechanical world, will scout the idea; for every mechanic is well aware, that, when the principle is given in a model, any body can make a machine, the efficiency depending entirely on the size and workmanship. In the minute above, it appears that the Dalkeith Society took no such view of the claim of efficiency, for they supposed that the priority of invention might be completely secured by a mere exhibition of the model, and accordingly they desired me to lay it before them for that purpose. The idea of efficiency is therefore unfit to support Mr Smith's claim, even although he had made an effective machine, which is by no means admitted; for if we examine the reports on the trials at Dalkeith, we shall there find that Mr Smith has very little to boast of as to efficiency. In the first of these reports, the committee say, they are "convinced that the machine, in its 66 present state, cannot be pronounced "effective ;" and in the last report it is stated, that," after the committee "had attentively inspected the ma"chine at work for the space of an "hour and a half, they were of opi"nion that the work was not at all "satisfactory." Here we have the opinion of a number of disinterested practical farmers, which is the best possible criterion. We are informed, however, that Mr Smith has since that time been more successful; but

แ

if we inquire the cause, and examine the change in the construction of the machine last exhibited by him, it will be found that he has adopted the bar and wheels below the cutter, and both of these are taken from the model which I shewed Mr Smith on the day after the last trial at Dalkeith, at which time the machine he exhibited had nothing of the kind, nor indeed for long after that period. This might have been all very well, had Mr Smith continued in correspondence with me; we might have interchanged ideas, and experimented together; but, in the way he now stands, it must appear very unfair to take advantage of my ideas, and to publish the whole Invention as his own. the proof of this, we need only examine the supplement to the Encyclopedia Britannica, lately published. In that work he has described the machine, without taking the least notice of my name, although he well knew my claim to the invention.

As

From what has been said, 1 presume there is sufficient evidence that Mr Smith is not the Inventor; but as a farther proof, I shall conclude with quoting part of a minute of the Dal keith Farming Society meeting, 3d March 1814.-After stating that Mr Smith had acknowledged that the machines were exactly the same, and calling the attention of the meeting to what the Club had done in April 1811, Mr Clark in continuation said, "that as Mr Kerr had exhibited "his model, long before Mr Smith "produced his machine, he thought "some notice should be taken of Mr "Kerr, and therefore moved that "the thanks of the Club should be "voted to him, and the same entered on the minutes.

66

I am,

in Upper Peru.

2. The order of Knighthood of the Bath enlarged, and divided into three classes; Knights Grand Crosses, Knights Commanders, and Knights Companions.

8. The British army, under Sir Edward Packenham, having landed on the 23d ult. attacked the enemy's lines before New Orleans, but were severely repulsed; having lost in the whole operations 2455 men-amongst them, Maj.-Generals Packenham and Gibbs were killed.

About this time numerous petitions against the Property Tax. 9. Martinique given up to the French.

14. The Margaret, Londonderry Packet, with three seamen and twenty passengers, was wrecked in Cullen Bay, when all perished, excepting two of the seamen.

15. President, American frigate, captured by the Endymion, Captain Hope.

- Swedish Pomerania exchanged