Nanci, to Mayence. The part most desirable to inhabit is that which is included between the Loire, the Rhône, the Rhine, and the sea. Its northern districts are not so cold as Sweden, nor so humid as Holland; and its southern provinces are not burnt up like those of Spain and Italy. In short, France has been treated by Nature as if she were her eldest daughter, and has been made the most privileged spot on the globe.' Though the author is thus of opinion that Nature has been all-bountiful to his own country, he does not flatter its inhabitants on the use which they have made of their advantages. He represents the French as very defective both in agricultural science and practice; and his object is to awaken their attention to the cultivation of the soil, and to the improvement of the breeds of those animals which contribute to feed, to clothe, and to abridge the labour of man. His motto is, Pâturage et labourage sont les deux mamelles de l'état; which we may translate, In furrow'd fields and meadows green, The sustenance of states is seen. In the first of these chapters, which treats of the advantage of Agriculture in general, M. DEPRADT reminds his readers that he employs the term not in a confined but in an extensive sense, as including all that respects the cultivation and produce of the earth. Before he states what is now doing or may be done, he looks backwards to consider the progress of moral improvement in France during the last century. Here he remarks that The population of France, a hundred years ago, did not exceed eighteen millions; and that, at the commencement of the Revolution, it reached twenty-five millions. The different accounts taken at different epochs have manifested a gradual increase of her population; and, to be convinced of this fact, we need not take the trouble of examining registers or searching parochial records; we need only observe the growth of her towns and cities, which, since the commencement of the past century, are become more large and more populous; better built and better inhabited. It is not an age since the people, of our towns, which then resembled prisons rather than collections of dwelling houses, disgusted with the gothic abodes and frightful inclosures of their ancestors, surrounded them with beautiful suburbs, the population of which equalled and in some instances surpassed that within the walls. Thus, in the course of a century, have arisen the fauxbourgs of St. Germain and of St. Honoré, the elegant chaussée of Antin, and all that string of elegant edifices which skirt the boulevards of Paris. The population and size of this metropolis are double their former extent. The same augmentation has taken place at Lyons, Marseilles, Bourdeaux, Nantes, Rouen, and in towns of all all ranks; so that they could not now be recognized by those who had not seen them for a hundred years. Moreover, France has not only changed her external appearance, but also her manner of living. The Frenchman, being richer and more comfortably lodged, lives better, and consumes more than he did. This country has not only maintained seven millions more of inhabitants than it subsisted a century past, but has also supported them more abundantly and elegantly. Country-seats and houses of entertainment have sprung up, to which the citizen repairs at stated seasons for his recreation; and this is so different from the antient manners, that if the former be termed the Age of Cities, the present may be called the Age of the Country; and if France has increased her population and her con sumption in a still greater proportion by her more luxurious mode of life, a correspondent improvement of culture must have taken place.' This picture has nothing singular in it. London, during the same period, has increased much more than Paris; and as to the general amelioration of the face of the country, France is far, very far, behind England. These improvements may be traced in both countries to the growing spirit of commerce, which diffuses general energy. Artificial meadows, the improved fruit-garden, and public roads regularly formed and sustained, are the work of the past century. Having contemplated the advantages which the present race of Frenchmen derive from the exertions of their ancestors, the author passes to estimate, in the following chapter, The Influ ence of the Revolution on Agriculture. Here, as in other respects, the consequences of the revolution must be painted in gloomy colours. It is stated that, by its attack on population, by its having interrupted consumption, and diminished internal trade and external commerce; by its ruin of the colonies, by the blow which people of great fortunes received, and by the disappearance of all splendid living; it must have operated banefully on agriculture: but that which M. DEPRADT deems the worst consequence of the revolution is the destruction of the great proprietors, with the division and subdivision of the land into small portions, owing to the repeal of the law of primogeniture; for the wisdom of which law, in a political view, he is a strenuous advocate. Indeed, for his partiality to the old system he offers his reasons. Large estates, in the hands of seigneurs, he maintains to be preferable to their being parcelled out among a number of cultivating proprietors, because he thinks that property in their hands melts imperceptibly away and at last becomes absolutely lost. As this writer is an enemy to the subdivision of landed property, the question so much agitated respecting large and small farms is decided by him, in the next chapter, in favour of the former; and he places the subject, if not in a convincing, at li 4 least least in a striking, point of view. Farming on a large scale is necessary to answer the demands of population on a large scale; so that if in a country there be many large cities, there must be many large farms. The families belonging to little farmers consume most of what they grow, and have little to bring to market; they are moreover generally poor; whereas large farmers have much to sell, and grow rich.-This subject is resumed in the sequel. Whether the Culture of France be sufficient to supply her Wants? is the topic of Chapter v.; one extract from which will sufficiently develope the author's sentiments: France at this moment presents a spectacle which merits particular attention. Her rival (England), with the riches of the world flowing into her lap, is dying with famine, and, like Midas, starves in the midst of her gold; while France, without abounding in money, overflows with provisions. This is the country in which bread and the necessaries of life are the cheapest and best in Europe. The purchases and clamours of England propagate famine on the continent: France holds her tongue, and supports herself abundantly in silence. She has undergone a trial, which will not be repeated: for her government has the good sense to see that it ought not to interfere in matters of this kind. Hence every thing is become abundant. In the midst of a prolonged and destructive war, which has taken an infinite number of hands from agriculture; after a multitude of heavy losses and trials; France finds in her own bosom abundant and easy means of subsistence. This new fact is sufficient to settle the question, and to demonstrate that she possesses a fertility equal to the ordinary wants of her inhabitants; or, in other words, that she can grow bread enough for her own consumption.' In Chap. vr. we come to a view of the actual State of Agrieulture in France, or rather of France in her former state; for the reader is warned that the author's account in this place respects the antient state, and that his statistical table is copied from Mr. Arthur Young: but for its accuracy he does not pledge himself. France, it is remarked, presents three zones of culture, marked by differences of climate. The first comprehends those provinces which produce olives and silk, together with maize and wine; the second includes those which yield maize and wine, but neither silk nor olives; and the third, those districts which grow corn, and whose inhabitants drink beer and cider. To this part, succeeds a review of the several provinces of France, marking their distinguishing features of soil and produce: but, though it is amusing, our limited space protests against its insertion. The general result is that, of the 48 parts into which France may be divided, 17 are good, and 31 middling or bad. It is moreover stated that one half of the French territory is arable; or that, out of 131,000,000 of acres, 66,000,000 are cultivated with grain: but then it is to be remarked that more than one half of this grain is rye, or corn even inferior to rye. That which may be pronounced good land does not exceed in quantity 28,000,000 of acres. On the whole, France has no reason, as yet, to boast of her agriculture, of the condition of her farmers, nor of her breeds of cattle. Errors without number in her system of culture demand correction. With the view of promoting the requisite amelioration, M. DEPRADT, in the 7th chapter, institutes a Comparison between the Agriculture of his own and that of Foreign Countries. This parallel is drawn principally with England, which is reckoned to contain only 46,000,000 acres, or to be in extent, compared with France, as 1 to 3. M. DEPRADT also reminds us that the superiority of his country does not consist merely in size, but that France, while it possesses all the productions of England, has others which it is naturally impossible for the latter to produce; yet he considers this advantage as in some degree balanced by the excellence of our agricultural system, and by the encouragement given by us to improvements in all branches of rural economy. This praise, however, is bestowed on us with the view of stimulating his countrymen to similar exertions, on a soil more varied, more extensive, and more prolific. Chapter VIII., or the 1st of Vol. II., treats of the Cultivation of France under the old Government: but, since it is decided that this government did nothing, or worse than nothing, for agriculture, we shall hasten to the succeeding chapter, concerning its State under the new Government. Instructions are here given to the government, respecting the conduct which it ought to adopt; and it is particularly enjoined to repair the evils inflicted on agriculture during the revolution, by establishing a course of public instruction in each department; by publishing books; by the formation of agricultural societies, and experimental farms; by introducing the most profitable trees, and the best breeds of animals, &c. This last subject branches out into a number of distinct discussions, which are separately treated in the 10th and subsequent chapters, intitled-On the Varieties observable in Animals of the same Species:-on the Influence of Blood in different Kinds of Animals :-on crossing Breeds on the Amelioration of the three most valuable Kinds of Animals :-on the Horse:-on the Restoration of the Studs :-on the Improvement of Cattle and Sheep-and on a general Method for the Amelioration of the three Kinds of Animals principally employed in Culture. As these topics have been much discussed by our agricultural writers, and as we have yet but little to learn from our neighbours respecting them, we shall pass over this part of the work without farther notice. In the 19th chapter, on the Amelioration of small Farms, the subject of the 4th chapter is continued, and more amply discussed. Small farms, it is remarked, are not evils in themselves, since they promote population and consumption: but they afford little disposable produce. To obviate this objection, it is recommended to the little farmer to abolish fallowing, to improve his breeds of cattle, particularly of horses, and to atone for the want of quantity by the superior quality of his crops. The author does not advise the proprietor to enlarge his farm, till he has given to the quantity already in his hands a complete amelioration. In the districts which produce wine, the selection of the best sorts of vines is recommended; and, to encourage an attention to the breeds of animals, M. DEPRADT details the accounts which our English newspapers have given, and which the French papers have copied, of the large sums paid to Mr. O'Kelly, to the late Duke of Bedford (the noble patron of English agricultural improvement), to the late Mr. Bakewell, and to others, for the mere hire of a stallion, a bull, or a ram; a circumstance, says he, unknown in the history of French culture, but on which the French gentlemen (this English word seems to be adopted into the French language) and farmers ought to reflect. For the Comparison in the following chapter (20.) between the use of Horses and that of Oxen in ploughing, the author is indebted to our own writers; and after the question has been so much and so recently agitated, we need not copy remarks at second-hand. In Chap. XXI. M. DEPRADT digresses to the subject of Manufactures, in which he recommends the employment of Machinery; and he concludes his work with imploring the assistance of the government in favour of agriculture;—or at least that it would promote a spirit of rural improvement, by repairing the public roads in France, (which before the revolution were the best in the world,) and by forming such canals as shall open a complete internal communication between the different parts of this vast country. Though this work was written during the war, as the quotation at the end evinces, it may be said to treat on the tactics of peace. To prompt his countrymen to surpass us in Hæc super arvorum cultu pecudumque canebam, manufac |