We confess that, in the first of the above passages, Mr. Stephens appears to us to assume something of the tone of a partizan, which has always the effect of lessening the weight of an author's opinion with the intelligent reader who is in search of the truth only. What is advanced as the main advantage of trench-ploughing in the first passage--that it can be safely done without previous draining, is in the second wholly discarded by the advice, _never to trench-plough without previous draining_. At the same time it is confessed, that in the case of a bad subsoil, trench-ploughing may do much harm. Every practical man in fact knows that bringing up the subsoil in any quantity, he would in some districts render his fields in a great measure unproductive for years to come. On the other hand, we believe that the use of the subsoil-plough can never do harm upon drained land. We speak, of course, of soils upon which it is already conceded that either the one method or the other ought to be adopted. The utmost evil that can follow in any such case from the use of the subsoil-plough, is that the expense will be thrown away--the land cannot be rendered more unfruitful by it. Subsoiling, therefore, is the _safer_ practice. But in reality, there ought, as we have already stated, to be no opposition between the two methods. Each has its own special uses for which it can be best employed, and the skill of the farmer must be exercised in determining whether the circumstances in which he is placed are such as to call specially for the one or for the other instrument. If the subsoil be a rich black mould, or a continuation of the same alluvial or other fertile soil which forms the surface--it may be turned up at once by the trench-plough without hesitation. Or, if the subsoil be more or less full of lime, which has sunk from above, trenching may with equal safety be adopted. But, if the subsoil be more or less ferruginous--if it be of that yellow unproductive clay which in some cases extends over nearly whole counties--or of that hard, blue, stony till which requires the aid of the mattock to work out of the drains--or if it consist of a hard and stony, more or less impervious bed--in all these cases the use of the subsoil-plough is clearly indicated. In short, the young farmer can scarcely have a safer rule than this--to subsoil his land first, _whenever there is a doubt of the soundness of the subsoil_, or a fear that by bringing it to the surface, the fertility of the upper soil will be diminished. It is no reply to this safer practice to say that even Mr. Smith recommends turning up the subsoil afterwards, and that we have therefore a double expense to incur. For it is known, that after a time any subsoil so treated may be turned up with safety, and consequently there is no risk of loss by delaying this deeper ploughing for a few years; and in regard to the question of expense, it appears that the cost of both draining and subsoiling are