In Walter Harte’s Essays on Husbandry (ii. 77) we read--“How Fitzherbert could be a practitioner of the art of agriculture for 40 years, as he himself says in 1534, is pretty extraordinary. I suppose it was his country amusement in the periodical recesses between the terms.” We are here presented with a definite objection, grounded, as is alleged, upon the author’s own words; and it is most probable that Harte is here stating the objection which has weighed most strongly with those who (like Hunter) have objected to the current opinion. The answer to the objection is, I think, not a little remarkable, viz. that the alleged statement is _not_ the author’s at all. By turning to p. 125, it will be seen that it was Thomas Berthelet the printer who said that the author “had exercysed husbandry, with greate experyence, xl. years.” But the author’s _own_ statement, on p. 124, is _differently worded_; and the difference is material. He says: “and, as touchynge the poyntes of husbandry, and of other artycles conteyned in this present boke, I wyll not saye that it is the beste waye and wyll serue beste in all places, but I saye it is the best way that euer I coude proue by experyence, the whiche haue _ben an housholder_ this xl. yeres and more, and haue assaied many and dyuers wayes, and done my dyligence to proue by experyence which shuld be the beste waye.” The more we weigh these words, the more we see a divergence between them and the construction which might readily be put upon the words of Berthelet; a construction which, in all probability, Berthelet did not specially intend. Any reader who hastily glances at Berthelet’s statement would probably deduce from it that the author was a farmer merely, who had had forty years’ experience in farming. But this is not what we should deduce from the more careful statement of the author. We should rather notice these points.