however, recommended to agriculturists to become their own architects and builders; therefore to those professionals the elaboration of many technical details which are here purposely omitted or curtailed is left.
The current talk now, as when Andrews wrote, is of antiquated farm buildings, unfit for their purpose, and of insufficient accommodation for live-stock. That deficiencies exist in these respects, though more in some districts than in others, is generally admitted. And no farmer now-a-days needs to be told that animals exposed to cold eat more and thrive worse than if better housed and kept warmer: in other words, that shelter and warmth economise food, and are equivalent to an actual shortening of winter.
But, while the accommodation for stock is admittedly inadequate, it is notorious that, even in many such cases, there has already been incurred a building outlay of from £5 to £10 an acre. Now this represents 5s. to 10s. per acre of rent-charge, and under the present conditions of British agriculture few, if any, farms in the country will support the expenditure.
If, then, increased building accommodation and improved buildings are to be provided, the solution of the difficulty would appear to lie in a better arrangement of buildings and in the adoption of cheaper methods and materials of construction.
The larger choice of building materials now available is a great help towards cheaper construction. Instead of walls and pillars being restricted to stone, brick, or woodwork, other materials such as iron and concrete are now, in many cases, found admirable substitutes, alike in point of fitness, durability, and economy; and the costly and cumbersome roofing tiles, slates, and shingles are now often advantageously superseded by the cheaper
