BOOK FARMING. 193 



Ihis reason or judgment, will meet Tvith disappointment and failure in whatever 

 occupation he may engage. 



But, because written productions sometimes contain very erroneous views of 

 the subject upon which they treat, is that a good reason for discarding all the 

 important truths contained in them? 



To refuse to read because error may be mingled with truth would forever 

 close every volume. Science, that has required ages to bring it to its present state 

 of perfection would be entirely excluded from human knowledge, because there 

 is no branch of science that does not contain error. 



Do you reject your religious, your literary or your political journal merely 

 because mistakes or misstatements find way into their columns despite the best 

 efforts of their conductors to prevent it? Ifyou do not, why subject the agricul- 

 tural periodical alone to an ordeal that none of all the other works of man could 

 pass unscathed? Infallibility in human productions is not to be expected, and 

 he who refuses to investigate because liable to find errors, will make little or no 

 advancement. 



The farmer, if he would be successful in his operations, should keep up with 

 the age in which he lives. Improvements in implements of husbandry are 

 being made daily, and various processes described by scientific men for the 

 enriching of the soil, etc., etc. This is a progressive age. Yet, many seem 

 to think that the old way is the best. 



These same sticklers for the old way of farming are also very tenacious of 

 the belief that the changes or quarters of the moon exercise a controlling 

 influence over the weather, and that certain vegetables should be sown at 

 peculiar stages of that satellite. With solemn visage, they look at the new 

 moon and confidently prophesy wet or dry weather. They examine their 

 almanacs carefully, to ascertain what time to sow their peas and cucimibers, to 

 wean their calves and kill their hogs, that the pork may swell in the pot, but 

 when you recommend to them the perusal of some valuable scientific treatise on 

 the subject of agriculture, they shrink from the idea with as much horror as 

 they would to first behold the new moon over their right shoulder or start on 

 Friday to make a journey. 



The advocates of the "good old way" should be consistent, go on horse- 

 back or walk instead of patronizing those new-fangled concerns called rail- 

 roads. They should shove off their old canoe and paddle along the shore 

 instead of treading the magnificent deck of the mighty steamer. They should 

 send their messages to friends by some traveler instead of employing the light- 

 ning telegrai)h. They should do as their grandfathers did in all if they insist 

 in imitating them in farming. 



Now there is no one present who will deny that there is some best way to 

 manage a farm ; and that way must be upon fixed scientific principles. Yet it 

 is amusing to hear the different opinions of farmers whom we consider equally 

 good, upon the most common branches of their business. One says, "Plow in 

 the fall for spring crops; it destroys insects, pulverizes the soil, and renders it 

 more fertile." Another says, '"Not so, by plowing in the fall you expose the 

 land to be drenched by the rain and thereby impoverish the soil." One says, 

 " Spread the manure you put upon the land immediately and bury it deep 

 under the furrow, that its fertilizing qualities may not evaporate." Another 

 says, " If you do that the manure is lost, you will never hear of it again, hence 

 it should be kept on or near the surface." One plows his land six inches deep 

 for corn and is sure he is right, his neighbor never trusts to shallow plowing, 



25 



