74 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. 



on a p;oo(l crop the following season. I am acquainted with some 

 farmers wlio follow this plan, and it succeeds well. My own practice, 

 however, in this direction has been to turn under the sod in the 

 autumn, and seed to grass in the spring in connection with a crop of 

 grain. I lose one crop of hay, but I gain a crop of grain. I am 

 not sure it is the better wa}'. If ray soil had less clay, the former 

 method might be preferable. 



You understand by this time that I am no advocate of top dressing. 

 A large lump of dry manure, be it ever so rich in fertilizing matter, 

 is of no more value to plant growth than a block of wood ; therefore 

 it should be as fine as possible and covered in the ground, where it 

 will absorb moisture and distribute vegetable nourishment all through 

 the soil where the little rootlets are seeking for it. 



We come now to the matter of waste. On a large majority of 

 farms there is more or less needless waste, generally more, by liquid 

 drainage from the barn3'ard and dung piles. This colored liquid, 

 rich in fertilizing material, is flowing almost unchecked down through 

 the fields into the brooks or into the gutters by the roadside, and is 

 thus a constant drain upon the best source the farmer has for main- 

 taining the productiveness of his fields. I once heard a farmer 

 remark that his fields were greatly benefitted by liquid flowing from 

 his neighbor's barnyard above and across the way. In this case but 

 little actual loss resulted, for what would have been an absolute loss 

 was just so much gain to another party. But we can hardly aflford 

 to dress our neighbor's fields even in this way. In nine cases out of 

 ten the loss is absolute and irreparable, the drainage being carried 

 off* into brooks. 



In one sense, this very liquid is carrying off our hay, grain and 

 vegetables. Now, if we actually saw these productions of our labor, 

 piles of hay, bushels of grain and vegetables by the cart-load, float- 

 ing oflf on the water, and could look on this destruction of our prop- 

 erty with habitual indiflference, and as little concern as we do on the 

 drainage from our barnyards, we should be called simpletons and not 

 competent to take care of property, and ought to be placed under 

 the protection of a guardian. And yet, the cases are very similar. 



How long shall this indiff'erence — it is not too much to call it un- 

 qualified, inexcusable slackness — continue? Has this matter of 

 waste been going on so long that our farmers have come to habitually 

 look upon it as a matter of too small importance to require atten- 

 tion ? Because we have not given the matter the thought it demands, 

 and eyes have been closed to its importance, as they have been to 



