[343 ] 



' Five hundred plants in April produced almofl a 

 bufhel of grain. My gardener fays, he can fet one 

 thoufand plants in a day, which is confirmed by the 

 opinion of two other gardeners. Mr. Miller 

 found no difference in the produce of what was 

 planted on lands that had dung, and on what had 

 none, except where the land was improper for 

 wheat at all. 



I have the honour to be, &c. 

 N(ro. 25, 1785. ROBERT BOGLE. 



[Mr. BoGtE -wLll fee by the Society's Premium Book this year, that 

 by having offered feveral premiums for experiments of the kind he fo 

 carneftly recommends, we v.'ifh to have his theory brought to the teft 

 of praiTlice. Our reafon for this, as well as for printing Mr. B's letter, 

 was, rather to excite detifive trials by ingenious perfons, than from 

 any expedlation of the pra<ftice ever becoming a general one. General* 

 indeed, it never can be. A fufiicient number of hands could not be 

 found to do it. Unkindly feafons, at the time of tranfplanting and 

 dividing the roots, would frequently endanger and injure, if not de- 

 ftroy the crops. But admitting the mode generally pradlicable, we 

 very much doubt whether all the advantages he has enumerated would 

 be derived from this mode of culture. Why (hould dividing and 

 tranfplanting the roots of wheat caufc the crop to be early, or afford 

 a certainty of its being a good one ? We cannot think that Icfs manure 

 is neceffary in this method, than either in drilling or broadcaft; nor 

 can wc by any means admit, that fuch crops would " beperfc(511y free 

 *• from weeds without either hand or horfe-hoeing." 



We readily agree with Mr. Boolk, that by this mode of culture,' 

 on a general fcale, an immenfe quantity of feed-corn would be annu- 

 ally faved to the nation; and in this we believe the advantage, were 

 it pradlicable, would principally confift, 



ytpril 1786.] 



Article 



