L 65 ] 



Remarks on the Smut and Mildexv of Wheat; with hints 



on the most probable means of prevention. 



By A. Fothergill, M. D. F. R. S. ^c. ^c. 



Fiat Hxperimejitwm.—BA.coN. 

 Read November 11th, 1806. 



The Society at our last meeting, having requested 

 my opinion on the nature of the disease, I must ob- 

 serve that the subject appears hitherto to be too little 

 understood to admit of a clear and satisfactory elucida- 

 tion. Such useful hints however, as occur to my recol- 

 lection, I will now lay before the Society without re- 

 serve. 



This and almost every disease, however different in 

 Its nature, which renders fruit or grain unproductive has 

 been called a blight — a generic term of indefinite sig- 

 nification which \vriters on husbandry have adopted, 

 without proper discrimination : thus the smut, the mil- 

 dew or rust, the effects of lightning, of sudden changes 

 of weather, and the depredations of insects have all pas- 

 sed indiscriminately under the general, though vague 

 appellation of blights. Writers have, however, liberal- 

 ly furnished us with sundry infallible remedies so called 

 against blights in general, and particularly against smut, 

 but these infallibles, when put to the test, have generally 

 had the misfortune to fail. 



The smut of grain is easily distinguished by the black 

 dust which covers the ear, seemingly as if sprinkled 

 with soot; whereas the mildew or rust infests the stem 

 and leaves with yellow and dark browTi stains, and forms 

 an orange coiouied dust, which viewed with a good 



XT 



