22 



FARMERS' REGISTER. 



[No. 1. 



From the Southern Recorder. 

 Tim ROT IN COTTON. 



Last year I planted two crops ofcotton, one near 

 Watkinsville, and the other on the Oconee near 

 Athens, the two places beinsi; five or si>: miles 

 apart: the crop at Watkinsville rotted so little that 

 it maj' he said to have had no rot, while the crop 

 on the Oconee rotted worse than any cotton I saw 

 iast year, or an j^ other year. Beinix a country doc- 

 tor, it was during the year an every-day occurrence 

 to have at niy iiouse planters, who catne to obtain 

 medical advice; I made it my business to select 

 the most experienced and successful of them, 

 many owners and overseers of plantations, and 

 carry them to see my crop, relate the ditf'erence, 

 and request their opinion of the cause: great many 

 reasons were niven, a iew only will be noticed, 

 which appear the most probable, after which I will 

 add my reasons for believin<r all of them wrono;. 

 One experienced planter, who began poor and 

 made a fortune by his skill in raising cotton, and 

 whose opinion was entitled to great confidence, as- 

 sured me, the cause, to him was very plain : " free 

 post oak land," said he, " is the land for cotton, 

 while strong red river land will rot." He advised 

 me to plant all my cotton on the post oak land, and 

 raise my provisions on the river — this had long 

 been his opinion, and now he was certain of it. 

 Another planter ap|)eared pleased with this posi- 

 tive proof of the opinion he had entertained ; 

 "here," said he, ''your land is all first and second 

 year ground, while on the river it is old land ; new 

 land, if it escapes the rust, will be certain to make 

 a good crop, as it will not rot." He was still more 

 certain fi'om the fact, in the second year ground he 

 found a little rot, but in the new ground he could 

 find none ; next year he was determined to plant 

 all his new ground in cotton. 



Another planter conceived he coidd give me the 

 undoubted reason of this great ditierence : he had 

 long since known that shallow ploughing was best 

 for cotton, the river plantation was all listed deep 

 with two-horse ploughs, while here it was only 

 scratched. This was, in his opinion, sulBcient 

 cause to explain the difference. 



A real practical planter advised me, with this 

 proof certain of the ill consequences of horizontal 

 ploughing, to lay it aside ; " see," said he, " on the 

 river plantation all the ground is ploughed horizon- 

 tal, which, by retaining: moisture, has rotted all the 

 cotton, while the other crop, by being ploughed 

 straight, lets ofl' the rain, and the cotton does not 

 rot." 



Another planter inquired when the two crops 

 were planted; when told, on the river I began 1st 

 of April, at home 15th of April, he felt flilly satis- 

 fied this was the whole cause. He insisted it 

 Avould be best if no cotton was planted until"May; 

 he had lost several crops, until he found out that 

 late cotton was least subject to rot. 



Another opinion was, that on the river, cotton 

 had been planted, more or less, for years, while 

 here, as no cotton had been j)lanted, the insect 

 which produced the rot had not, and the crop 

 therefore escaped. 



An excellent planter took great interest, and 

 examined both crops; he was more satisfied than 

 everof his opinion: cotton should always be plant- 

 ed in wide rows ; on the river the cotton was three 

 feet apart, in Watkinsville four feet : wide cotton, 



he thought, the air and sun acted upon, and pre" 

 vented rot. 



I know not how many different theories were 

 advanced by planters whose experience and suc- 

 cess eniilled their opinions to value ; the above are 

 some of the theories advanced by persons entitled 

 to the most confiilence, and each one of them ad- 

 vocated by the most numerous supporters. Now, 

 in searching into the cause or causes of an evil of 

 a doubtful character, some light may be thrown 

 upon it by ascertaining vvhat.was not the cause or 

 causes. Each and every one of the above theories 

 are the suggestions of experienced and successful 

 planters — every one appeared fully satisfied lie 

 had iJtiven the true cause of rot, while a more 

 carelijl and general collection of fiicts would prove 

 every theory advanced to be contradicted with 

 facts, and entirely wrong; and although I will at- 

 tempt to shew tile fallacy of these theories by 

 only a few facts, yet, in every instance, many 

 more facts of a similar kind could be brought for- 

 ward. 



The opinion of the thin post oak land here be- 

 ing more suited to cotton than the strong red land 

 on the river is incorrect, for Mrs. Nunnally's plan- 

 tation, of the same quality, and not two miles from 

 me, rotted very bad indeed, wliile mine rotted 

 none. Mr. Davis made the best cotton 1 saw last 

 year; he had no rot. His plantation is on the river, 

 his land is stronger and redder than mine, which 

 rotted so bad. It cannot be altogether, therelbre, 

 the quality of the land which causes the rot. 



The opinion of the new land not rotting, must 

 be an error, for on both of my places I had some 

 new and some oki land in cotton — on the river the 

 newest land was decidedly the most rotted. 



Of the effect of deep ploughing I was somewhat 

 uncertain ; it appeared to be supported by so many 

 facts by the experience of the person vvho gave the 

 opinion, I therefore took some trouble to examine 

 many crops; many fticts, however, prove it incor- 

 rect. On my own place, one fact proved it to be 

 wholly incorrect. In some of my fields the rows 

 were listed every six feet with large two- horse 

 ploughs, the intermediate rows ploughed shallow, 

 no difierence was observed in the rows — again, the 

 field I ploughed deepest was least rotted. 



I could have placed some confidence in the opin- 

 ion, that horizontal ploughing caused rot, as my cot- 

 ton was the only cotton I knew that was ploughed 

 horizontal, and it rotted worse than any cotton I 

 saw; but the field I ploughed deepest and took the 

 most pains to have exactly horizontal, was rotted 

 least, and in places, none at all. 



Two facts fully contradicted the opinion, that 

 the early and late planlinir caused the greater or 

 less quantity of rot: Mrs. Nunnally's crop, which 

 rotted so bad, was planted later than mine, which 

 rotted so little, while Mrs. Davis' beautiful cotton, 

 that rotted none, was planted in March, from one 

 to two weeks earlier than mine which rotted so 

 bad. 



Of the effects which frequent planting would 

 have in breeding insects to cause rot, more will be 

 said, but the fact is contradicted by the experience 

 of every practical planter. 



Whether planting thicker thin really has any 

 effect in causing the rot, much observa'ion has left 

 in doubt on my mind. All other years that I have 

 noticed, I believe the thinnest cotton rotted least, 

 while tliis year was an exception ; the rankest and 



