233 



FARMERS' REGISTER, 



[No. 4 



they appeared as if soot, or some other smutty- 

 powder had been strewed over them. Under a 

 common lens, the cha(f appeared covered with 

 small blark dots. irre<jularly scattered over it. and 

 ■widely different fi-om the appearance of the rust. 

 Whenever this appearance seizes the ear, it inva- 

 ribly occasions the ijrain to shrink so mucli as to 

 he fit, he thinks, only for leedino; hogs, or poultry, 

 but certainly not fjood tor them. Mr. Kirby, 

 writing from recollection, thmks that this mildew 

 was confined to the ear; but liu'mers told him that 

 the straw also was always injured. 



The red gum, a? described byMarsham and Kir- 

 by, differs in growing usually on the inside ol" the 

 husks, under the bark or epidermis, like a pustule 

 on the human skin, and through which it at length 

 bursts, emitiiny; a powder of a bright orange color. 

 It does not appear that this injures the grain, for 

 Mr. Kirby has seen ears quite full of it, and yet 

 plump with liirina. 



Another similar affection, commonly cidled by 

 the vague name of bli2;kt* (which should be ex- 

 cluded from all such discussions,) is described as 

 growing upon the leaves, stem, and chaff, also un- 

 der the bark or epidermis, throuijh which it bursts 

 in longitudinal streaks of a black color, causing it 

 to appear split. Mr. Litunhexisavs (Linn. Trans: 

 iv. 193,) that, in 1797, it injured the wheat very 

 much, and several fields near Warminster were 

 eo infected with it that the farmers cut them down 

 long before they were ripe. Mr. Kirby, on the 

 other liand, says, that, "after repealed examina- 

 tion of ears, the straw of which was quite black 

 with it, in no one instance, was the grain injured 

 by it." {Idem, v. 122.) It is by no means cer- 

 tain, however, that these writers refer to the same 

 thing. 



Alleged Causes of Smut, Canker and Rust. 



In the preceeding details, considerable care has 

 been taken to exclude reterence lo causes real or 

 supposed, except in quoting Mr. Bryant res- 

 pecting smut. This was deemed the more ne- 

 cessary, that, notwithstanding scientific men have 

 been long agreed as to the chief flicts, tliis is by 

 no means the case among practical agricultural- 

 ists, who in many cases adhere to traditionary 

 popular opinion, and practical empirical remedies 

 founded on these opinions. Even scientific men 

 are ofien, as we shall presently see, biassed by po- 

 pular opinions, so as to adopt mistaken notions, 

 derived from imperfect or inacciu-ate observation. 

 It may, therelbre, be useful, even ai the present 

 day, to mention a few of the alleged causes be- 

 tbre coming to the real cause. 



1. Insects. — Insects which feed on vegetable 

 substances, from being very numerous and of 

 many species, are always more or less apt to be 

 found on corn, whether sound or diseased. Seve- 

 ral of these insects, such as the wheat-fly (^Tlpula 

 Triiici,) do extensive damage; but it is of a very 

 different kind frotn those caused by snmt, canker, 

 and rust. It is probable that it was the irrubs of this 

 or some other i\y which the author of the "York- 

 shire Farmer" found in his smutty wheat, which 

 led him to ascribe it to this cause. 



* Probably Puccinia graminis, Pers. ; Urcdo Pri- 

 muli, Sowerby. 



M. Tillet gives a very minute account of the 

 observations vv'hich he made with the view of as- 

 certaining the efi'ects of insects in producinir can- 

 ker. At tiie beginning of June he unfolded an 

 ear of wheat fi-om its hose, and saw issuing out of 

 it a swarm of small black insects, rendered very 

 obvious by their color. Induced by this discovery 

 to examine other plants, he found the same in- 

 sects m great abimdance. The msects were long- 

 bodied like earwigs, of the sort termed siapfiyli- 

 nus. On the snnuted ears he found ft;w of these 

 insects, but on the cankered ones he found many 

 of the black insects, together with others much 

 smaller, of a red color, the latter more common 

 during the blooming period. In a word, he satis- 

 fied liimself that the red insects were the grubs of 

 the black ones, whose eggs and excrements he 

 also found both on healthy and on sound ears. 



After many experiments and observations, he 

 could not find that these insects devoured any part 

 of the grain; but he adopted the opinion, with- 

 out, it would appear, very rigid proof, that they 

 fed upon the pollen, and hence the stigmata being 

 deprived of fecundating stimulus, the grain be- 

 came catdiered, — a cause, as we shall afterwards 

 see, inadequate to produce this efiect. 



A very intelligent agricultural writer, the late 

 Mr. Sommerville, convinced himself that smut 

 was caused' by insects, and founded upon this 

 plan for preventing their destructive ravages. — 

 (^Cummun. to the Board of Agriculture, vol. ii.) 

 By using, in the course of his researches, magni- 

 fying-glasses of high powers, and concentrating 

 the sun's light on ears afli'ected with smut, by 

 means of a concave mirror, he observed small in- 

 sects of the form of wood-lice, perhaps the same 

 as those described by M. Tillet, or more probably 

 the beetle (^Derntcsies ater,') mentioned by Mr. 

 Kirby, for a person not much conversant with in- 

 sects might suppose either of these to resemble 

 wood-lice. Be this as it may, the author gives it 

 as his opinion, that the smut is occasioned by the 

 small insect observed by him; for the smut-balls 

 being either broken by the fiail or otherwise 

 brought into contact with healthy grains, the in- 

 serts leave the smutted grains, and, adhering to 

 such as are healthy, are sown with them, and 

 wound the tender stem in such a manner as to 

 render it incapable of producing any thing but 

 smut. It may be remarked, however, that this is 

 only conjecture, as insects were not actually ob- 

 served to have been sown with the corn, much 

 less were they seen to wound the stems; and far- 

 ther, it was not proved that smutted ears had their 

 stems wounded in any way. 



Sir John Call is another supporter of the doc- 

 trine of smut being caused by a similar cause. — 

 He maintains that it is produced by certain ani- 

 malcula, deposited in the husks of the ear whert 

 the wheat is in blossom, and that these are fed 

 and nourished by the milky juice in the unripe 

 grain. Tlie reasoning, however, as well as the 

 experiments adduced by Sir John, are vague and 

 inconclusive, as well as in opposition to the best 

 established facts on the subject. 



In reference to these views it is recorded (^Far- 

 mers'' Magazine, vol. iii.) that an Irishman em- 

 ployed at Alloa in Clackmannanshire, to stamp 

 linens, instructed a fiarmer in the Irish method of 

 preventing smut by kiln-drying the seed-corn so 

 as to kill the insects. It is said that after the 



