380 



FARMERS' REGISTER. 



[No. 



lotifj would become so foul as to create much ad- 

 dilioiiiil labor. 



Oberlin. 



King and Queen, 2lst Septemher. 



From the Genesee Farmer. 



QTTRSTrONS RRSPECTING THK EGOIVOMY OF 

 OlTTrNG UP COKN. — TOPPING OOIINSTALKS 

 SHOULD NOT BIO PRACTISED. 



It has ive tliink been siifficiently ascertained, 

 that when corn is injured by an early frost, cuttino- 

 it up coniributes nothing to its relief^ and nothing 

 to its subsequent improvement. It is we think bet- 

 ter in such cases, not to molest it, for unless the 

 frost be a very deadly one, the corn will still derive 

 nutriment from tbe stalks and leaves. There is 

 another question related to this which we think 

 merits the attention oragriculturalists. The ques- 

 tion is this : Is it, in general, good practice to cut up 

 corn at all, or to cut up the stalks while tbe ears 

 are attached to them? We are nnt ibr war, and i( 

 we were disposed to answer this question in the 

 negative, we should scarcely dare do it, knowing 

 as we do that this would bring us into conflict with 

 almost universal o|)inion, We will, however, 

 suggest certain considerations, and leave the ques- 

 tion to be adjudicated and settled by our readers. 



1. CutliniT up corn at any time before the leaves 

 are fully dead, does undoubtedly injure the crop in 

 some degree, affecting it probably both as to quan- 

 tity and quality. 



2. When corn is cut up, and the stalks secured 

 in the best manner they can be, it rarely fiiils that 

 some of them get down, and thus both the corn 

 and stalks are damaged bj exposure to the weath- 

 er. If it were not so, the large butts and stems of 

 the stalks are of little value (or fnlder. Ibr no sort 

 of stock will eat them, unless compelled to it by 

 jdire starvation. 



3. If the stalks be left standing in the field, cat- 

 tle will consume quite as great a portion of them 

 in the field after the corn is gathered, as they 

 would if ihey had been cut and gathered to the 

 barn. 



4. As rr.'aterials for dunsf, ptalks cannot be dis- 

 posed of to belter advantage tban to be allowed to 

 remain where they grew, and there be mixed with 

 the soil, as is usually done by subsequent tillage, 



5. Cutting up and securing a well grown crop 

 of corn, is a heavy and toilsome labor, involving, 

 together with the eubse(]uent ingathering of the 

 stalks, no trifling item of expense. 



If these things be true, is it, in general, good 

 practice to cut up corn at all? In times of threat- 

 ened scarcity of winter teed tor stock, it may be, 

 and probably is, wise and prudent to do it. It may 

 too be profitable to do it, in the vicinity of cities and 

 large villages, where fodder commands high prices. 



In agitating the question thus far, we have sup- 

 posed that the stalks, if they were cut and gather- 

 ed to the barn, were to be given to stock, without 

 further cutting, or any other preparation. In the 

 case of farmers who have good cutttng machines, 

 and intend by cutting to prepare their stalks for the 

 use of animals, the question may assume an en- 

 tirely varied aspect. 



With a few occasional exceptions, our practice 

 for several years has been, to let our corn remain 

 unmolested, imlil the lime of harvcsliuii it. Some- 



times we have cut up and gathered the stalks, af- 

 ter the corn had been sepeiated from them. This, 

 when corn is harvested early, can be done lo ad- 

 vantage, and if culling be practiced at all, we 

 think this is the better way. More generally we 

 have left our stalks to be depastured in the field 

 where they grew. 



The advantages of practising as we have done, 

 are supposed to consist, 1st. In a greater quantity 

 and better quality of corn. 2d. In exemption 

 from much toilsome and expensive labor. The 

 only loss known to result from this practice, con- 

 sists in the inferior quality of the stalks to be con- 

 sumed as fodder. It does not appear that, as to. 

 quantity, there is any loss, for cattle will consume 

 as great a portion of the stalks, while depasturing 

 in the field, as they would if they had been cut, as 

 is usually practiced, and given out in the barn yard. 

 Neither does it appear that any thing is lost, in 

 connection with the economy of manures. Or if 

 there be any loss in this article, certainly it is very 

 small. 



We offer these remarks for the consideration of 

 farmers. The question is, are the advantages 

 which, in ordinary cases, result from cutting up 

 corn, while yet in a state of imperfect maturity, 

 sufficient lo balance the damage which it does to 

 the crop, and the expenses of doing it. 



Hitherto we have said nothing relative to the 

 practice of topping cornstalks, which formerly pre- 

 vailed almost universally, and prevails now to 

 some extent. The economy of this practice has 

 been the subject of so many experiments, and so 

 much light in regard to it has of late been gained, 

 and disseminated in the public journals, that it 

 seems scarcely necessary to re-agitate the subject. 

 By many well conducted experiments, it has been 

 proved most conclusively, that topping the stalks 

 of corn, while as green as to be worth topping, 

 essentially injures the crop, often causing a reduc- 

 tion equal to one-fifth of its value. Among en- 

 lightened farmers, the practice of topping has fal- 

 len into general disrepute; and as it is most clearly 

 an unprofitable practice, it should be entirely 

 abandoned. 



Dan Bradley. 



Marcellus, N. Y., Feb. , 1827. 



BRITISH OPINIONS ON THE 'eSSAY ON CALCA- 

 REOUS manures', and THE ORIGINAL DIS- 

 COVERY OF ONE OF ITS POSITIONS. 



The package containing the April No: of 'Loudon's 

 (British) Gardener's Magazine', and some other for- 

 eign agricultural works, was not received until late in 

 September — which delay has prevented our seeing 

 earlier the following communication in that No. The 

 passage quoted below, by a correspondent of that jour- 

 nal, forms part of a very long and elaborate article 

 in a previous No. of the same work, from the pen of 

 its editor, Loudon, on the progress and advancement 

 of horticultural and agricultural discoveries and im- 

 provements, in general, in 1836. The length of that 

 article added to other considerations, prevented its 

 being before republished in the Farmers' Register; 

 though this reference to it will induce the republica- 

 tion as soon as it may be convenient. But our present 

 business is with the objection to a particular passage, 

 which is here copied at length. 



