232 



THE FARMERS' REGISTER. 



VVebater (I think it is) calls it humus, and Pro- 

 lessor Dana calls ii geine, and Liebii^ calls it 

 ammonia. Now, vvillioul resorting to long quota- 

 tions, wliicii would merely cumber tliis piece and 

 add notliing to the argument, I will simply 

 state that these three learned gentlemen do 

 agree that tlte above are the only ingredient ne- 

 cessary to the thrilt of a plant ; and that where 

 they exist in proper proportions in any soil, that 

 soil is a (tjriile one. Dr. Dana expressly says, 

 (Second Report of the Agriculture oi Maesachu- 

 eetis, page 105,) " ii' we can induce the state ol 

 geine best fined for each plant, then adieu to the 

 doctrine ol" the necessity of a rotation of crops." 

 But in a plain discussion, such as this is iniended 

 to be, I would rather rely upon common sense, 

 supported by observaiion, than upon any authori- 

 ty of tlie learned whaiever. What are the/ads 

 tlien in the case? The Rev. Mr. Colman, com- 

 missioner ol' the above report, states it as a fact, 

 liiat he saw a rich alluvion field on the Connecti- 

 cut river, [he. proprietor of which told him that, 

 without any manure, it had continued to produce 

 good crops of wheat (or Ihiriy years in succes- 

 sion. In corroboration of this, I well recollect 

 that, when I was a boy, my mother had her cotton 

 patch, which continued to produce the same crop 

 year after year, for I know not how long a time. 

 There was also on the same farm a sweet potato 

 paich which shared precisely the same fate. In 

 addition to this, it is within my knowledge, and 

 can be proved by hundreds of others, that the 

 late Dr. Tazewell continued to cultivate corn on 

 one of his lots near my farm, for more than ten 

 years in succession; and that his last crop was 

 inferior to his first, only in consequence of the ex- 

 haustion of the land. Here then is wheat, and 

 cotton, and sweet potatoes, and corn, not one of 

 which is dependent on a rotation of crop for their 

 success. 



But there is another department, in which 

 cropping is gomg on, on a much larger scale, in 

 which, as 1 think, I am borne out in the above 

 position. This great department is the world, 

 and the crops are the immense forests with which 

 it is covered. Now liere is a great crop produced, 

 and according to my position, it must be at the 

 expense of an immense exhaustion. Here too 

 is no relief arising from rotation, for the same 

 crop has been on the land for thousands of years. 

 And yet this same good farmer. Nature, has so 

 contrived, that without the least rotation in all 

 that lime, the fijrtility of all that land of which 

 she has had the exclusive management, has not 

 only been maintained, but has constantly im- 

 proved. Nature's farm presents at this time a 

 most singular anomaly of bearing an increasingly 

 heavy crop for thousands of years in succession, 

 and is at this day in better heart, than it was 

 when she took it in hand. It is simply because 

 nature's wants are all real, and iherefore feio. 

 Her main object has been, what ought to be the 

 main object of every farmer, to keep up the fer- 

 tihty of her land. And how has she accom- 

 plished it? Not by a rotation, but simply by re- 

 turning the crop to the land which produced it. 



But whilst nature has constantly set thiswise 

 and laudable example, man has come in, and 

 though endowed with intellect, and calling him- 

 self the " lord of creation," has made a very 

 poor affair of his larniiiig. He has taken his 



little patches, and under the growings of his arti- 

 ficial wants, has taxed them to the full amount 

 of their ability, atnl appropriating the whole pro- 

 ducts to himselfi and giving back nothing to the 

 lands, has reduced both them and himself to a state 

 of beggarly starvation. And now he is trying to 

 repair the injury, by a rotation of crops. This, 

 as I think, is only calculated to make matters 

 worse. When I see land refuse to bring one crop, 

 I consider this as plain evidence that it will 

 refuse to bring another. Tlie rotationist however 

 is of a different opinion. He tries corn, and fails, 

 he then tries wheat, and fiiils also, his next efl^ort 

 is with clover, here is another failure, his last 

 resort is to black-eyed peas, these may be sprout- 

 ed, but lliere will be a (ailure in this crop also. 



Now what can be the cause of all these suc- 

 cessive failures'? Some special ingredient is 

 wanting is the soil. Yes ! this is the truth. And 

 what is it? Learned men call it humus, or geine, 

 or ammonia ; but 1 call it by the vulgar name of 

 manure. Put manure on the land, and it will 

 bring corn, and wheat, and clover, and peas, and 

 any thing else, and that without regard to any 

 particular rotation. The very best rotation, then, 

 (and gentlemen will surely thank me for solving 

 this difficult problem for them,) is that which 

 brings ihe most frequent and plentiful supplies of 

 manure on the land. Wiih this medicine, admi- 

 nistered not in broken doses, as timid physicians 

 recommend their nostrums, but the whole portion 

 swallowed down at once, I have never known any 

 rotation to fail. Grain crops may follow grain 

 crops, and grass crops may follow grass crops, or 

 vice versa, and ail will find in the soil the very spe- 

 cial ingredient that they require. 



But it was stated above that, in my opinion, 

 some crops exhaust more t^ian others. By this I 

 mean that some have a more pernicious and inju- 

 rious effect on the land than others. I have no 

 doubt that grain crops are more injurious than 

 grass crops. And why so? It is not because the 

 grass does not, in common with the grain, take 

 up the nutriment of the soil, and thus impoverish 

 it. The fact is, both are exhausters, whether to 

 the same amount, I pretend not to determine. 

 One thing, however, is certain, that land will con- 

 tinue to produce grass longerthan grain : and the 

 reason is a very obvious one ; for as soon as you 

 remove the grass, it makes an effort to recruit 

 itself, and I have known it to succeed in doing so, 

 to the amount of the first crop. The second crop 

 then falling and decaying on the land contributes 

 materiallylo the fertility of the soil, and in this 

 way we may account for the fertilizing efl'ects of 

 the grass. The grain crop, however, being 

 wholly removed, and making no effort to recover 

 itself, must necessarily be a rapid exhauster. 



But it will be objected, that by following na- 

 ture's model, as so much lauded above, we shall 

 defeat one great object of all cultivation, which 

 is to supply our numerous wants. Nature, it will 

 be said, has but one want, and her whole crops go 

 to the supply of that one ; whilst man has nume- 

 rous wants, and therefore cannot be equally gene- 

 rous. To this I reply, that the farmer's greatest 

 want is rich, productive land. Hie first care ought 

 therefore to be to supply this want ; and if he tan 

 but succeed in this, he will find no great difficulty 

 in supplying all other reasonable vyants. Fertile 

 lands will fill his corn-crib, and plenty of corn will 



