258 



THE FAIIMEKS' REGISTER. 



were not on the field. This, though it be Na- 

 ture's own and universal mode of restoring fer- 

 tihty to impoverished lands, and iherelore is offer- 

 ed to the observation ol' all persons, had not been 

 practised before any where ; nor had even the 

 theoretical truth on which the practice rests, been 

 received or considered. The plan may be claimed 

 as an improvement entirely Virginian, in large and 

 systematic use; and the first promulgation and 

 extension of the practice was due to the mind 

 and the labors of John Taylor, and especially to 

 the publication of his ' Arator.' It is true, that 

 this mode of lertilization is not suited to lands al- 

 ready in a productive state, nor where animal 

 products are very profitable, or indispensable — 

 nor where putrescent manures can be obtained 

 by purchase, or from other foreign sources, more 

 cheaply than to surrender the grazing of entire 

 fields, however poor and bare of grass. But the 

 system was, nevertheless, admirably suited to the 

 general condition ol eastern Virginia — nearly 

 every farm of which presented much ofexhausted, 

 and miserably poor fields, producing, when grazed, 

 very scanty sustenance to a half siarved stock ol 

 cattle, which, even if 100 in number on a parti- 

 cular farm, yielded very little return to the pro- 

 prietor. One Iburlh of the number, if of well 

 kept cattle, would have yielded more, in milk, 

 meat, and labor, and nearly as much in manure. 

 In fact, the gross product of the -then large stocks 

 of cattle on the farms of eastern Virginia, es- 

 timated at fair market prices, did not compensate 

 their owners for the cost of keeping, them, with- 

 out including the enomous attendant expense of 

 the fences dividing the several fields of each 

 farm, and which were rendered necessary solely 

 that nearly starved cattle might roam over the 

 almost naked pasture fields. To adopt some other 

 mode of keeping a much smaller stock, was of 

 itself a great saving ; and by so doing, all the 

 natural growth of the fields, when resting from 

 tillage, served to manure the ground on which 

 it grew — giving back, in the large proportion 

 formed from the air and water, perhaps twice as 

 much of enriching matter as they had drawn 

 from the soil. And however scanty might be the 

 cover of weeds lo the acre, the whole amount 

 on the field would be greater than the owner 

 could possibly have supplied to his farm in pre- 

 pared vegetable manure ; and moreover, it was 

 already spread over the whole surface, and ap- 

 plied in the best manner, as well as produced 

 without labor or cost. If the several fields of a 

 farmer (under the then usual circumstances) 

 were 100 acres each, and three in number, (the 

 rotation, corn, wheat or oats, and rest,) while he 

 could barely manure 10 acres of his corn field from 

 the farm-yard and stable, and by naked summer 

 cow-pens also, he could add thereto the slight 

 but costless manuring of the 100 acres to which 

 the rotation gave rest that year. Suppose this 

 cover to the 100 acres to be worth but half as 

 much as the other manure, (in the earliest prac- 

 tice, and the then most impoverished condition 

 of the land,) the 100 acres so treated would at 

 least receive the value of 5 other acres manured ; 

 and this would be adding at once 50 per cent, to 

 the previous amount of manuring done, and that 

 without any increased expense, or loss of other 

 products. 

 3iitj great as was the improvement undoubt- 



edly made by these two modes of vegetable ma- 

 nuring, there was much waste of effort, and 

 much loss subsequently suffered, by applying 

 improperly in practice the doctrines and instruc- 

 tions of Taylor, which were true in theory, and 

 of which the application would have been pro- 

 fitable under other circumstances. It was ne- 

 cessary to learn, (what is now much better and 

 generally understood, but what Taylor neither 

 taught nor seemed to know,) that naturally poor 

 land cannot be durably or profitably enriched by 

 vegetable or putrescent manures, so as to be 

 raised and kept above its original state of fertifity. 

 And on such lands, therefore, after a certain slight 

 degree of improvement obtained, even the cheap 

 manuring methods of Taylor were almost thrown 

 away. And on better original soils, after being 

 much recruited and enriched by such means, 

 there are enormous and yearly increasing evils 

 produced, m the troublesome weeds encouraged 

 to grow, and the myriads of insects sustained by 

 their growth, and which become depredators on 

 the succeeding cultivated crop. Even the plough- 

 ing under the rank weeds on moderately rich 

 land became ^ difficult operation; and, like the 

 also difficult ploughing under of coarse unrotted 

 manure from the fiirm-yard, was often very 

 troublesome to tillage, and sometimes even in- 

 jurious to the first tilled crop. But these objec- 

 tions do not lessen the merit of Taylor's "en- 

 closing system," for a vast extent of impoverished 

 fields, for the restoration and improvement of 

 which, that system was not only profitable, but 

 indispensable. The greatly increased and ex- 

 tended benefits of these and other applications 

 of vegetable manures, were, however yet to be 

 shown by the subsequent introduction of the 

 knowledge and use ol calcareous manures'. 



///. Marling, or manuring from beds of fossil 

 shells. 



This mode of fertilization, now so genera! 

 through all the marl region of lower Virginia, 

 was not practised except on three on four detach- 

 ed farms, and that to but small extent, before 

 1820. Some few and generally small experimen- 

 tal applications of marl had indeed been made, 

 by different individuals, from 15 to as far back 

 as 45 years before; but which applications, from 

 total misconception of the true mode of action 

 of calcareous manures, had been deemed failures; 

 and without exception, of course, had been 

 abandoned by the experimenters, as worthless ; 

 and the experiments had been almost forgotten, 

 until again brought to notice, after the much 

 later and fully successful introduction of the prac- 

 tice. 



Henley Taylor and Archer Hankine, two plain 

 and illiterate farmers, and near neighbors in 

 James City county, were the earliest successful 

 and continuing appliers of marl in Virginia. 

 But at what time they began, and which of them 

 was the first, I have not been able to learn, though 

 visiting Mr. Hankins' farm for that purpose, as 

 well as to see his marling, and making inquiries 

 of him, personally, in 1833. Mr. Taylor had 

 then been long dead, and his improvements said 

 to be almost lost, by the exhausting cultivation 

 of the then occupant of his land. Mr. Hankins 

 was unable to say when he and his neighbor be- 

 gan to try marl. He wai only certain that it was 



