242 



FARMERS' REGISTER, 



[No. 4. 



ed to my own interest, by pride of opinion, as not 

 to persevere in it — or to the interest of others, as 

 not 1o recommend it to them. 



In arguing against the general adoption of this 

 system, it must not be overlooked that so enlight- 

 ened and so judicious a gentleman as Mr. John 

 Wickham, on land too, of much better than ordi- 

 nary quality, should, after having tried, condemn 

 it. As much as his opinions are worth ou all sub- 

 jects, they seem to me to be at least doubled in 

 value, when founded on experience. 



Mr. S. thinks the number of horses or mules, 

 necessary to cultivate a farm in three or lour fields, 

 equal; and states the number at 12 for 400 acres. 

 This puts the subject in somewhat a tangible 

 shape. In the latter part of his communication 

 too, he gives the force employed in cultivating the 

 Curie's estate in four fields, and slates the number 

 at 40 mules and 50 hands. 



Now I leave it to all the gentlemen who prac- 

 tise the three-field system, to say, whether there 

 is a single instance known to any one of them, in 

 which, on a well managed farm under that sys r 

 lem, the number of horses or mules is so great in 

 proportion to the arable surface in the one case, or 

 to the number of laborers in the other. 



Perhaps 1 might be excused for having presu- 

 med on the authority of Mr. S. that a much larger 

 number than 12 for 400 acres, is necessary under 

 the new system; for in his first communication (in 

 page 323 Vol. I. of the Register,) he tells us that 

 he then worked at Westover, 11 horses, 14 hands, 

 some inefficient ones among them, and but few 

 oxen; and that these numbers should be nearly 

 doubled to give a just exhibition of the four-field 

 system. Now Westover contains 400 acre's of 

 arable land. Let me not, however, be understood 

 as disapproving of an adequate team; but eight to 

 a farm of 400 acres, under the three-field system, 

 I should consider an ample allowance— more I am 

 sure than are generally found on a farm of that 

 extent. 



It is difficult to imagine, when the proportion of 

 horses and hands is as 40 to 50, that there will 

 not be a good many of the former idle at many 

 seasons of the year, when manual labor is required 

 to be performed. Mr. S. says that under the three- 

 field system, the horses are idle from the time, the 

 crop of corn is laid by till seed time; and elsewhere 

 tells us that this is the critical time to plough under 

 clover to improve the land, and also urges as an 

 objection to the three-field system, that the corn 

 land can very rarely be broken up in time. Now 

 can any thing be imagined more easy than to 

 give these idle animals employment by turning in 

 a heavy growth of clover for corn; thereby avoid- 

 ing all danger from the worm the ensuing spring, 

 obviating at the same time, the objection to the 

 three-field system, urged by Mr. S.; and by di- 

 minishing the labor to be performed the next win- 

 ter, more time will then be afforded for collecting 

 materials for manure. There are unquestionably 

 some farms under this system, on which clover is 

 grown to considerable extent without being depas- 

 tured; and allow me to add, that the farm cultiva- 

 ted by me in three-fields, affords at this time am- 

 ple evidence of the fact. There can be no reason 

 why it should not succeed under this system ou all 

 land able to produce it; nor why it should be gra- 

 zed off sooner than under any oilier system. If it 

 were impracticable, or even difficult to succeed 



with the clover husbandry under the three-field 

 course, I should be one of the first to abandon it; 

 for I am endeavoring to improve my laud exten- 

 sively by the use of that valuable grass. Mr. S. 

 says that the best clover does not grow on the best 

 land. My best has certainly grown after lime and 

 manure. Indeed, without the previous use of 

 lime, the clover hardly pays me for the seeding; 

 but in a few years we hope to have the whole ara- 

 ble surface here improved in that way, having al- 

 ready more than half accomplished it. 



There is one argument in favor of the four field 

 system, which seems to have been overlooked by 

 its advocates, and which it. may not be amiss to 

 advert to in this place. The scantiness of the se- 

 cond crop of wheat in the rotation is very favora- 

 ble to clover, by sheltering the young plants with- 

 out endangering their exigence by suffocation, as 

 is sometimes the case when the crop is heavy. In 

 this point of view, I must acknowledge its decided 

 superiority over the three-field system. If the 

 crop of corn, succeeding wheat, made on a clover 

 fallow, is as much benefited by the decayed grass, 

 as Mr. S. contends, why would not wheat after 

 corn, made on clover, (as under the three-field 

 system) receive equal benefit? 



Mr. S. labors to prove the superiority of wheat, 

 as a crop, over corn. Whether he has succeeded, 

 it must be for others to determine, and experience 

 will be their best guide. It is certain that many 

 of my notions ore erroneous, and I am far from 

 wishing that any opinion of mine should be prac- 

 tically adopted by a single individual, unless sanc- 

 tioned and confirmed by his own experience and 

 observation. With me, the crop of corn, estima- 

 ting what is consumed at home at the price the 

 remainder sells for, has been much the most pro- 

 fitable, and far more certain, however more varia- 

 ble the price may be. In the last two years, for 

 instance, the gross crop of corn has been much 

 the most valuable, although made ou less land, 

 after deducting $360 for shorts, each year. I will 

 add that the quantity delivered this year exceeded 

 the delivery of any previous year by 180 bbls. and 

 that the moiety of it was sold from the farm under 

 the abominable three-field system, although no 

 more expense was incurred for shorts than for the 

 last five years. 



Admitting that as much corn can be made per 

 acre under this, as under the three-field system, 

 and that no more would be consumed, (and I am 

 as far as ever from a'dmitting either proposition — ) 

 as there would be one-fourth less land cultivated in 

 corn, the gross crop would be diminished one- 

 fourth, and as one-half of all made under the best 

 management is usually consumed at home (even 

 under the three-field system,) the quantity for sale 

 would, of course, be reduced one-half. 



On good corn lands that crop is not unfrequent- 

 ly the most profitable when shortest, (paradoxical 

 as it may appear;) and the reverse of this is gen- 

 erally true with regard to the wheat crop. The 

 reason is that the demand for the former is local, 

 and the price is accordingly more affected by a 

 partial failure. 



Mr. S. rates his loss from shocking out his corn 

 one year at nearly a sixth of the whole. Now 

 we are in the habit of putting all our corn in shocks, 

 in order to expedite the seeding of wheat, and a 

 portion of it frequently remains out lill January, 

 and yet we have never sustained any considerable 



