302 



THE FARMERS' REGISTER. 



frrass-seed could nol be povvn among the crain ; 

 but by changing the course; ol'croppiiig, beijinning 

 with wheat, rye or barley, tbilowed by corn, and 

 ending wiih oats and grass, tlie difficulty might 

 be avoided ; nor need the stubble be ploughed 

 till towards the first of April, or anytime during 

 ihe winter; plants about stacks and other places 

 must also be attended to ; and let it be remember- 

 ed that larmers must pursue the same plan, as it 

 is in vain lor a lew individuals lo attempt an ob- 

 ject, ivhilst thousands are united to oppose it. I 

 will further observe, that the surest way to raise 

 a good crop of any grain, subject to injury Irom 

 the fly, is to put the lands in a proper state of 

 cultivation, as where that is the case, and when 

 the season proves favorable, litde or no damage 

 will be sustained, although the fiy may be very 

 numerous, as it certainly is every year. It is foll^ 

 to sow wheat on a poor soil. 



The insect described by Miss Morris is not the 

 Hessian fiy, and 1 think she is mistaken in the 

 manner ol'deposiiing its eggs; it appears to be the 

 same as that noticed by me in 1823 ; it has three 

 generations in the course of a year, and is observ- 

 ed a lew days earlier than the Hessian fly, and 

 the same remedy may be applied to both ; the 

 spring and (all generations are to be Ibund near 

 the roots of the plants, and the summer are at 

 the several joints. There is another insect lodged 

 in the straw above the upper joint, which causes 

 the premature appearance of ripeness of the head 

 and prevents the grain from forming ; it has not 

 yet done much injury, but may hereafter increase. 



There is also an insect which attacks the roots 

 of wheat and causes the stunt or sedge ; it is 

 probably a species of aphis, and the remedy must 

 be applied to the soil. I would recommend salt 

 or ashes ; perhaps lime might be good. 



James Worth. 



Sharon, Bucks County, 1st March, 1841. 



PROPOSAL. TO TRY HUSSEY S REAPING MA- 

 CHINE. 



To llie Editor of the Fanners' Register. 



Baltimore, jJpril 14, 1841. 

 As some uncertainty is felt amongst the farm- 

 ers of your state with regard to the usefulne.«s of 

 my reaping machine, I beg permission to make 

 a lew remarks in your valuable journal, which, as 

 coming from me, will be taken lor what they are 

 worth. I, last spring, sent to order several reaping 

 machines lo gentlemen in the counties adjacent 

 to Richmond, and followed thern myself, early in 

 ihe harvest, to put them in motion. A partof these 

 machines were on my former plan, which had been 

 proved several years, such as had been favorably 

 noticed in your journal, and part were on a new 

 plan as respects the horse- power, which had never 

 been proved, but had been very generally prefer- 

 red for their simplicity, by those who examined 

 both at my manuliictory ; the former gave.full sa- 

 tisfaction as far as 1 had any knowledge, and es- 

 pecially so while I was present ; the latter proved 

 defective in a certain arrangement lo accommo- 

 date the raker, and in a piece of cast iron which 

 should have been wrought. I discovered the prin- 

 cipal defect in five minutes' cutting in Goochland 

 county. Fearing the disastrous consequences 



which might follow to the credit of the machine, 

 1 immediately wrote to all who had chosen ma- 

 chines of this description, apprising them of the 

 difficulty which 1 had met with, and describing 

 the alteration necessary to be made, and proceed- 

 ed myself with all haste to Charles City county, 

 where 1 considered my assistance most necessary. 

 One gentleman in that county had ordered by let- 

 ter such a machine as had been recommended by 

 the Delaware Agricultural Society. Such was of 

 course sent to him ; this was one of my former 

 plan. Two other gentlemen of ilie same county 

 employed a friend to act lor them, who, on exa- 

 mining the machines at my manufactory, aided 

 by a professed mechanic, made choice of two 

 machines on the new plan. On my arrival in 

 Charles City, I soon discovered that the gentlemen 

 who had received these two machines were not 

 satisfied with the choice their friend had made, 

 believing the other kind to be the best. One of 

 these" gentlemen inlbrmed tne, that he did not get 

 the machine because he needed it, being over- 

 stocked with hands; it was, (under these circum- 

 stances,) not to be wondered at that he should 

 regret the purchase when he found that his ma- 

 chine, which he considered of an inlerior kind, 

 could not be used without alteration, although it 

 required but one day's work to alter it. I mention 

 this, believing that whatever unfavorable reports 

 have spread in Virginia have chiefly arisen fi-ora 

 these circumstances. It should be borne in mind 

 that it requires experience to use any machine 

 with success, however good the principle may be ; 

 hence one so new to the community should not be 

 condemned too hastily, while so great an amount 

 of evidence from Maryland can be produced in its 

 favor. It is admitted that it may not do every 

 thing that may be expected of it when proper ma- 

 nagement is not used ; lor instance, when the 

 wheat is rank and mixed with grass, the cutters 

 should be raised to the highest point ; if it be thin 

 and short they should be put at the lowest point ; 

 but this is not often thought of, and more seldom 

 practised, at first, especially when the farmer, as is 

 often the case, depends entirely on his laborers lo 

 manage the machine — added to this seeming diffi- 

 culty, the awkwardness of his hands before they 

 become practised. The opposition and designed 

 awkwardness of a class of cradlers, whose inte- 

 rest it is that the machine should fail, and the ap- 

 prehensions thus created that the machine may 

 not prove useful, will be very likely to tire the pa- 

 tience of the farmer, however well the machine 

 might work in other hands. The consequence is, 

 the machine would be represented (and honestly 

 and coirecily according to the impressions they 

 received by the farmer,) to be of doubtful utility ; 

 and others are deterred from purchasing. 



Whether this machine is or is not a useful in- 

 vention, should by this time be a settled question. 

 That it is not so settled in many sections of the 

 country may be accounted for by the very short 

 lime it can be used in each year, and from the 

 fact that, like all other machines, it must be tried, 

 improved, and tried again. Hence the reaping 

 machine requires more time to perfect it than 

 those improvements which can be experimented 

 with every day in the year. 



Wishing, lor my own interests, as well as for the 

 interests of agriculture, that the machine should 

 be better known in Virginia, and believing that 



