u 



NEW E NJ G L A .\ D FAR M E R 



AIG. 5, $40. 



ecution, he may rest assured, that the recompense 

 will be still more restricted, and that it is mnre 

 judicions to impmve one acre well, than to deceive 

 liimself by a superficial operation on a more extend- 

 ed surface. 



A remarkable effect is, that the harvest is con- 

 siderably earlier on land so treated than on tlie 

 same land in its previous state, and it is scarcely 

 ?iecessary to remark, that there will be a constant 

 return for the same seed and labor and manure far 

 greater than when they are applied to land in a 

 naturally wet condition. 



Evidence of James Smith, Esq., invtnlor of the Sub- 

 soil Plough. 



Chitirman. You live at Deanston ? — Ye.s. 



Where is that? — In the western district of 

 Perthshire in Scotland. 



Do you occupy a considerable farm in that part 

 of Scotland ? — About ;J00 acres. 



Have you improved your farm lately ? — I have. 



In what way? — Chiefly by tlioroirirh draining 

 and subsoil ploughing. 



What was the nature of the soil upon your farm ? 

 — It was various : there is some part of it rather 

 light soil, some of it gravelly upon the edge of the 

 river, and some lightish loam, with rather a tena- 

 cious bottom, and in other parts a stiff sandy clay. 



Is it a stiffsnbsoil ? — Some part of it very stiff. 



And it was all subject very much to wet? — The 

 greater part of it was covered with rushes and bent 

 before being drained. 



Will you describe to the committee your mode 

 of draining? — The principle upon which I drain is 

 to put in drains frequently, so that there may be 

 opportunities for the water to pass off, because I 

 find that in our climate the chief injury arises from 

 the water that falls from the heavens. 



Are those drains placed up the furrows or across 

 the land ? — They are placed in *,iie same direction 

 that the furrows were before, but I have now no 

 furrows. I lay all my fields down without any fur- 

 rows. I object to furrows, because water is allow- 

 ed to collect in a body, and thereby ruins the soil. 



The fact is, that those drains are so frequent that 

 they answer the purpose ot furrows?— Yes ; they 

 answer the purpose of furrows. 



How far are they apart? — '1 weiityone feet, and 

 two feel six inches deep to the bottom. 



Do you drain with atones or with tiles? — Chiefly 

 with broken stones, because I have stones upon 

 the land. 



You spoke of subsoil ploughing; you are the 

 inventor of a subsoil plough ? — I am. 



Do you use it after draining? — After draining. 

 I first take a grain crop, and then after the separa- 

 tion of that crop from the ground 1 subsoil plough. 



How far do you fill up the drain with stones .' — 

 I put in 12 inches of stone.'', leaving 18 inches be- 

 tween the upper pait of the drain and the surface 

 of the soil, and then I cover them most carefully 

 with very thin sods, overlapping at the joinings, 

 because it is of the first importance to prevent tlie 

 soil which has been rec^.■mly removed from running 

 into the drains. There are many drains destroyed 

 by means of the soil getting in at the top. 



The water comes in at the side of the drains ? — 

 Yes, by fissures in the subsoil. 



Will you describe the operation of tlie subsoil 

 plough ?— I have got a plate of it here, (pruducitig 

 the sanie.)* The princijile upon which I construct- 



*Sce First Report of Agriculture of Mass., p. i. 



ed that plough was this, that I saw it was of the 

 greatest importance to break up the subsoil, espe- 

 cially "here it « as tenacious. I saw that the com- 

 mon trench plough, when used to break up the sub- 

 soil, at the same time turned over tlie recently 

 moved subsoil to mix with the surface soil, which 

 induced a sort of partial sterility for a time. I 

 then bethought me of having a plough that would 

 move the subsnil, still retaining the active soil upon 

 the surface, and I considered how I should con- 

 struct it to have the le.-ist draught, so that the hor- 

 ses might easily draw it, because I was aware that 

 it would require considerable forre. I therefore 

 made the plough as thin as possible in its trans- 

 verse section, and the share of the plough, which is 

 usually made with a free point not touching npon 

 the lower part of the plough, and I found it was 

 apt in stony land to get knocked out of its place, 

 and therefore I made a mortice in the sock, and 

 inserted the point of the share in this mortice; 

 then in order to move the subsoil as much as pos- 

 sible, I placed an oblique spur upon the one side 

 of the plough, which throws up the subsoil after 

 the furrow has been divided and breaks it, but does 

 not throw it further up than the bottom of the fur- 

 row of the active soil. 



Mr Hadlty. Does not the .spur increase the 

 draught ? — It does not materially. 



How many horses does it require to work that 

 plough ?■ — Generally four horses in onlinary sub- 

 soils, but npon some it has been necessary to use 

 eight horses. 



How deep do you plough? — Sixteen inches 

 from the surface. 



Mr Loch. What is the depth of the original 

 furrow ? — Six inches : we first go on with the com- 

 mon plough and turn over a furrow of the depth of 

 six or eight inches, and then the subsoil plough 

 goes and stirs up the bottom without bringing the 

 soil further up than its original position, then when 

 the common plough comes round again, it throws 

 the active soil upon that part which has been sub- 

 soiled. 



Then the advantage uf stirring up the subsoil is, 

 that the water which falls gets down to the bottom 

 of the second furrow so as to relieve the upper soil 

 from tlie effects of the rain that falls? — Yes; be- 

 sides there is a constant operation of the air upon 

 the subsoil, which converts it into soil. 



Mr Cayletj. Is it with a view to draining prin- 

 cipally? — ^With a view first to draining, and then 

 to converting the subsoil into a fit soil for growing 

 plants. 



It makes the soil more permeable ? — Yes. 



How long have you been doing this.' — About 

 twelve years. 



In the first instance, if you were to turn up that 

 subsoil, it would not be a productive soil, and there- 

 fore you prepare it by this course for subsequent 

 turning up when it is prepared? — Yes. 



When you conceive it to have come into a prop- 

 er state for vegetation, do you turn it up at once 

 or gradually ? — .^t once. 



Do you find that the soil will be very jiroductive 

 the first year after it is turned up? — I find it so. 



Do you stir it up with the old soil ? — I subsoil it 

 only once. I then fake a green crop, followed by 

 a grain crop; then it lies three years in grass; and 

 then after that, I take a crop of oats; and then af- 

 ter, I turn it up to the depth of sixteen inches. 



Then it takes about three or four years to bring 

 the subsoil to a proper degree of preparation ? — It 

 does. 



After the subsoil has been brought into a proper 

 degree of preparation for vegetation, have you ever 

 tried the experiment of bringing in a certain pro- 

 portion, say a fourth part of the subsoil after it is 

 prepared, into co-operation witii the active soil ? — 

 1 have, and it answers very well. 



Do you consider that the bringing into play the 

 whole of the subsoil at once is a better thing and 

 more productive than holding in reserve a portion 

 of the subsoil? — I think it is. 



After turning up the subsoil how many years 

 have you grown crops upon it.' — My mode of crop- 

 ping is a-seven years' shift, and I have now four 

 fields undergoing a second shift. 



Have yon had the experience of what the con- 

 dition of the previous active soil becomes, from be- 

 ing in a state of rest for several years ? — It is all 

 mixed together. 



Then the effect of your system is to produce a 

 new soil instead of the old one ? — Yes. 



Mr Denison. According to your plan, supposing 

 you were not to have turned up any o( this subsoil, 

 but merely to have had your subsoil plough pass 

 through it, and were to go on cultivating without 

 any thing being turned up to the top, instead of 

 producing sterility, would even that produce an im- 

 provement of the crop ? — It would, and a continued 

 improvement. 



After getting upon land that has been subsoil 

 ploughed, and then ploughing it up again, do you 

 find that the subsoil continues friable ? — I do to the 

 bottom. 



With strong tenacious soils you do not find that 

 it is run together again ? — No. 



Mr Heathcote. You have no furrows, and you 

 plough 16 inches deep in all parts of the farm ? — 

 Yes. 



Do you find that the water stands at the bottom 

 of the furrow any length of time before it gets into 

 the drain ? — I do not think it does, but I cannot see 

 the bottom of the furrow. 



When you turn it up how do you find it? — 1 

 find it particularly dry, and sometimes where the 

 land has been poached in consequence of taking off 

 a green crop, still it is perfectly dry at the bottom 

 of the furrow. 



You do not find that the treiding of horses has 

 any effect upon it at that depth ? — None whatever; 

 the effect of the most thorough poaching does not 

 go beyond six inches, and below that it is found 

 quite dry. 



Will this subsoil ploughing apply to all species 

 of soils ' — I have never yet seen any soil that it 

 would not apply to. 



The most retentive stiff soil ? — Yes, and the 

 deep bog as well. 



Mr DenisoH. After breaking up the subsoil, 

 hut without turning it up to the top, suppose the 

 farmer was to continue to plough it seven or eight 

 inches, in that case how lon<? do you think the ope- 

 ration on the subsoil would remain efiectual, or 

 how soon do you suppose it would run together 

 again ? — I think it would never run together in a 

 solid form, because when it has been turned up 

 there is a constant circulation of the water and the 

 air, which prevents running together again ; and 

 when soil is laid in a dry position and exposed to 

 the atmosphere, it seems to get some sort of attrac- 

 tive quality : if you look at any mould you will find 

 that it is all in little globules, and those are gath- 

 ered together in large masses, forming larger glo- 

 bules which keep the soil open. 



Do you think that the mere operation of allow- 



