1858. 



NEW ENGLAND FARMEK. 



311 



they were bird tracks. Among the quadrupeds 

 he had concluded, but without evidence that en- 

 tirely satisfied him, that five M'ere marsupials — 

 the youngest of the mammalials. Of the bipeds, 

 14 were of the thick-toed birds, like the ostrich, 

 and 9 of the narrow-toed tribe. These statements 

 of the most accomplished judge of such matters 

 in the world, and a man of great caution, give us 

 astonishing glimpses into the period when such 

 a variety of extinct monsters went tramping or 

 writhing up and down the valleys of New Eng- 

 land. — Boston Journal. 



For the New England Farmer. 

 UNDERDRAINING. 



Mr. Editor ; — Taking some interest in under- 

 draining, theoretically, I have read three articles 

 in your late numbers on this subject — two by S. 

 F., and one by Mr. Nourse — with a desire to get 

 some clearer views upon an agricultural topic 

 now exciting much attention. 



I understand your correspondent S. F. to com- 

 bat the idea that "oZZ land requires to be drained." 

 This he seems to do with a quiet smack of self- 

 satisfaction, though the notion has not much vi- 

 tality, in this country at least, and according to 

 his statements, but little in England. He may, 

 however, have killed this feeble extravagance, 

 yet at the waste of some of his best ammunition. 

 Strike lightly on the weak ! 



In speaking of the dampness of the soil of Great 

 Britain, your correspondent observes, "Eng- 

 lish farms may perhaps need draining ; Ameri- 

 can farms need irrigation." This may be true — 

 but certain it is that both soils need just mois- 

 ture enough for the proper development of roots, 

 and no more. S. F. it would seem, is unacquaint- 

 ed with the theory of underdraining, or else some 

 of its benefits were forgotten, or thrust aside as 

 problematical, when he penned his articles. Un- 

 derdraining, as I understand it, by carrying off' 

 the surplus water, equalizes the temperature and 

 humidity of the soil during the summer months, 

 while it deepens and improves it by giving it a 

 freer circulation of air, which at night is cooling, 

 and leaves in its apertures moisture in the form 

 of d^w, which it would not do in a hard or baked 

 state of the soil. Figuratively, underdraining 

 gives greater lungs, and consequently more vi- 

 tality to the land subjected to it. Porous soils, 

 and those not having a hard, impervious pan ten 

 or twelve inches beneath their surface, may not 

 need underdraining, as the air passes freely 

 through them, and moisture maj^ be drawn up 

 from a greater depth by capillary attraction. 



And let me say here (though I may refer to it 

 again) that the idea of the salts washing out and 

 running to the ocean, need excite no fears for a 

 soil so retentive of moisture as to need under- 

 draining. 



My friend S. F. may have seen low lands with 

 more or less water standing on their surface in 

 June. In July it may have evaporated (not 

 sunk ;) and in August the soil is hard and cracky. 

 In surveying such a piece, after wiping off' the per- 

 spiration from his face and making his "bow," 

 he would probably exclaim — "Inscrutible powers, 

 what a dry piece of land is this ! Plague on our 

 hot summers ! It's 'a deficiency of moisture, not 



an excess,' that American farmers have to fear 

 and guard against. But if we can't get showers, 

 mulching would be the remedy, if not expensive 

 and impracticable, to prevent the evaporation." 

 A friend might suggest underdraining. "That 

 would only carry off" the water the sooner! 

 Draining is preposterous. But it is a self-evident 

 fact, that as the water is gone, it needs irriga- 

 tion." 



But I may be doing S. F. injustice ; for he 

 says in his last article, that in the United States 

 "draining will be confined to swamps and low 

 lands." It seems by this that he would drain 

 swamps and low lands. He cannot, however, 

 mean those which lose their water in a drought 

 and become baked, for this would be draining 

 soils already parched up, and which, as I under- 

 stand him, need "irrigation" — at least in the lat- 

 ter part of the summer. I suppose, then, he 

 means those lands only which present water to 

 the eye the year round ! I venture the opinion, 

 after some little hesitation, that his "good com- 

 pany," Prof. Nash, would differ with him here. 



And here I would notice his California fact, 

 which asserts that the "river bottoms," so called, 

 are only cultivated there, which soil is constantly 

 moist, "almost to its very surface." The soil 

 there," it is stated, "which is not thus kept filled 

 with moisture, bakes and cracks in the drj' sea- 

 son, and cannot be cultivated at all, until by 

 some means the land shall be irrigated." 



Now this land, which he would irrigate, (a fre- 

 quent and expensive job,) in my opinion, should 

 be underdraincd. By this operation the water 

 would sink, not dnj up, and the land would be- 

 come porous and well ventilated, and would pre- 

 serve a proper and almost uniform moisture per- 

 haps for half the year ; and being thus porous, 

 would not be so liable to crack, and would prob- 

 ably be rendered very valuable for the purpose 

 of cultivation, even without irrigation. 



But S. F. would demur at this, especially if it 

 were underdrained with tile ; for he says, "I ob- 

 ject to tile draining that it is exhaustive," for it 

 "hastens the decay of vegetable matter in the 

 soil," as its advocates say, which he thinks would 

 be "far more encouraging to the race of farm 

 skimmers than to those who wish to improve the 

 soil." The sooner the vegetable matter is used 

 up, the sooner the land is exhausted ! There is 

 undoubtedly vegetable, no less than mineral mat- 

 ter, deep in the soil, which the plow will not turn 

 up ; and S. F. seems to think that it should re- 

 main there undisturbed and unpenetrated by the 

 roots of plants and by the decomposing and life- 

 giving influence of the air, because, forsooth, the 

 sooner you get at it and use it up, the sooner the 

 land, will become exhausted ! This most every one 

 would regard as poor economy. Good farmers 

 spread manure on their soils with the purpose of 

 raising crops. These crops imbibe the manure, 

 and, using it up, tend to exhaust the land. Would 

 it be well to plant nothing, so that the manure 

 may remain in the soil ? 



By laying drains three or four feet deep, we 

 get a far deeper soil, of nearly as good a quality 

 as on the surface, and hence a greater resource ; 

 for water, air, manure and warmth all penetrate 

 it. And when the roots are attracted by deep 

 nourishment, they will strike deeper for it and 

 flourish greatly by it. "The roots of our corn 



