NEW ENGl-AND FARMER. 



PUBLISHED BV GEO. C. BAKllETT, NO. 52, NORTH MARKET STREET, (at the Agricultural Warkhouse.)— T. G. FESSENDEN, EDITOR. 



vol.. XI. 



BOSTON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 8, 1833. 



COMMUNICATIONS. 



For Ike A't-ic England Farmtr. 

 ANALYSIS OF DIPPEREBIT SORTS OP 

 SALT, &c. 



Jamaica Plain, April 20,, 1833. 



T. G. Fesse.nden, Esq. Sir, — In your N. E. 

 Fiu-mcr, of 7tli March, 1832, you ijublislied an 

 ;irticie i'lirnislied by mo, on the .subji^ct of salt, (in 

 consequence of aii article from the N. York Medi- 

 cal Repository by Dr. Mitchell on the ilestruclive 

 fjrialilies of Liverpool Salt) in which paper I gave 

 you au extract from Ure's Chemistry, 4tli edition, 

 1833, an analysis of eleven sorts of salt. And iny 

 expectations of being enabled to fufjoisli you an 

 analysi.s, by an able chemist of our d\vu country, 

 of several foreign as well as American Salts. 



I procured eight samples as per particulars be- 

 low, and President Quincy was so obliging as' to 

 request Dr. Webster, Professor of Chemistry of 

 Harvard University to analyse them. He has 

 sent me the result which I now give you of 500 

 grains of each. 



■&■ 



i = .= -5 -s =■» 



478 U 

 491 00 

 •iS'i 5.i 

 4TJA 2 

 48J| 3 



■s •?"; ^ 



2.i 4i iii li 6i 



.3| OU 2| 1 2 



5| 00 4 2 



10 00 2 li 4^ 



5 00 00 44 2 



491i 00 34 00 00 00 



I. Sicily coarse salt, 

 "Ti. Eastporl, Me. 

 4. New York, fine, 



7. St. Ubes, coarse, 

 9. Ciuinc)', Mass. 



8. Native Rock or ") 

 Mineral salt from J- 

 Choshiie, England. J 



No. 2. Liverpool coarse fine. The Muriale of Soda and otlil 

 constituents agreed so nearly with the results from No. 8, as 

 did the results from No, 6, (Liverpool finest) that I find them 

 noted on my book as the same, ditiering only in ilie state of 

 mechanical division. 



No. 5. Turks Island salt, very nearly the same results as No, 

 1. In tlie sample from Sicily, No. I, I obtained an indication of 

 a minute proportion of Iodine. I. W. W. 



No. 3 was a specimen of salt manufactured at Eastporl, in 

 Maine, (from the English Cheshire Rock or Mineral salt), 

 Large quantities of it are there manufactured, and it appears to 

 possess precisely the qualities of Li^-erpool salt all of which I 

 believe is manufactured from the Mineral rock and springs of 

 Cheshire. ^ 



No. 4 was froM a basket of fine table salt manufactured at 

 one of the salt estabnshments in the western part of New York. 



No. 9 was a specimen of salt from Presitlent Uuincy's own 

 salt works at Quuicy, Mass., evaporated from sea water. His 

 works have long been considered as producing it of superior 

 quality. 



After the examination, of the different salts 

 usually for sale in our markets, I trust there 

 need be no longer any/ear in using them, on ae- 

 coimt of any bad properties they may have been 

 supposed to possess. Only bearing in mind that 

 their use sl-.ould be by toeight, not measure. If for 

 butter I have no doubt the iine Liverpool (or 

 Eastporl) is as good as any other, provided the 

 butter be thoroughly well made and worked. 



I have for many years had no other used, till 

 the ])ast year I purchased the best Turks Ishnd 

 I could find, and had it well washed and groimil 

 fine. VVe do not perceive the least difference in 

 the butter, having usetl precisely the same weight. 



There is no doubt for packing meat and fish the 

 coarsest salt ehould be used, as keeping the meal 

 separate, and being longer in dissolving. 



Yours truly, John PniNCF.. 



You may modestly laugh at an ingenious witti- 

 cism ; but show me only a ghastly grin at a vulvar 

 tale. 



For the New Evi^land Fanner. 

 CUIiTURE OP INDIAIV CORN. 



Mr. Fessenden, .S'lV, — If you think the fol- 

 lowing account of some experiments relative to 

 planting Corn, worth a place in your Journal it is 

 at your service. 



I''or some years, I have planted my corn thick- 

 er tlian has been thought a suitable distance, by 

 fannors generally, in this section of the coun- 

 try ; and to me it has appeared decidedly to in- 

 crease the crop. But as that was a matter of 

 opinion, I made a little experiment; rather how- 

 ever to remove llie doubts of others, than any of 

 my own on the subject. 



I will i)remise by stating that the ground on 

 which the first experiment was made, was a sandy 

 loam, rather cold, and though naturally pretty 

 good, was so run down by neglect and severe 

 cro])ping, that in 1831 it gave probably less than 

 half a ton to the acre, of poor sour hay, worth lit- 

 tle else than to throw into the barri-yaid for litter 

 and manure. In May 1832 it was ploughed, and 

 about 20 cart-buck loads per acre, of a compost, 

 (Jiliieh was made, one load of manure to two of 

 nieadow-mud or good soil, and piled up in layers 

 tlie previous autumn,) were spread and harrowed 

 in on the furrows. 



The situation was one much subject to early 

 frosts, and the crop probably suffered a diminu- 

 tion of about one fourth, by that which occurred 

 in Se|)t. and by which nearly all the leaves were 

 killed, while the stalks pretty generally remained 

 fresh and green. The effect of this frost, was 

 very similar to what I should have expected from 

 topping the stalks at that time. The corn was 

 full in the milk, and the process of filling out, 

 ceased entirely where the leaves were all killed; 

 and where nothing more than the leaves were kil- 

 led, the corn dried or shrivelled up without rot- 

 ting. 



I believe the farmers here, usually, give fifteen 

 to eighteen feet, and I have seen some lots where 

 twenty feet of ground were given to a hill. 



In 1831, I gave twelve feet to a hill, and in 

 1832, it was my intention to give generally about 

 ten feet, or to plant the hills a little more than 

 three feet distant each way. The ground being 

 prepared as above stated, and all treated alike, 

 there seemed to be very little difiiculty in making 

 an experiment that might prove satisfactory, in de- 

 termining whether I was giving the hills room 

 enough or not. Accordingly about half a dozen 

 rows were planted, at about four and a half feet 

 from hill to hill, and as many more rows next ad- 

 joining were planted at about two and a half feet 

 from hill to hill in the rows. The rows all being 

 3 ft. apart. 



All were alike until harvest, which was about 

 the 10th Nov. when for the sake of making as lit- 

 tle trouble as was consistent with a fair result, I 

 fixed on two of the rows, which were standing 

 side by side, and which I shall call No. 1 and 

 No. 2; as being suflicient for my purpose. 



In No. 1 there were 22 hills on 100 ft. in 

 length, and the rows each side being 3 ft. distant ; 

 it gave an average of 13^ square ft. of surface to a 

 hill, or 3197 hills per acre. 



In No. 2 there were 37 hills on 100 ft. in 



length, and being the same^width as No. 1, it gave 

 an average of 8 1-9 square ft. of surface to a hill 

 or .5372 hills per acre. 



The corn was husked in the field, and carefttUy 

 weighed, and 75 lbs. of ears (the usual quantity) 

 allowed to produce a bushel of shelled corn. No. 

 1 contained 77 hills and gave 51J lbs. of cars, 

 equal to 10 oz. 12 grs. per hill, or 28 bushels and 

 48 lbs. per acre. No. 2 contained 132 hills and 

 gave 75 lbs. ears, equal to 9 oz. ^ grs. per hill, or 

 40 bu.shelsand 44 lbs. per acre. Making (in this 

 case) 11 bushels and 71 lbs. per acre in favor of 

 the thick planting. It will be perceived that while 

 the hills in No. 1 gained, individually, nearly 

 20 per ct., of those in No. 2; which by the way 

 was very much calculated to mislead one as to 

 the real result, if no other method than guessing 

 has been adopted they collectively, by the acre, 

 made an entire loss of about 30 per ct. 



The difference was greater than I had anticipat- 

 ed, and perhaps much greater than it would have 

 been on a different soil. Therefore, I have given 

 you some particulars relative to the soil, and man- 

 agement in this case, in the hope, that some of 

 your readers, will make comparative experiments, 

 in other kinds of soil, and give the result through 

 the columns of the N. E. Farmer ; that thus by 

 making common stock of our experience, we nioy 

 be able to take at least one important step, iu the 

 cultivation of this most valuable crop, independent 

 of the old method o{ guessing at it. 



I have ;;iven the data from which the estimates 

 were made, so that if any inaccuracy has been ad- 

 mitted, it may be detected. 



I also made a small experiment, to test the 

 method proposed by some one, (I believe in the 

 N. E. Farmer ) of planting the hills much thicker 

 in the rows to prevent the corn sending up suck- 

 ers, and at the same time giving the space between 

 the rows a much greater width than is usual, for 

 the purpose of freely admitting the rays of the sun. 

 It was on a warm sandy soil, iu somewhat better 

 condition than the one above described. The 

 corn suffered some from the drought, but not so 

 much from the frost as the preceding. The items 

 were as follows: — No. 1 had 36 hills on 100 ft. in 

 length, and the average distance of the rows on 

 either side was 3 ft. 3 in., giving each hill 9 4-144 

 square ft., or making 4825 hills per acre. 



N0.2 (between which and No 1 there was an inter- 

 mediate row) had 53 hills on 100 ft. in length, and 

 the average distance of the adjoining rows, was 

 four feet three inches, giving 8 2—144 square 

 ft. to a hill, or 5435 hills per acre, 



In row No. 1 there were 97 hills, the produce of 

 which was66J lbs. ears, equal to 43 bushels and 73 

 lbs. per acre, allowiug as before 75 lbs. for a bush- 

 el shelled corn. 



In No. 2 there were 146 hills, yielding 88J 

 lbs. ears, equal to 43 bu. 09 lbs. per acre. 



In this instance it will be seen that the advantage 

 (if there bean advantage) obtained by planting 

 thick in the row, was somewhat more than lost by 

 leaving so large a space between the rows. 



On another part of this lot where the ground 

 was rather better, but otherwise all treated alike, 

 (the manure having been spread on and harrowed 

 in after ploughing,) I measured one row and found 



