No. 8. 



Magnesian Lime. — Sulphate of Lime. 



263 



For the Farmers' Cabinet. 

 Magnefeian Lime. 



jVIr. Editor, — I was much amused with 

 our friend S. Lewis's article on lime ; for as 

 far as I can learn, such an opinion is entirely 

 new in thispart of Pennsylvania. He seems 

 to think, if I understand him rightly, that 

 magnesian lime is quite as good for land as 

 that which has no magnesia in it. And to 

 prove it he cites the practice of farmers in 

 the south-east part of Pennsylvania; but 1 

 think he is mistaken with regard to them. 



South-east Pennsylvania is large I know, 

 so I do not answer for the whole of it, but 

 only for the part in which I live: it is in the 

 midst of limestone, and not very far from the 

 Great Valley ; and it is the general opinion 

 of this part, and founded on sound experience, 

 that magnesian lime in large quantities is 

 very injurious to land : some of our graziers 

 would not allow it to be spread on their land 

 free of cost; but I think they go too far, for 

 with the present mode of applying lime (100 

 bushels at three coats), it does not make so 

 much difference. 



One field on my place was limed with about 

 300 bushels to the acre at one coat, five years 

 ago, with lime from J. Pyle's quarries, which, 

 upon examination, proves to have very little 

 if any magnesia in it; the last summer I cut 

 near two tons of grass (green grass, timothy 

 and clover) to the acre from part of it. A 

 friend of mine, who lives not far from here, 

 limed one of his fields six or seven years ago 

 with about 75 bushels to the acre, from an- 

 other quarry, which, when examined, was 

 found to contain, if I remember rightly, from 

 1-5 to 25 parts of magnesia ; the consequence 

 is, he has never had a crop of any kind on it 

 since, until this last summer, when it was 

 farmed for corn. S. Lewis also says, " he 

 does not wish to be understood that he im- 

 putes all of the improvement here to the use 

 of lime," in which he is right, for without our 

 manure from our cattle, &c., our farms would 

 not be wliat they are. His expression of 

 " whatever part of this improvement is owing 

 to lime, is owing to magnesian lime, and none 

 other," is too strong entirely ; for the opinion 

 and experience of this part of south-east 

 Pennsylvania is quite the contrary. I do not 

 wish to dampen the ardour of any young far- 

 mer with regard to liming, for as 1 said be- 

 fore, 33J bushels of lime is now considered 

 sufficient to the acre at one coat; and I do 

 not think in the above quantity there would 

 be enough magnesia to occasion any serious 

 drawback. Now I hope that neither thee, 

 nor any of thy readers, will think of me as 

 one of the " would be oracles of the day," ybr 

 / can assure you all, I have no wish to be 

 considered anylhing of the kind. But if any 



of thy readers should be out-argued by any 

 such, let them be careful where they point. 



There is an old saying in these diggings^ 

 that lime, when used properly, " if it puts the 

 farmer in jail, it will bring him out again." 

 C. Taylor. 



Spring Hills, London Grove, Chester Co., Pa. 



To the Editor of the Farmers' Cabinet. 

 Sulphate of Lime. 



Sir, — Having read with much pleasure 

 two articles in the Cabinet, vol. 5, pp. 378 and 

 382, on piaster saturated with urine, and be- 

 ing anxious to try it on corn, I take the liber- 

 ty to ask, what quantity will be sufficient for 

 each hill, on a poor sandy loam, which has 

 been a long time untilled, and is incumbent 

 on a porous subsoil. I also purpose applying 

 it exclusively to a drill or two of early pota- 

 toes, but would like to know how much ought 

 to be given to each set. 



I feel much obliged, as no doubt many 

 others are also, to your correspondent E. T., for 

 his very valuable article on potatoe planting. 

 But it appears to me he has forgotten two 

 things, the precise time for plantmg, a sub- 

 ject on which I find some diversity of opinion, 

 and the depth of soil to be laid on the sets. 

 If my memory serves me, a Mr. Murphy of 

 Connecticut says 7 or 8 inches; and, as E. T. 

 says, no earthing up in the after culture. All 

 to be put on in the beginning. As E. T. seems 

 to be acquainted with Gen. Barnum's mode 

 of planting, perhaps he will be kind enough 

 to furnish it in detail through the Cabinet to 

 your numerous readers. Georgos. 



Harford Co., 3Id., Feb. 1], 1842. 



Notice. 



PHILADELPHIA AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY. 

 Notice to competitors for premiums on crops for the 

 year 1842. 

 Competitors must apply to the committee at least one 

 month previous to housing their crops. They must 

 furnish the committee with an account of the manner 

 of cultivation ; kind and quantity of manure applied; 

 a description of the soil, and expense or amount of la- 

 bour bestowed on each crop. They must also furnish 

 satisfactory certified evidence of the quantity produced 

 per acre. Competition is limited to Pennsylvania, and 

 a distance within 20 miles of the city. The committee 

 will withhold premiums, when those offered for com- 

 petition are not deemed worthy of distinction. 

 PREMIUMS. 



For the best 5 acres of wheat, $10 



For the ne.\t best 5 do 5 



For the best 3 acres of rye, 10 



For the next best 3 do 5 



For the best 2 acres of potatoes, 10 



For tlie next best 2 do 5 



For the best 1 acre of sugar-beets, 10 



For the next best 1 do 5 



For the best 1 acre of ruta-baga or field turnips,.... 10 



For the next best 1 do ;• .5 



For the best J acre of carrots, 8 



For the next best i do, 4 



For the best ~ acre of parsneps, 6 



For the next best ^ do 3 



For the best 5 acres of Indian-corn, 10 



For the next best 5 do 5 



Aaron Clement, i 



J.W.Roberts, S Com. on Crops. 



Henry Chorley, ) 



