504 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



Nov. 



large proportion absorbed into the soil, instead of 

 running down the surface, and become the source 

 of innumerable springs, that would otherwise be 

 dried up. 



These are points of greater importance to the far- 

 mer than has ever been dreamed of, except by a few 

 scientific observers; and the farmer who cuts down 

 the trees from the summits of the hills and from bar- 

 ren elevations, without providing for the immediate 

 renewal of these forests, is doing himself a posi- 

 tive injury, and injurj' enough to the whole coun- 

 try, to render it proper for legislative action to in- 

 terpose. It is conceded that one man has no right 

 to neglect, in his own lands, the extirj)ation of any- 

 thing that becomes an injury or a nuisance to those 

 of his neighbors. If there was, for instance, a 

 practicable method of extirpatwig the canker worm 

 or the caterpillar from our woods and orchards, 

 and every man who owns land would not consent 

 to use those means in his own terriloiies, the com- 

 munity would have a right to require this to be 

 done by all those who were disposed to neglect it. 

 Otherwi<;e, when the majority had extinguished 

 these nuisances from their own trees, they would 

 be exposed to emigrations of caterpillars or canker 

 •worms from the territories of their negligent neigh- 

 bors. In like manner, if it could be proved that cer- 

 tain tracts ought to be kept constantly wooded, as an 

 indispensable condition for the prosperity of agri- 

 culture, it would be right that our legislatures 

 should interfere to prevent the mischief from be- 

 ing done. Though, in a general sense, every man 

 is the owner of his own land, yet the whole com- 

 munity have an interest in it ; and if the land own- 

 ers were spoiling the climate for the sake of the 

 profit derived from the sale of their trees for tim- 

 ber and fuel, the rest of the community would 

 have a right, and it would be their duty to inter- 

 fere, though by so doing they would be meddling 

 with other men's property. This sorL of interfer- 

 ence is common, when, for example, a poor man 

 who has no taste, and but little intelligence, is pre- 

 paring to cut down a magnificent elm or oak which 

 stands upon his own ground. It is rightly argued 

 that this tree must be preserved, because in a vari- 

 ety of ways it is serviceable to the public, and that 

 therefore the owner has no right to destroy it, 

 though it be his own property. I think the pub- 

 lic have no more right to interfere in this case, than 

 in the case of an individual who is proposing to 

 cut down a wood on an elevated and barren hill, 

 where the trees would not be likely to be renewed, 

 if by the removal of these trees the beauty of 

 the whole landscape would be seriously injured. 

 But of the last case, it would be said that a man 

 has a right to the revenue that would be derived 

 from the sale of his own woodlands; and this wood 

 when brought into market would support his fami- 

 ly a year. Very true — and the wood of the mag- 

 nificent elm would if sold support the poor owner's 

 family a month. If we can be justified in prevent- 

 ing a man from obtaining twenty dollars worth of 

 timber by the destruction of one beautiful tree, we 

 can be equally justified in preventing a man from 

 obtaining a hundred dollars worth or more of tim- 

 ber by cutting down a wood which is the crowning 

 beauty of the landscape. I think the public have 

 no right to prevent either act from being done, 

 withrut making some j)ecuniary compromise and 

 stipulation with the owner. But still I should be 

 in favor of legislative action on the subject, by which 



this sort of interference should operate equallv and 

 justly. Let it be understood that certain trees in 

 certain situations, and certain woods in certain sit- 

 uations, are not at the dispos; 1 of their owners; 

 and that whenever a man purchases land, he does 

 it with a knowledge, that the trees on a certain 

 knoll or declivity do not belong to himself but to 

 the public. He may feed his cattle there, and en- 

 joy all the benefit to be derived from them while 

 standing ; but he has no right lo cut them down 

 or to do anything which will injure their growth. 

 No injustice would be done, if the land were bought 

 with a knowledge of these circumstances. 



But to return from my digression. I am willing 

 to allow that it is difficult to regulate these matters 

 uniformly according to an established principle. 

 Many persons own small farms which they wish to 

 devote entirely to tillage, although there are some 

 parts of their land which the general good of the 

 country would require to be kept covered with 

 trees- But if the principle can be well established, 

 and the people can be made to believe it, there 

 must be a general approximation to the right meth- 

 od of operations. If men could be fully persuaded 

 that their own interest would be improved, provid- 

 ed they had a plenty of land in the right situation 

 for tillage, by keeping all elevated hills, barren 

 ridges and steep declivities covered with trees — 

 they would generally take measures that would se- 

 cure a new growth, as soon as they had cut down 

 the trees from any one of these situations. 



Every farmer knows the value of the leaves of 

 trees as fertilizers of the soil, and florists prefer 

 leaf soil to any other kind for the culture of their 

 finest flowers. The leaves that drop from the trees 

 serve directly to fertilize the spot upon which the 

 trees are growing ; the most barren land will, when 

 covered with a forest, not only supply the trees 

 with nutriment, but the soil will be constantly in- 

 creasing in fertility as long as the trees stand upon 

 it. But the leaves that fall from the trees are not 

 the only source of this increase in the bulk and fer- 

 tility of the soil. The lichens, mosses, and other 

 incrustations upon the surface of their bart, and 

 the off"al deposited by birds, insects, and quadru- 

 peds, all unite in contributing to the same purpose. 

 Hence the most barren plains are productive for a 

 few seasons after the removal of an old forest. 



These facts may explain why a forest of trees is 

 always vigorous, though it has remained for centu- 

 ries upon the same ground. If the soil vn which 

 they grew were fertilized only by their own leaves, 

 it would gradually lose its fitness to promote tlje 

 health and increase of the forest. But these foreign 

 matters, consisting of mosses, lichens, fungi, and 

 the deposites and relics of various creatures, which 

 have lived and died there, are fully equal in quan- 

 tity to the leaves, and afford a species of nutriment 

 of a diff'erent nature from that of their own decayed 

 foliage, and more suitable to their health. 



This question of spontaneous fertilization is a 

 very important one, and deserves still further con- 

 sideration. What, then, is the source of all these 

 matters ? Something must be taken away from 

 somewhere to produce them. The answer is obvi- 

 ous. The two sources from which they are derived 

 are the deeper portions of the soil that lie below 

 the reach of cultivation, or of action from the roots 

 of other plants, and the atmosphere. The roots of 

 the trees draw up nutriment from these depths, 

 and a portion of it enters into the composition of 



