310 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



July 



dead weights of New England cattle killed at 

 home, and after being driven from Connecticut riv 

 er to Brighton, the Boston beef market, a distance 

 of 75 or 80 miles : 



Example 1. — One ox live weight in market, 

 2,393 lbs.; quarters weighed 418 lbs., 415 lbs., 

 324 lbs., 331 lbs.; hide, 150 lbs.; tallow 173 lbs.— 

 1,811. 



Difference, 582 lbs. 



Example 2. — Two oxen of A. S., killed at home 

 weighed as follows : 



Live. Killed. 



1,979 lbs. 1,400 lbs. " 



1,910 lbs. 1,841 lbs. 



About 294 lbs. loss on a hundred of the live 

 weight. 



Example 3. — An ox weighing on Connecticut 

 river 2,250 lbs., weighed in market, 1,472 lbs. 

 Loss, 778 lbs. 



Example 4. — An ox weighing as above, 2,255 

 lbs., weighed in market 1,487 lbs. Loss, 768 lbs. 



Example 5. — A fat bull, of D. S., killed at 

 home, and weighed alive 1,495 lbs.; dead, 1,051. 

 Loss, 544 lbs. — Stock Register. 



For the New England Farmer. 

 "EXPERIMENTAL FARMING" AGAIN. 



Messrs. Editors: — Your correspondent J., of 

 Bridgewater, in the N. E. Farmer, April 30th, 

 criticises the communication "Experimental Far- 

 ming" with a "home thrust," and makes a pass 

 at my friend, S. F., of Winchester, but the armor 

 of S. F. is so well adjusted in every part, that the 

 effort is as vain as chemical analyses are follible. 



How Mr. J. is going to defend himself in his 

 "opinion," and by his spirit of "controversy," 

 against the results of the experiments of our best 

 practical chemists, I have yet to learn. I advise 

 every farmer to read the communication of S. F. , 

 of Winchester, in the N. E. Farmer, No. 3, for 

 March, 1853, page 125, caption, "Analyses of 

 Soils." If sidb.men as Professor's Norton, Hitch- 

 cock, Llebifoifaipd othei-s, have acknowledged the 

 imperfect'iigfet chemical -analyses of soils as ap- 

 plicable to practical purposes in agriculture, how 

 can Mr. J. make us believe that we are behind the 

 times, beyond telescopic reach, or does he suppose 

 we are to swallow down the reports of chemists, 

 good or bad, as infallible, for genuine science, at 

 "first sight," without an emollient to lubricate the 

 way? Is it not only very possible but very prob- 

 able, that the instance of augmented crops, related 

 by Professor Mapes, might have been owing par- 

 tially, if not wholly, to a more careful cultivation, 

 or a more favorable season, or both combined? I 

 have but little faith in reports of that kind where 

 no responsible names are given. I have repeated- 

 ly raised double the quantity f)f produce on an acre 

 one scitson I qo\\\(\ g.'t on another, soil and treat- 

 ment being equal ; tl;e result of one year's trial of 

 a particular ingredient, as manure, would not sat- 

 isfy the most of us, as it would not allow time 

 enough for a fair experiment, and if Mr. J. con- 

 cludes that because Mr. none of us know who, 

 raised large crops after having his soil analyzed, 

 that we can do the same here, he must "jump at 

 conclusions' ' wonderfully , considering that as much 

 depends upon a favorable season us upon the quan- 

 tity and quality of the manure applied to the land. 



I did suppose that the surface soil was very much 

 dependent upon the subsoil for its fertility, till I 

 have been better taught by my friend J. in his 

 surface reasoning. I believe in many instances we 

 can form a better opinion by examining the sub- 

 soil, what the surface soil requires to fertilize it, 

 than a chemist would be likely to do by analyzing 

 the surface soil. Experience has taught us that 

 clay applied to the surface of a quicksand subsoil 

 was a proper application, but no experienced far- 

 mer would apply it to an argillaceous foundation. 



If my friend J. can make an accurate estimate 

 by "figures" how much more ground will produce 

 by being analyzed,ihe must be the greatest mathe- 

 matical juggler of the age. 



If farmers are to be governed by the dictation 

 of chemists of doubtful skill, they must be forced 

 into a labyrinth of uncertainties quite as perplex- 

 ing as the old system of composting and experi- 

 menting. I am in favor of chemical analyzation 

 of soils for all who are disposed to go into it, and 

 think that good may come out of it ; but by the 

 reports of our most able chemists themselves,, of 

 the uncertainty of deciding accurately enough to 

 give positive practical directions, and considering 

 the great variety of surface soils on our farms in 

 New England, I feel but little confidence in the 

 application of the science to my land, thinking to 

 be remunerated for my labor and expense, but I 

 hope my friend J. will engage in the practical an- 

 alysis of his soil with a zeal becoming "a man of 

 science," and with that success which his enter- 

 prise shall deserve, and be able to enlighten us 

 who are behind the times by giving us good prac- 

 tical demonstrations. Silas Brown. 



Wilmington, May 10, 1853. 



For the New England Farmer. 

 PLASTER, ASHES, &0. 



There seems to be nearly as many opinions in re- 

 gard to the value of plaster, as there are people ; 

 and it is not strange that such is the case, — for 

 while some soils are benefited from its use, others 

 appear to receive no advantage whatever. Until 

 within a few years I have had no foith in applying 

 it to any soil. But for three years past, I must 

 acknowledge that I have been materially benefited 

 by using it on potatoes, planted on light, sandy 

 land. I have very little faith in making use of it 

 on other soils. But my candid opinion is, that it 

 will pay for the farmer to purchase plaster at pres- 

 ent prices to put on potatoes, where they are plant- 

 ed on a soil of dry, sandy loam. Last spring, I 

 plowed up a piece of land in a worn-out pasture, 

 which grew nothing but sweet-fern and whortle- 

 berry bushes, and planted the same to potatoes, 

 (potatoes too small to sell in market) and used a 

 small handful of plaster in the hill at planting, 

 and the same at hoeing, — and I had the largest 

 yield of potatoes and of the best quality that I 

 have raised for several years. 



I have experimented some with ashes, and am 

 of the opinion that unleached ashes have but very • 

 little effect when applied to corn hills at hoeing 

 time. I was in the habit several years ago, of 

 carefully saving all my wood ashes to put on my 

 corn, and thought the while I was getting well 

 paid for the operation ; but on bringing the mat- 

 ter to the test (putting ashes on some rows, and 

 leaving them off on others, side by side,) I was ful- 



