1851. 



THK GENESEE FARMER. 



137 



an uniform fact, it is important that it should bo 

 known, for it would be better to cutoif he small ends 

 and throw them away and plant only from the large 

 ends. The difference in the product would repay, 

 fmr-fol', ihe loss of the portion tlirown away. I 

 deem it, therefore, a matter of much interest to have 

 the experiment repeated, in order to ascertain wheth- 

 er the results will be uniform, or whether in this case 

 it may be considered fortuitous. 



I consider your correspondent as suggesting, indi- 

 rectly, a reason for this result in the opinion which 

 he expresses, that the eye or seed at the large end is 

 more mature and perfect than at the small end. I see 

 not the truth of this position, nor the force of this 

 reason. How is it ascertained that the eye at the 

 large end is mature and perfect, while that at the 

 small end is not equally so ? And how does it appear 

 that on a potato that is ripe, whether large or small, 

 all the eyes are not equally matured 1 The fact that 

 they are not, may be conjectured and assumed — but 

 is it really so ? And if it were so, provided they 

 were all sufficiently ripe to germinate, why should 

 there be a difference in their products 1 I make these 

 remarks, not to controvert the suggestions of your 

 correspondent, but to induce thorough investigation 

 into this subject. 



Now as to small seed. Influenced by early educa- 

 tion, and the force of example, I should not risk them 

 but for the results of actual experiment. Nor would 

 I be induced to confide in them, after one experiment 

 only. But having tried them two years, and on dif- 

 ferent soils, embracing different degrees of richness, 

 and different characteristics, and rinding, uniformly, 

 the product of the small to be equal to the large, I 

 have given the opinion that it would be safe to hazard 

 them as a field crop. This opinion will govern my 

 practice the present season. Should further experi- 

 ments produce a different quotient, and prove that 

 uniformity in the results is not to be depended upon, 

 then there will be reason to discontinue the practice. 



E. 



THRESHING OATS. 



Messrs. Editors : — As there has been two articles 

 written on this subject, I suppose that I cannot say 

 anything that will be instructive in relation to it ; 

 nor do I wish to ; but I would like to give my opinion 

 in regard to H. L. E.'s threshing 400 bush, of oats 

 with his machine, with only four men and two horses. 

 H. L. E. has one man to feed, one to untie the sheaves, 

 one to take the straw, and one to take the grain, with- 

 out chaffing, which would make about 800 bushels, 

 chaff and all — a pretty good day's work for one man. 

 But he might do it. One man might feed the ma- 

 chine ; but he cannot untie and feed. Nor can one 

 man throw the sheaves from the mow and untie. 

 One man might get the straw from the machine, but 

 he cannot stack it nor pitch it on the stack. H. L. 

 E.'s horses might go without a driver, but all horses 

 will not. Now if H. L. E. had said eight men in- 

 stead of four, and an extra span of horses to change 

 with, we might come to the conclusion that he had 

 seen service ; but as it is, we think that he is better 

 at puffing than he is at threshing. Honest. — Read- 

 ing Center, JY. Y., 1851. 



We leave to others the question of economy, merely 

 remarking that we have often seen these machines 

 in operation, but never saw any necessity for a dri- 

 ver. 



A FEW THOUGHTS FOR FARMERS. 



Messrs. Editors : — I take considerable interest in 

 agricultural science and would like to suggest a few 

 thoughts, to which you may give such prominence as 

 you think proper. 



I have observed among farmers, an almost endless 

 diversity of opinion as to agricultural practice. — 

 '^-very other individual has a different method, and all 

 ha 'e full confidence in the superiority of their own 

 ways. For example, in endeavoring to avoid the 

 destruction of potatoes by the rot, one believes ia 

 digging early, and another goes for leaving them in 

 the ground as long as possible ; one succeeded best 

 by spreading them upon his barn floor, and another 

 by putting them in the cellar and covering them with 

 ashes. And so, in relation to almost every part of 

 agricultural practice, farmers differ in some points, 

 and often to the extent of direct opposition. The 

 consequence is, that agricultural experience is an 

 exceedingly unreliable guide, and the science itself is 

 perplexed with confused, if not contradictory opinions. 



The course of this diversity, it appears to me, is 

 two-fold. With the great mass of farmers it is the 

 product of limited information. They read but lit- 

 tle, and of course base their conclusions upon their 

 own narrow views and vngue impressions, and as 

 these differ in the case of different minds and circum- 

 stances, the conclusions themselves must be equally 

 diverse. Among the better class of farmers, the di- 

 versity of opinion springs from imperfect observation. 

 The farmer but partially notices the first facts of the 

 case in hand, and trusts to his memory for the pres- 

 ervation of these, so that when he arrives at the final 

 result, his conclusions are based upon partial data, 

 and thus a wide margin is left for error, and conse- 

 quently diversity of opinion. For example, the far- 

 mer may have .carefully and correctly noted the 

 chara,cter of the soil, the mode of preparation, the 

 quantity of seed and the time of planting, and yet 

 have neglected a dozen points that might very mate- 

 rially change the great result and thus give ground 

 for a different conclusion. 



Now, as to the means of removing this diversity 

 of opinion, and settling the facts of agricultural prac- 

 tice upon a certain basis, so that the farmer's experi- 

 ence shall be a safe guide and a valid ground of 

 belief, it will be seen at once that, in the first case, 

 resort must be had to increased knowledge. When 

 the farmer has, through the various channels of infor- 

 mation which are open to him, thoroughly informed 

 himself as to the present state of agricultural science, 

 he will be less likely to be governed by crude im- 

 pressions and limited views. In the second case, and 

 this I regard as the most important to be noticed here, 

 the evil must be removed by cultivating habits of 

 thorough and systematic observation. The intelli- 

 gent farmer might accomplish this by keeping a 

 farm-book of facts, in which he should enter in reg- 

 ular order, every fact in his practice that could in 

 any way afford data for sound conclusions. He 

 might enter as follows, or in some tabular form, facts 

 like the succeeding, in relation to a certain crop : 



The Field. — 1st, it.? exposure ; 21, character of 

 the soil ; 3d, its condition ; 4th, manner of prepa- 

 ration. 



The Seed. — 1st, its character ; 2d, the quality ; 

 3d, the mode of preparation for planting. 



The Planting. — 1st, the precise time; 2d, the 

 manner; 3d, its character as proven by time. 



)l 



I 



