802 



THE GENESEE EARMEK. 



WHEAT FEOM THE SOUTH. 



Eds. Gen. Farmer: — Is it not a rule of logic, as 

 v^ell as a principle of common sense, " that we 

 should consider in what sense it is likely an author 

 expected or intended to convey his thoughts to 

 tliose to whom he addressed himself?" and a judi- 

 cious writer always expects each word to he under- 

 stood, as nearly as it will allow, in that sense wliich 

 will maintain, not defeat, the truth of the proi)osi- 

 I ion affirmed. Consequentl}-, any construction given 

 his language that will either so enlarge or restrict 

 its meaning as to render it inconsistent with the 

 proposition affirmed, is forced and illogical. Again, 

 if a proposition is to be proved " supremely absurd," 

 it should be criticised, at least, as written, not, as in 

 this case, transpose the sentences, so as to make a 

 <|uotation, cited in support of the proposition, a 

 (listinct proposition of itself, and then assert that 

 the propositions are " supremely absurd." The mere 

 fact that a transposition was resorted to, is evidence 

 that it was done because it gave strength to the 

 position of the writer ; otherwise, he would not 

 have resorted to any such means to prove tlie pro- 

 position " supremely absurd." 



The second proposition affirmed by us was this : 

 " that plants, after vegetation has commenced, require 

 also a certain amount or quantum of heat, not any 

 certain duration or continuation thereof. It is the 

 amount, not the duration, that is essential to 7nature 

 plants." In support of this proposition, we quoted 

 from De Oandolle the sentence to which your 

 correspondent, J. 13. 0., so much objects. Your cor- 

 respondent then remarks, "Now if these propositions 

 are umiualitiedly true, then the greater the heat the 

 mord rapid the growth ; and all we have to do to 

 increase the growth, is to increase the heat ad 

 infinitum^ and that one day at 212° (boiling point) 

 wonld cause vegetation to grow as much as two 

 days at 106°, and so on, at a higher or lower degree 

 of temjjerature, which is, to say the least, supremely 

 absurd." We admit that if this is the certain amount 

 of heat required for vegetation, or if it is ^'•essential 

 to ^nature plants," then the terms used were unqual- 

 ified., and the construction of J. B. 0. fair and 

 legitimate. But, on the other hand, if the degree 

 of heat indicated in his construction of the jn-opcr- 

 sition is greater than the "certain amount required 

 for vegetation,*' or if greater than the amount or 

 quantum "essential to mature plants," and would 

 destroy, not n:?ature them, then his construction of 

 the language used is forced and unnatural — the otf- 

 spring of his owjj brain, and which he has the 

 undoubted right to characterize as "supremely 

 absurd," in which opinion it would be unkind in 

 us to say we coucnrred. In short, our proposi- 

 tion is, that after vegetation has commenced, a 

 certain amount of heat is '■''essential to mature 

 plants." Now, when your correspondent affirms 

 that this means tliat the heat may be increased to 

 the boiling point, he affirms that which would 

 -'-'roy, not mature plants,— a construction which 



: tally inconsistent with the proposition stated, 

 i.iid is therefore conclusive of its own fallacy. 



We might stop here, but we would like to meet 

 die assertion that our propositions are mere theories. 

 This, we maintain, is no objection to them,, if they 

 /ire true. But we deny that they are mere theories. 

 We maintained that all plants were thermometers, ] 



with their respective zero points or degrees of veg- 

 etation. This proposition is supported by tlie very- 

 highest authority. M. Cii. J»Iahtixs says that 

 "Each species of the vegetable kingdom is a kind' 

 of thermometer, which has its own zero." De 

 Candolle says the above quotation is true, and 

 adds : " When the temperatin-e is below the zero 

 point, it is useless to ]>lauts on account of the con- 

 gelation of their juices." Our own observation 

 proves the same fact. Take any kind of plants from 

 New York and bring then"' here, and plant them 

 with the same kind brought from Georgia, :ind the 

 result will be that the plants from New York will 

 vegetate first, those grown here nest, and lastly, 

 those from Georgia; the ('ifference in time of vege- 

 tation being from ten to fifteen days. Now, we 

 insist that this is conclusive of the position, that 

 the zero point'or vegetation degree is earlier reached 

 in plants grown north than it is in plants grown at 

 the south. Consequently, when removed to a lati- 

 tude where the necessary amount of heat is realized 

 earlier in the season than in their native homes, 

 they will vegetate that much sooner, and before 

 the plants of that latitude, or those brought from a 

 still warmer climate. It is true, that in the course 

 of time these plants will acquire the same vegeta- 

 tion degree, but it will require time to change the 

 original zero point or vegetation degree so as to 

 make them harmonize. 



The next proposition was this : Admitting the 

 mean temperature to be the same nortli and south, 

 still, as the vegetation degree would be reached 

 earlier by the removal south, plants would mature 

 that much sooner there than they Avould at tlie 

 north, because vegeiatiou would commence that 

 much earlier in the season; but if, in addition to 

 this, we increase the 7ncan temperature south, that 

 will of itself hasten the maturity of plants in pro- 

 portion to the increase of the v}ean tem.peratnre. 

 In support of this proposition we quoted the fol- 

 lowing remarks from an essay read by De Can- 

 dolle before the Academy of Science at Paris : "It 

 is plain that a great heat during a short period mivst 

 produce the same effect on plants. with a less degree 

 of heat during a longer term." This is the propo- 

 sition so nmch objected to bj' J. B. C. It is true, 

 the author does not qualify his language, and for a 

 very plain reason, — he knew tiiat those who w^ere 

 in search of truth would confine the proposition to 

 its appropriate subject matter, the amount of heat 

 essential to mature, not to destroy plants. If this 

 proposition is in fact erroneous, it was highly com- 

 mendable in J. B. 0. to advise others of the error, 

 and we hope he will forward a copy of his article 

 to the Academy of Science. But is it erroneous? 

 BoussiNGAULT savs : " There is an obvious relation 

 between a time a crop is upon the ground and the 

 mean temperature of the place or season where it 

 grows." In short, the table given below, compiled 

 from his work, shows tl.at a less 7nean temperature 

 required more days to mature plants than does a 

 higher mean temperature to accomplish the same 

 purpose. These experiments were made in places 

 where both zero point and mean temperature were 

 difl:erent, and they establish beyond controversy, 

 that when the zero point, in one instance, was 

 reached on the 15th day of February, and in the 

 other, not till the 1st of March, the mean tempera- 

 ture being the same in both cases, the same kind 



