CULTIVATION OF PLANTS. 



sand eight hundred and forty hills, or nineteen thousand three hundred and 

 sixty stalks. An acre planted three by two and a half feet will have five 

 thousand eight hundred and eigtht hills, or twenty-three thousand two hundred 

 and thirty-two stalks. An acre planted in drills at three feet, and the plants 

 in the rows at six inches distance, would have twenty-nine thousand and forty 

 stalks. An acre planted in double drills, 



six inches apart, the plants nine inches in the rows, and three feet nine inches 

 from the centre of the drills, would have thirty thousand nine hundred and 

 seventy stalks. An acre planted three rows in a drill, thus, 



rows six inches apart, and the plants nine inches in the rows, with a distance 

 of three feet from the centre 01 the drills and this was the way adopted by the 

 Messrs. PRATTS to produce their great crop would have forty-three thousand 

 five hundred and sixty stalks. Reduced to a tabular form, and a gill of corn 

 to a stalk allowed, and the result would be thus: 



Rows 4 feet by 4, 10,888 stalks, 42 bushels, fractions omitted. 

 3 " 3, 19,360 " 75 " " 



3 " 2J, 23,232 93 " " 



Drills 3 feet, plants 



6 inches, 

 Double drills as 



above, 

 Triple drills as 



29,040 " 113 

 30,970 " 120 



above, 43 > 560 



The difference is indeed most striking, yet how few there are that will profit 

 by such lessons. We continue to plant our corn so as to get only from forty- 

 five to fifty bushels an acre, when the same soil is able to give us eighty or a 

 hundred. But we satisfy ourselves with the reflection, that our fathers were 

 as wise as most men, and they always planted their corn in hills, and why 

 should we deviate from such a practice. The best corn we have ever raised, 

 or seen raised, was planted in rows two and a half feet apart, and the corn 

 eighteen inches in the rows, two stalks standing together, being the same as if 

 planted in hills at three by two and a half feet. 



There can be no possible doubt of another thing in planting, and that is, our 

 farmers are far too economical of their seed corn. Better to use double the 

 seed actually required, than to have your land but half supplied with plants. 

 There is an advantage too in being able to select the most vigorous plants at 

 hoeing, while the weak and sickly ones, not being needed to stock the field, can 

 at once be rejected. Judge BUEL has estimated the expense of raising a crop 

 of corn at fifteen dollars per acre, allowing five dollars for rent of land. Now, 

 if a farmer gets, allowing the corn worth fifty cents per bushel, sixty bushels, 

 he makes fifteen dollars an acre; if but twenty bushels, he loses five dollars; 

 making a difference in the profits of twenty dollars between twenty and sixty 

 bushels an acre, or one hundred dollars on a piece of five acres. Corn, when 

 properly cultivated, is a most valuable crop, and when, as for several years 

 past it has, commanded seventy-five cents a bushel, it is a very profitable one. 

 It ought, moreover, to be remembered, that the extra manuring and tilling re- 

 quired to produce a heavy crop of corn, is abundantly repaid in the increased 

 quantities of wheat, barley, or grass that may follow. Twenty acres of good 

 land is better than fifty of poor; and a man will be much more likely to get 

 forty bushels of wheat, or fifty of barley, from land that has produced a hun- 

 dred bushels of corn to the acre, than from that which will not produce one- 

 fifth that amount. It is contrary to the order of nature, that manure and labour 

 applied to the earth should be lost. 



