72 MASSACHUSETTS AGRICULTURE. 



These figures indicate that, for corn alone, manure should 

 be cross-ploughed, or ploughed in. The excess of products on 

 land cross-ploughed over that ploughed only, is not, however, 

 sufficient to warrant the increased ex]3ense. 



The average, per acre, of the second crop, small grains, in all 

 the experiments, was : 



No. 2, manure cross-ploughed in, . . $29 53 



No. 1, manure ploughed in, . . . 29 51 



No. 3, manure harrowed in, . . . 28 84 



No. 4, manure on the surface, . . . 24 23 



These results are, relatively, about the same as in the previous 

 crop, and the same remarks are applicable, with the addition tliat, 

 for a rotation of corn and small grains, the manure ploughed in 

 for corn should be brought up by the plough, and mixed with the 

 soil, before the second crop is sown. 



The average, per acre, of the third crop, grass, in all the 

 experiments, was: 



No. 2, manure cross-ploughed in, . . 129 00 



No. 3, manure harrowed in, . . . 27 16 



No. 4, manure on the surface, . . . , 24 78 



No. 1, manure jDloughed in, . . . 24 40 



We have here different results. No. 2 still has the lead ; 

 No. 3 and No. 4 have each advanced one step, while No. 1 has 

 dropped to the foot of the list. The conclusion follows that for 

 grass, after grain crops, (and the same is doubtless true for grass 

 as the sole crop) manure should be kept near, but below the 

 surface. It may appear, however, that, for reasons which will 

 be suggested. No. 1 occupies too low a place in this comparison. 



Averaging the value, per acre, of the four plots numbered 1, 

 the four plots numbered 2, &c., for the whole course in rotation, 

 we have the following: 



No. 2, manure cross-ploughed in, . . 8125 29 



No. 1, manure ploughed in, . . . 120 18 



No. 3, manure harrowed in, . . . 118 87 



No. 4, manure on the surface, . . 106 25 



