On Smut in Wheaty ^^ 



good order, and in good time. Mr. Barton's crop was 

 iVee from smut, at the following hai'vest, but the crops 

 tpf the other two persons were much infected.* 



Mr. Somerville in the paper before quoted upoi> 

 blight, smut and mildew in wheat, says that from his 

 own observation, aided by the testimony of the most res- 

 pectable farmers, the salt pickle has always prevented 

 the crop from suffering by smut, where it has been ju- 

 diciously applied, yet that under certain circumstances, 

 it may be injurious. 



3. In the Farmer's Magazine,t we find the following, 

 remarks, under the Banffshire quarterly agi'icultural re- 

 port: "what wheat we have, where free of smut, is of 

 excellent quality. The advantage of pickling was ap- 

 parent in a patch, where part had been pickled, and pan 

 of it not. The former was very little touched, while the 

 latter was at least a fifth or sixth smutted. Several in- 

 stances of this kind shew the utihty of that preparation, 

 and though it may not at all times be an entire preven- 

 tive, it should not be omitted." 



A writer in the same volume : J who signs J. W. and 

 dates from Norfolk, offers for a trifling premium per 

 acre, to insure the whole seed of England from injury 

 by pickling, and the crop from being damaged by smut, 

 provided the following recipe be judiciously applied. 



'' Steep your wheat five or six hours in water brought 

 from the sea, or in common water salted, till it is strong 



* Barton's Medical and Physical Journal. 2 Supplement, 

 f Vol. 5. page 483, printed at Edinburg. An excellent work, 

 which ought to be in the possession of every farmer. 

 \ Page 443. 



