L 65 ] 



Remarks on the Smut and Mildew of Wheat; with hints 



on the 7nost probable means of prevention. 



By A. Fothergill, M. D. F. R. S. £^c. ^c. 



Fiat iLxperhyientuTn.'—BACo'ix, 

 Read November 11th, 1806. 



The Society at our last meeting, having requested 

 my opinion on the nature of the disease, I must ob- 

 serve that the subject appears hitherto to be too little 

 understood to admit of a clear and satisfactory elucida» 

 tion. Such useful hints however, as occur to my recol- 

 lection, I will now lay before the Society without re- 

 serve. 



This and almost every disease, however different in 

 its nature, which renders fruit or grain unproductive has 

 been called a blight — a generic term of indefinite sig- 

 nification which writers on husbandry have adopted, 

 without proper discrimination : thus the smut, the mil- 

 dew or rust, the effects of lightning, of sudden changes 

 of weather, and the depredations of insects have all pas- 

 sed indiscriminately under the general, though vague 

 appellation of blights. Writers have, however, liberal- 

 ly furnished us w ith sundry infallible remedies so called 

 against blights in general, and particulai'ly against smut, 

 but these infallibles, when put to the test, have generally- 

 had the misfortune to fail. 



The smut of grain is easily distinguished by the black 

 dust which covers the ear, seemingly as if sprinkled 

 with soot; whereas the mildew or rust infests the stem 

 and leaves with yellow and dark brown stains, and forms 

 an orange coloured dust, which viewed with a good 



tr 



