4 On Paring and Burning. 



those of science agricultural discussions, carried on in a candid 

 and generous spirit, must be doing much good. They often 

 ventilate the question under discussion in all directions, and tend 

 by degrees to the establishment of principles useful to intelligent 

 men. Uniformity of opinion leads to stagnation, and this, in the 

 world of intellect, is as baneful as it is in the physical world, 

 whatever the relations may be in which stagnation may be 

 considered. Thus the discussions which appear from time to 

 time in our agricultural periodicals on paring and burning are 

 not so unprofitable as they may perhaps seem at first sight. For 

 my own part, I feel indebted to them for several hints, which 

 have much assisted me in the examination of the question : "Is 

 paring and burning, as a regular farm practice, founded on 

 correct principles or not ? " 



The object of the following pages is to record some experi- 

 mental investigations made on this subject, and to adduce 

 reasons, founded upon analytical evidence and well-established 

 agricultural experience, in support of my conviction that paring 

 and burning on some kinds of soils is not only a profitable 

 operation, but that it is, under certain circumstances, by far the 

 most rational plan of cultivation which can be adopted, in our 

 present state of knowledge, for raising upon some kinds of land 

 the largest amount of produce with the least expenditure of 

 money. 



OBJECTIONS AGAINST PARING AND BURNING. 



Various objections have been raised against paring and burn- 

 ing, amongst which the following three are the principal : 



1. This practice has been condemned by some writers on the 

 subject, because it destroys the organic matters in the soil, and 

 thus causes a waste in a most important class of fertilising con- 

 stituents. 



2. Others less speculative, and therefore ready to acknow- 

 ledge the benefits arising from paring and burning, notwith- 

 standing object to it because they maintain that, although two or 

 three good crops can be grown after paring and burning, this 

 operation will leave the land afterwards in such an exhausted 

 condition that the cost of bringing it again into a profitable 

 state of cultivation will be found greater than the temporary 

 benefit derived from paring and burning. 



3. It is objected to on the ground of expense, and maintained 

 that it is more profitable to lay out money in the purchase of 

 guano, superphosphate, or other artificial manures, than to spend 

 it in paring and burning. 



Let us examine these three objections : 



1st. With regard to the first objection, it will be observed that 

 it is taken for granted that organic matters are soil-constituents, 



