66 Observations on Colonel Taylofs Letter. 



existence. Theories sink under facts ; and I depend on 

 the latter. Young grass does no harm. But I have lost 

 crops by plaistering clover ; and throwing up luxuriant 

 vegetation under wheat. 



You must get Dr. Seybert, or some other chemist, 

 to inform how to discover the quantity of the sulphuric 

 acid in plaister. It is good or bad, according to the 

 proportion of this acid contained in it. My way has 

 been to heat it in a dry pot ; and judge by the ebullition. 

 But I now take it as I can get it. I find hard or soft 

 stone very little different in effect ; though it makes a 

 great odds in pulverization. The colour is given by 

 metals — most commonly — by iron. It is a sulphat ; — 

 and its distinguishing characteristic is the sulphuric 

 acid. If Mr. T. would keep this in view, and attend to 

 the principles I have mentioned often, both in the 

 " agricultural inquiries" and in our memoirs, he would, 

 with his great industry, and agricultural, as well as 

 other capacities, help us all in developing causes. The 

 half bushel, doing as much as any quantity, is account- 

 ed for on these principles. Our pupil will soon be our 

 master. He wants no instruction. His facts agree with 

 my experience, ever smctgi/psum was used here. With 

 wheat or other culmiferous chaff-bearing crops, I never 

 found it anywise efficient : except that rolling the seed 

 in it gives an impetus to the first spring or shooting of 

 the plant. I wdsh Mr. T. would gradually banish the 

 heterodox custom of maize with wheat, in the same field. 

 But the southern farmers will never listen to this Penn* 

 sylvanianisme. We meet the fate of all preachers against 

 inveterate habits. 



