40 TALKS ON MANURES. 



years, until he needs it again for corn, etc. This is " slow farm- 

 iflg," but it is also good farming — that is to say, it gives large 

 yields per acre, and a good return for the labor expended. 



The soil of this farm is richer to-day in available plant-food than 

 when first cleared. It produces larger crops per acre. 



Mr. D. called our attention to a fact that establishes this point. 

 An old fence that had occupied the ground for many years was 

 removed some years since, and the two fields thrown into one. 

 Every time this field is in crops, it is easy to see where the old 

 fence was, by the short straw and poor growth on this strip, aa 

 compared with the laud on each side which had been cultivated 

 for years. 



This is precisely the result that I should have expected. If Mr. 

 D. was a poor farmer — if he cropped his land frequently, did not 

 more than half-cultivate it, sold everything he raised, and drew 

 back no manure — I think the old fence-strip would have given the 

 best crops. 



The strip of land on which the old fence stood in Mr. Dewey's 

 field, contained more plant-food than the soil on either side of it. 

 But it was not available. It was not developed. It was latent, 

 inert, insoluble, crude, and undccomposed. It was so much dead 

 capital. The land on either side which had been cultivated for 

 years, produced better crops. Why ? Simply because the stirring 

 of the soil had developed more plant-food tban had been removed 

 by tbe crops. If the stirring of the soil developed 100 lbs. of plant- 

 food a year, and only 75 lbs. were carried off in the crops — 25 lbs. 

 being left on the land in the form of roots, stubble, etc. — the land, 

 at the expiration of 40 years, would contain, provided none of it 

 was lost, 1,000 lbs. more available plant-food than the uncultivated 

 strip. On the other hand, the latter would contain 3,000 lbs. more 

 actual plant-food per acre than the land which had been cultivated 

 — but it is m an unavailable condition. It is dead capital. 



I do not know that I make myself understood, though I would 

 like to do so, because I am sure there is no point in s icntific farm- 

 ing of greater importance. Mr. Geddes calls grass the "pivotal 

 crop ' of American agriculture. He deserves our thanks for the 

 word and the idea connected with it. But I am inclined to think 

 the pivot on which our agriculture stands and rotates, lies deeper 

 than this. The grass crop creates nothing — dcvelopes nothing. 

 The uiitilled and unmanured grass lands of Herkimer County, in 

 this State, are no richer to-day than tliey were 50 years ago. The 

 pastures of Cheshire, England, except those that have been top- 

 dressed with bones, or other manures, arc no more productive that 



