2S2 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER, 



MARCH IS 



18-7. 



exert our best efforts that our own sliiill be as 

 agreeable to you as possible. 



Accept, Sir, llie assurance of the high consiil- 

 eraiion witli wliich I liave tiie honor to sa- 

 lute you. ToUGARD, 



President of the Hoit. Society of Rouen. 



Voted, That the thuuks of the Society be pre- 

 sented to Dr Fischer, Professor of Holany of the 

 Imperial Guj'ilen of St Petersburg, for a valuable 

 collection of seeds, and that the Corresponding 

 secretary be requested to communicate to him the 

 same. 



[coPT OF Di! Fischer's lettf.r..] 



Sr Petersbijro, June 1, 1836. 

 To Robert Treat Paine, Esq., 



Corresjiondiiig Secretary iviaps. Hurt. Society. 



Sill : — 1 take the liberty to direct to you a 

 second catalogue of seeds of the Inip;rial Botanic 

 Garden, together with a choice of sutli seeds, as 

 I suppose acceptable to you, and worth your cul- 

 tivati )U. I shall send this small jiarcel to Ham- 

 burgh, svhere the Russian General Consul, will de- 

 liver it to the care of the Consul of the U. States. 

 This will always be a sure and safe way of com- 

 munication. 



I remain. Sir, with true respect, 

 your most obe't servant, 



F. E. L. FiscHF.R. 



(Fortlie New England Farmer.) 



Northampton, March 3, I837.» 

 Mr Fb:ssF,NDE.\, Sir : — Injustice to Mr Tucker, 

 1 must ask your indulgence for a few lines in your 

 N. E. Farmer. I was not aware, till I savy Mr 

 Tucker's comniimication, that Mr Fancher did 

 not add a postscript to the letter he wrote to 

 the Editor of the Fanner, but did so in that which 

 was ptdilished in the Northampton Courier, — not 

 having the pleasure of the acquaintance of ]Mr 

 Fancher, — I had no other source for information 

 but the Courier. As it respecis the other com- 

 munications, it appears by Mr Tucker's account, 

 that 1 was misinforuiod ; of course 1 shall not have 

 the rudeness to doubt his word, and cheerlully give 

 Iiini credit. What then is the amount of his reit- 

 erated charges against ULe? Simply this: that 

 several gentlemen purchased mulberry seed of my 

 agent, which has disappointed both myself and 

 thein-^as respects its vitality — and in their case 

 as to ihe sort it should produce ; tln-iefore reason 

 the gentlemen — Mr Whilniarsh intended it as a 

 fraud upon the public. There are cerlain persons 

 in the world, who are ever suspicious that those 

 with whom they are dealing, wish to cheat them. 

 I envy not such persons their feelings; it is in 

 vain to attempt to convince them to the contrary. 

 'J'here is one consolation, however, their thinking 

 so does not uor cannot |)rove it so. Allow me to 

 state the charge upon which 1 am brought before 

 the public. It is '^ that I sent out nuilberry seed 

 from Europe, with directions to my agent to ad- 

 vertise and sell it as the inulticaulis ; which has 

 proved to be nothing but the white ; and this too 

 with the intention of taking advantage of the [lub- 

 lic." Now Sir, for the facts. In the first p!ace, 

 the seed never was advertised nor sold as multi- 

 caulis. The advertisement, which has been so of- 

 ten copied, will speak for itself. It will be seen 

 that mullicaulis trees and genuitic Chinese mul- 

 berry seed, were advertised. Now, sir, the latter 



part of the advertisement, Chinese, &c. must have 

 been accidental, as my agent suyiposed, till my re- 

 turn, and till he re(;eived the secil, that it was mul- 

 ticaulis. i merely mention this to show that it 

 was not so advertised. Notice was given, by let- 

 ter, by the newspaper, and verbally, to all, it was 

 supposed, that Ihis seed was not the inulticaulis, 

 but what wascallcd the Chinese, of :i /iarrfiVr char- 

 acter, and well adapted to our climate. .\'ine 

 tenths of all the seed sold, was taken as such. It 

 appears some few persons understood it as the 

 mullicaulis, .and the seed, unlorlunately, in some 

 instances failing, iias brought about this tfar. Now 

 sir, had I reserved the seed and raised the trees, 

 I shoul ■! have realized ni. re than <e?i times the 

 amount which I have done, and have reserved to 

 myself the chance of cheating the public on a larg- 

 er scale. But I am found out, and must adopt 

 some other course. Seriously, sir, every per.son 

 who has one hundred plants from a paper of that 

 seed, has more in value (for raising silk,) than 

 twice the number of those ti.ey so much 

 sought after. Those who wish the mullicaulis 

 exactly like those froMi the cuttings, must still 

 raise them from cuttings. It is the cheapest and 

 best way. Those who wish for other varieties, 

 may try the seed. We have what are called the 

 Canton multicaulis, raised here from Cantoti seed, 

 and which is certainly better than the original ; 

 and I now would refieat it to those who wish the 

 identical tree not to try the see(!, they will be disap- 

 pointed if they ilo. I had liked to have gone off 

 and forgotten my friend. I would ask him why 

 he has not informed his injured corre-pondents, 

 through his columns, from the Couii(M', of my of- 

 fer to all those wl'O were ciieateri, to call for 

 another paper, gratis) He says I have petty 

 quarrels with seedsmen. I never qiiarrelleil with 

 any one. I shall not u ith him, as I supjjose un- 

 less he visits a certain Fish Market in England, he 

 can say nothing worse than he has said. And if 

 in his travels, he should lake Northa:npton in his 

 way, I will extend to him every attention and 

 courtesy a gentleman should receive. 

 Respectfully, 



Samuel Whitmabsii. 



Should Mr Tucker wish ti) re;ily to the above, 

 our cidumns are at his service, hut we hope the 

 controversy will close with his an&wer ; if he 

 should wish to comnuinicate anything further on 

 a subject which has no interest with most of our 

 readers. — [Ed. 



CUTTING CORN STALKS. 



Many years ago, I was induced by some argu- 

 ments I heard among our old farmers in relation 

 to cutting corn stalks, to make an experiment on 

 the subject. I cut the stalks from a row, earlier 

 than usual ; then at the usual time tor cutting 

 stalks, I cut the row next to il, and the third row 

 I left uncut until harvest time. At harvest time 

 I examined the three rows, by stripping down the 

 husks as they stood in the tield, and perceiving 

 but little difference, I satisfied myself without ei- 

 ther measuring nr weighing; for being then but 

 an inexperienced boy, I was not aware cf the er- 

 rors that people might be led into, by leaving a 

 part to guess work ; and being trained to the prac- 

 tice of cutting stalks, I could scarcely endure the 

 slovenly appearance of letting them remain on till 

 harvest time, aiul therefore made up my mind, 

 that, taking into consideration the value of the 



value of the stalks for fodder, we might as well 

 cut the stalks as taught by our anccstois. .Agree- 

 ably to this conclusion, I have practised a part of 

 the time since ; and although convinced that sound 

 philosophy was against me, yet concluded the loss 

 in corn would probably but about balance the s;;. 

 ving in stalks, and so contented myself to delay a 

 more thorough investigation, and most likely 

 should ever have remained contented so to do, had 

 I not taken an agricultural paper ; for it was in 

 one of these vehicles of infmination that I read 

 the communicaiion of \V. Clark, and some others 

 last summer on this point, that gave the result of 

 experiments too convincing to ]:ass by without no- 

 tice. Therefore I was induced to try a more 

 thorough experiment than I had before made, the 

 result of which, alihough contrary from my autic- 

 ijiation, even after having examined it in the fieM 

 as before, for here we could not believe the dif- 

 ference to be so great, I am constrained to sub- 

 mit for the consideration of your readers, with u 

 hope that many of them will next year make a 

 full and fiir trial, and that too without guessing 

 at part or all. And having made such a trial 

 will communicate the result to the public, through 

 the medium of your paper, and thus not only great- 

 ly increase the value of your publication, but es- 

 tablish a fact that may in ten years time be worth 

 millions to o;ir State alone. The spot selected 4br 

 my experiment, was not at the corners or outer 

 edge of the field, bul was chosen within the field, 

 where the soil appeared of equal quality, and the 

 whole being managed alike, except the time of 

 rutting the stalks — here the stalks were cut from 

 four rows, earlier than the usual time, say about 

 the time the corn was in full milk — next to these, 

 four rows were left uncut till harvest time, and 

 next to the last mentioned, four rows were cut at 

 the usual time of cutting stalks, that is, when the 

 top had become crisp, and before the main stalk 

 and leaves had perished. At harvest time, each 

 parcel was g.-ithereil in one day, and kept separate 

 till well dried, when the weight was found to be 

 in the following proportion : On the same quanti- 

 ty of ground that produced 133 1-3 lbs. where the 

 stalks were not cut, I had 100 lbs. where they 

 were cut at the usual time, and 78 lbs. whewe they 

 were cut earliest, the quality of the corn where 

 the stalks were not cut, being by far the best, and 

 the early cut the poorest. In another part of the 

 field, a trial was made with a different kind of 

 corn, on two rows side by side, and the result was 

 nearly similar. But this being a later sort of 

 corn, the frost injured it .some, so that the ex[)eri- 

 ment was not so fiiir as the other. 



The season last year, was a j)eculiar one ; and 

 the result may be difterent in a different season ; 

 but the subject is one of great importance and should 

 be thoroughly tested. To be sure there is a little 

 trouble attending such an experiment ; but what 

 is it? perhaps worth 50 or 100 i-cnts — and what 

 may the experiment he worth tocomnmnity ? this 

 we cannot tell, but it may be va.st. Let us esti- 

 mate a little, Ibunding our estimate on the result 

 of the above experiment. And here let me re- 

 mark, the expeiiment of Wm. Claik, above spok- 

 en of, gave nearly a similar result. 



Suppose a farmer has for 25 years past, raised 

 100 bushels of corn per year, on an average, and 

 cut his stalks as has been usual with the greater 

 [lortion of farmers, he would each year, accord- 

 ing to our position, have had an addition of 33 

 1-3 bushels, provided he had left his stalks uncut 



