90 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER, 



SEPT. SO, 184 3 



CUTTING CORN STALKS, &c. 

 We have ihounht wo could not belter answer 

 the queries of " A New Subscriber" respecting the 

 matters of topping corn and curing the stalks, than 

 by re-publishing parts of a communication on those 

 subjects, by Hon. \Vm. Clark, Jr., of Northampton, 

 in the N. E. Far. vol. x. p. 21)7. 



" I have made a small experiment the past sea- 

 son, to ascertain the damage, if any, that results to 

 the corn crop, from topping tlie stnlks in the usual 

 way. * * As the cxpernnent seems to me to 

 involve the interests of corn grouers, it may be 

 well to give a detailed statement of the case, so 

 tliat any interested may be able to draw their own 

 inferences. 



" For a few years past, I have not cut my corn- 

 stalks until the corn was harvested, guessinfr that 

 it was a course preferable to the one commonly 

 pursued in this part of the country, of topping the 

 stalks wjiile in a green state. But for the purpose 

 of settling this point more clearly, and with as 

 little trouble as the case would admit, I selected, 

 about the olii of September, a row of corn in a 

 field of about five acres, intending to take one that 

 would average in quality equal to the field through- 

 out, that I might at the same time be able to ascer- 

 tain with tolerable certainly, the product of the 

 whole field. The manure having been spread on 

 the surface of the ground and harrowed in length- 

 ways of ihe furrows, and the corn planted across 

 tlie furrows, made it apparently less difficult to se- 

 lect an average row. On this row [ cut the stalks 

 from half the hills ; beginning at one end and cut- 

 ting the first hill, then leaving the next uncut, and 

 so proceeding through the row. I had intended to 

 confine the experiment to this row, but finally was 

 led to extend it so far as to include four rows, and 

 numbering them agreeably to the order in which 

 they were standing in the field, this row may be 

 called No. 2. There were ninetytwo hills in the 

 row and the stalks were cut from fortysix hills, all 

 of them in the manner that is hero termed jointing, 

 (i.e.) cut off between the ear and the first joint 

 above the car. I thought they were somewhat 

 more ripe than is usual at the time of cutting; a 

 few of them were nearly dry. 



" My estimate of the number of hills on an acre, 

 was made in the following manner, and if I am 

 wrong in my calculations, I shall be corrected by 

 some of your readers : 



"In an acre of 200 feet square (or 40,000 square 

 feet,) there were sixtytwo rows, with fiftyfour hills 

 in a row, making 3348 hills. This is equal to 

 3fi46 hills per acre, each hill occupying nearly 12 

 square feet of surface. There were about four 

 stalks of corn in a hill. In estimating bushels, [ 

 have allowed the lawful weight of 50 lbs. to the 

 bushel. 



At the time of harvesting, the corn was husked 

 in the field. The fortysix hiils from wliich the 

 corn had been cut, gave 48 ] -2 pounds of ears; 

 and the fortysix hills on which the stalks had not 

 been cut, gave 62 pounds of ears. The number of 

 ears in the two cases was about the same; those 

 from the uncut hills were evidently the best filled 

 out and the most hale ; on a large proportion of 

 them the kernels were so wedged in, as to make it 

 difficult to bend the ear at all without breaking it. 

 There was very little mouldy corn in either case ; 

 a few ears were gathered, mostly from the cut 

 stalks, but the whole quantity was so small as to 

 make it questionable whether cutting the stalks 

 had much effect in this particular. 



•' Both parcels were carefully laid aside in a dry 

 chamber, lor about six or eight weeks, at the expi- 

 ration of which time they were again weighed, and 

 the parcel of ears from the uncut hills had lost in 

 drying, about two per cent, more than the other ; 

 affording some evidence that the sap continued to 

 circulate for a greater length of time, in the uncut 

 than in the cut stalks. The uncut hills gave 42 lbs. 

 8 oz. dry shelled corn, equal to 14 oz. 12.^ grs. per 

 hill, or 60 bushels and 8 pounds per acre. The 

 parcel from the cut hills gave 33 lbs. 7 oz., equal 

 to 11 oz. 10 grs. per hill, or 47 bushels and 18 lbs. 

 per acre ; making a loss of 12 bushels and 46 lbs. 

 per acre, by culling the stalks; — conclupive evi- 

 dence, that while the snp is in circulation, nature 

 does not assign the stalks an unprofitable office. 

 The product of this whole row, taken together, cut 

 and uncut hills, was equal to .53 bushels and 41 

 pounds per acre. 



The product of row No. 3, taken by itself, (con- 

 taining 92 hills, on one-half of which the stalks 

 were cut on the same day the others were,) would 

 not show the practice of cutting stalks quite so de- 

 structive in its effocts as that exhibitted in row 

 No. 2. Its whole produce was 77 lbs. !) oz. dry 

 corn, equal to ^5 bushels and 10 pounds per acre, 

 or 1 bushel and 25 lbs. per acre more than row 

 No. 2. 



" Not satisfied with resting the experiment here, 

 I gathered the corn on the rows Nos. 1 and 4, (i. e. 

 the rows each side, next adjoining No. 2 and 3,) 

 and on wliich none of the stalks had been cut. 

 These rows, together, contained 186 hills, and 

 their product of dry shelled corn was 171 lbs. 13 

 oz., equal to 14 oz. ]2i grs. per hill, or GO bushels 

 and 8 pounds per acre — precisely the same ave- 

 rage yield as that part of the row No. ^2, on which 

 the stalks had not been cut. This exact coinci- 

 dence, however, I think may be numbered .imong 

 those cases which rarely happen. 



"The difference between the two rows on which 

 half the stalks were cut, and the two rows on 

 which none of the stalks were cut, was 5 bushels 

 384 lbs. per acre. If this difference arose from 

 cutting half the stalks, (and I know of no other 

 reason,) then ciUting the whole would have reduc- 

 ed the crop 11 bushels and 21 lbs. per acre, or 

 froui 60 bushels and 8 pounds, to 48 bushels and 

 43 pounds per acre. 



'' To recapitulate. Row No. 2, on which the 

 experiment was commenced, is as follows : 40 

 hills on which the stalks had not been cut, gave 

 42 pounds and 8 oz. dry shelled corn, equal to, per 

 acre, 60 bush. 8 lbs. 



40 hills from which the stalks had 

 been cut, gave 33 lbs. and 7 oz. dry 

 shelled corn, equal to, per acre, 47 " 18 " 



Loss by cutting the stalks, per acre, 12 bush. 4G lbs. 

 The four rows, taken together, stand as follows: 



Nos. 1 nnd 4, on whicli no stalks were cut, gave 

 an average of, per acre, CO bu. 8 lbs. 



Nos. 2 and 3, from which half the 

 stalks were cut, gave an average of, 

 per acre, 54 " 25^ " 



Loss per acre by cutting i the stalks, 5 bu. 36i lbs. 



o 



Loss pr. acre by cutting all the stalks, 11 bu. 21 lbs. 



" The difference in the result of the two cases, 



is 1 bushel and 25 lbs. per acre; or, in the two ex- 



periments, there is an average loss by cutting 

 stalks, of 12 bushels 5 1-2 lbs. per. acre — a 

 quite equal to all the expense of hoeing, and 

 vesting, especially when we consider that in hoc 

 ing, the labor of making hills was dispensed wit 



" A measured bushel, from the cut hills, weigh* 

 57 lbs. 6 oz. ; 1 pound less than frcun the uncui 

 the shrinkage being very nearly equal to the who 

 loss in weight. 



"If this experiment ie a fair test, it seems th; 

 ahout twenly per cent, or one-fiflh part of Ihe cro] 

 is destroyed, by ciditn^ the stalks in the tony thi 

 are vsiially cut. If furtlim' experiment should e 

 tabllsh this fuel, I think there are few fanners th 

 will hesitate long in deciding which is the mo* 

 valuable, one acre of corn or five acres of toy 

 stalks. But this twenty per cent, is not saved i 

 the expense of losing the stalks: they are wort 

 as much, and I third: more, all tilings considere( 

 after the corn is harvested, than they are galliere 

 in the usual way. If after being bunched up in 

 green state, they heat or become mouldy, (a cas 

 of frequent occurrence,) they are utterly worthies! 

 except it be for manure ; I know of no animal tha 

 will eat them. But after they have once bee- 

 dried by the frost and wind, a subsequent mode 

 rate degree of mfuldiness seems to be no injurj 



"The course which I have pursued with then 

 has been as follows: In the first place, they ar 

 cut ofl^ near the ground, and for this purpose i 

 short scythe is found the most convenient instrul 

 nient. The expense of cutting in tliis manner i 

 but a trifle, if any, more than cutting the stu 

 stalks in the spring, and may with propriety be en 

 lered as an iieni of expense against the next crofi 

 for which it is preparing the ground. Alter cut 

 ting, they are gathered into bunches of suitabh 

 size for binding, and three good sheaves of ryi 

 straw, if wet, will be sufficient to bind a ton. li 

 gathering them up and laying in bunches, an ac 

 live boy will do as much as a man. In this wav 

 the whole expense of gathering, binding, and load 

 ing, will not exceed 75 cents per ton. As tliej 

 tare very bulky, for want of barn-room, 1 have then 

 stacked near the barn. It may be obji.'cted thai 

 they are not as good and nourishing as others gath- 

 ered in the usual way; as to that matter I am not 

 able to say ; but if the cattle are good judges ir 

 the case, and I think they ought to be admitted a: 

 such, they are quite a.s good and quite as nourish- 

 ing, for they are eaten, apparently, with quite as 

 good a relish. In addition to this, they are ob. 

 tained without breaking off ears, or breaking down 

 hills in hauling out, occurrences quite frequent in 

 the other case. And last, though not least, they 

 make more than double the quantity of manure, 

 the value of which will be duly appreciated by 

 every good farmer, without argument. It may be 

 said that the butt stalks can be gathered after har- 

 vest, and furnish the same quantity of litter and 

 manure as in this case: that is true; but the ex- 

 pense of gathering both parts in tliat way, from 

 the butts being so short and inconvenient to bind, 

 would be three times as much as it is to gather 

 them whole. 



" Thus viewing the suhjcct in various points, I 

 think this method of managing corn-stalks is much 

 better than the old one ; and that a little observa- 

 tion and experience will convince the most skepti- 

 cal, that this branch of agriculture is not yet 

 brought to a state of perfection — that there is yet 

 room for improvement. 



WM. CLARK, Jn." 



