14 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



Jan. 



symmetry of their forms, and the brightness of 

 their looks. The one partly Durham uas most ad- 

 mired. Whether their weight -was G.300 or 7000 

 pounds, I cannot say ; their keeper was rather sliy 

 of scales. At all events, they were big enough, 

 and fat enough, to rejoice the hearts of many on a 

 Thanksgiving day, provided all the turkeys had run 

 off, and there should be no extended liquor around, 

 and no liitle man to extend it. 



As "line upon line" and "precept upon precept" 

 have ever been helpers in a good cause, I send 

 you such views as have occurred to my mind in 

 relation to underdraining — in the course of some- 

 what extended observations, on some of the best 

 conducted farms in our county the past season. 

 The motto of our farmers is, "Make the best of 

 what you have." If a man can, by an expenditure 

 of fifty dollars per acre, make his lands produce 

 two, three, or four times as much, as without such 

 expenditiu'e, this I reckon good economy. I can 

 point out many instances, within a few miles dis- 

 tance, where this has been done, and I trust there 

 are many other fields where it will be done. 



Truly yours, j. \v. P. 



South Danvers, Nov. 16, 1859. 



For the New England Farmer 

 FRENCH'S FARM DRAINAGE. 



With a simple "please accept," I received some 

 time since a copy of this work from the editor of 

 the Farmer. It was an acceptable present ; al- 

 though it suggested the thought that I was in- 

 debted for the gift rather to Gov. Brown's personal 

 knowledge of the "thorough drainage" of my 

 ])urse, than to any successful experiments in the 

 application of the system to my laud. 



I have read the book carefully ; "road, not to 

 contradict and refute, nor to believe and take for 

 granted, but to weigh and consider." I do not 

 propose to attempt a "review" of the Avork. This 

 has been done by abler pens. I wish simply to 

 give expression to a few thoughts which its j^erusal 

 has suggested to my mind. And if, in doing so, 

 I shall indulge in a little fault-finding, I think it 

 will be gratifying to the author, by way of variety ; 

 for, so far as I have seen, the numerous "notices" 

 of his book have been of unmixed commendation 

 and praise. 



As I have not the vanity to suppose that my 

 opinions are entitled to a very conspicuous posi- 

 tion among the practical suggestions of your cor- 

 respondents, I propose to v,rite a few short arti- 

 cles, that may be put into any spai-e corner of your 

 pages, on some of the many topics discussed m 

 the "Farm Drainage ;" and will begin with the 



ANTIQUITY OF DRAINAGE. 



After a brief introductory chapter, our author 

 enters upon the "History of the Art of Draining" 

 with the following opening sentence : 



"The art of removing superfluous water from land must 

 be as ancient as the art of cultivation ; and from the time 

 when Noah and his family anxiously watched the subsid- 

 ing of the waters into their appropriate channels, to the 

 present, men must have felt the ill effects of too much 

 water, and adopted means more or less effective to remove 

 it." p. 24. 



I must confess to great veneration for antiquity. 

 I believe 'there is much truth in the declaration 

 that "there is nothing new under the sun," not- 



withstanding the many "new" inventions of our 

 progressive age. The question of the antiquity of 

 drainage is, therefore, to my mind, a most impor- 

 tant one. For if farmers in other times, and in 

 circumstances similar to our own, have found 

 draining necessary, then miay we reasonably con- 

 clude that eventually we shall be obliged to pur- 

 sue the same course. 



The Bible contains frequent allusions to agri- 

 culture, during some four thousand years of man's 

 occupation of the soil, in countries where "thou 

 sowest thy seed, and waterest it with thy foot," as 

 well as in those "of hills and valleys that drinketh 

 water of the rain of heaven," and as a part of that 

 history, which is philosophy teaching by example, 

 is, I think, very properly alluded to by our author in 

 this connection ; however some may be disposed to 

 smile at the idea of a Bible argument on draining. 



His specific allusion to the Flood naturally di- 

 rected mv attention to the ^Mosaic account of that 

 event. \Ve are told that on the first day of the 

 first month of the 601st year of Noah's age, he 

 removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and 

 l)ehold Xhcfuce of the gi-ound was dry. Nearly two 

 months longer did the "anxious" voyagers remain 

 in the ark. The "water of ckainage" was still in 

 the soil. Impatiently may we suppose they watched 

 the sloM' process of its removal. Finally, in the 

 second month, on the seven-and-twentietli day of 

 the month, was the eurtli dried — "thoroughly 

 drained." Noah came forth from the ark, and the 

 Almighty covenanted with him, "neither shall there 

 any more be a flood to destroy the earth." 



Turning over a single leaf of the sacred record, 

 we find, in the account of Lot's separation from 

 Abram, that the plain of Jordan was chosen — not 

 because it was thoroughly drained, not because the 

 ill effects of too much water did not happen to he 

 felt there, but simply because "itica-sicell umtered 

 everywhere." And from Genesis to the parable of 

 our Saviour, in which the seed of the sower "with- 

 ered away because it lacked moisture." frequent 

 references are made to ill effects of drouth, Init, 

 so far as I am aware, not a solitary one to "the 

 ill effects of too much water." 



As a curse, it is said "the rebellious dwell in a 

 dry land;" and as a reward to the righteous, "he 

 shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water." 

 It is promised that "he that watereth. shall him- 

 self bo Avatered ;" but nowhere except in some 

 new translaVon that I have not seen, is it said, 

 "he that draincth, shall himself be drained." 



In relation to the writings of "Cato, Columella 

 and Pliny," Avho, otu- author informs us, mention 

 draining, I can say nothing, because I haA~e never 

 seen tlieir -works. In this connection, hoAvever, I 

 Avill allude to a statement, Avhich I saw not long 

 since in a neAvspaper, to the etlect that the Em- 

 peror Napoleon had rettu-ned from his Italian cam- 

 paign an enthusiastic advocate of uTigation. 



That the agriculture of the Chinese furnishes 

 little evidence of the antiquitj- of draiiiing may be 

 inferred from the fact that, among a set of models 

 of Chinese agricultural implements noAV in the 

 Museum of this State, there is not a single one 

 adapted to any of tho processes of draining, Avhile 

 tAvo of the most ex])ensive and complicated are 

 machines for irrigation. 



But all this argument Avas scarcely necessary, on 

 my part. The chapter Avhich thus opens Avith the 

 assertion that draining must be as old as the art 



