61 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



Feb. 



For the J\ew England Farmer 

 THE POTATO ROT ONCE MOKE 



Mr. Editor : — At the close of the article in 

 your last paper on the cause of the potato rot, you 

 sugf^ested the propriety of discontinuing the dis- 

 cussion of the question for the presmt, until 

 some new light slumld break forth ujjon it. With 

 the propriety of this suggrstion I fully accord, as 

 I have no desire to protract the discussion, with- 

 out the prospect of obtaining furth'r light. Yet 

 it is due to myself and to the iiei/a/ive of the 

 question, that 1 should have the privilege of clos- 

 ing the present discussion with a brief statement 

 of facts, so as to leave the question on the ground 

 of its true merits. I am willing to forego any re- 

 ply to Mr. Reed's last article, in order to have an 

 opportunity to present the merits of the question, 

 and the discussion that has been had upon it, in 

 its true light, to the public. 



Mr. Lyman Reed, of Baltimore, Maryland, has 

 undertaken to prove that the potato rot is caused 

 by insects. The position he has taken throws 

 the whole burden of proof upon his shoulders. 

 He must prove it to be a fact, that insects cause 

 the potato rot, or fail to do what he has under- 

 taken. By the rules of all just controversy, I am 

 not bound to prove the negative of the question; 

 I may do it, if I ])lease ; but I am not bound to 

 do it. All that can be expected of me, is candidly 

 to admit his facts as far as they are true, boldly 

 to rebut and disprove his assertions and inferen- 

 ces when they are untrue ; in other words, to 

 show that they are untrue in point of fact, or that 

 they do not apply to the question at issue. 



As yet, Mr. Reed has produced but one solita- 

 ry fact to show that insects are the cause of the 

 potato rot. He says that he and others, by the 

 aid of the microscope, have seen insects on pota- 

 toes, performing the work of destruction. For 

 the sake of argument, it has been admitted that 

 ]\Ir. Reed and others have seen, what they say 

 they saw, insects on certain diseased potatoes. 

 But the inference which he attempts to draw from 

 this admitted fact, viz., that insects are the cause 

 of the potato rot, has been denied ; because it is 

 believed, that they are not the cause, but the ef- 

 fect or consequent of it ; in other Avords, that the 

 potatoes were thoroughly diseased before the in- 

 sects were seen upon them. For it seems to be a 

 general and universal law, in the economy of Di- 

 vine Providence, that all vegetable and animal 

 matter, going to decay, whatever be the cause of 

 the decay, should waste away, be consumed, and 

 used up, in giving existence to myriads of insects. 

 This law applies as well to vegetables as to ani- 

 mals ; so that the mere fact of finding insects on 

 rotten or diseased potatoes, is no proof of their 

 being the cause and origin of the rot, any more 

 than the finding of insects in the bodies of dead 

 animals, is a proof that insects have killed those 

 animals. 



I have, therefore, solicited Mr. Reed's particu- 

 lar attention to the point at issue. I have asked 

 him to prove, if he can, not only that insects are 

 an adequate and sufficient cause of the rot, but that 

 they are the only and original cause of the disease. 

 This he has failed to do, at least to my satisfac- 

 tion. In my last communication, lest this dis- 

 cussion should vent itself in a windy war of 

 words, I invited Mr. Reed's attention to eight 



well-known, stubborn and opposing facts — facts 

 which are the result of careful observation and 

 experience, well known to all good farmers, aiul 

 utterly inconsistent with the insect theory. And 

 yet Mr. Reed has not seen fit either to admit, or 

 to deny those facts. John Goldsbury. 



Wanvick, Dec. 17, 1860. 



THE SPBUCE FIR, [Abies Excelsa.] 



Many of our common farmers have begun to 

 embellish the grounds about their dwellings with 

 shrubs and shade trees. They find advantages in 

 so doing, independently of the pleasure derived 

 from merely looking at them. They shelter the 

 house from high winds, break the force of storms 

 of hail, rain and snow, and temper the fierce suns 

 of summer. Thus they save paint and fuel, and, 

 when it is needed, aff"ord a grateful and refresh- 

 ing shade. These are, certainly, considerations. 

 And so is the beauty which they give to the land- 

 scape, and that air of home, snugness and shelter- 

 ing warmth or shade which they afford to the 

 house in which those farmers live. 



But when they look farther, and find that these 

 trees have a direct influence upon the climate — 



