| 38—1846. ] 
THE AGRICULTURAL GAZETTE. 469 
Farmers' Clubs. 
Wernersy: June 18.— T'he Policy of Thin Sowing.— 
G. L. Fox, Esq., the proposer of the subject, was voted 
to the chair. 
Mr. Fox said, they had heard the policy ofthin sowing de- 
Signated as one of the greatest humbugs that had ever been 
brought before the country as an agricultural scheme. Now, 
he must say that he disagreed entirely with that opinion, and 
he did so because he believed that the reason why thin sowing 
9r dibbling had not E successful so far was that it had not 
Deen fairly t tried. In discussing this subject, the first thing 
they ought to consider was the preparation of the land, because 
the effect of thin sowing was different as the state of the land 
varied, Now, what was the old system of ploughing, and what 
were the effects which it produced? Many persons ploughe 
their land, year after year, and had done from time imme- 
morial, three or four inches eep, the subsoil never sla 
touched. Well, when the corn begun to vegetate, the roots 
tothe bottom of the ploughing, but no further, and then that 
Which Mr, Hannam had complained of took place. One o! 
consequences of their sowing was that the krain tillered ; that 
Was, it threw out a large head, with a small root, and the re- 
sult was that, in the case of a high wind, it was sean knocked 
about, the roots were torn up, and that ‘side which was more 
ee affected by the nad perished : on if the seed hap- 
potea to come to ma We BS was sure to be light and thin, 
oot of the seed was un 
enabled to aaah "n food as x B it could go, and this gave FH 
Strength to the plant which hardly any wind could affect. He 
ad had a good instance of this upon his own farm last year, in 
n experiment of which Mr. Garside had had the management, 
"They S dibbled two acres, using. three pecks to the acre in- 
ULT and they had tried two acres in the common 
The result was that the corn which 
Was ded aie Bs dud „by the winds and rain, whilst the 
moved, which S a pens proof Ven m roots had got suf- 
Drw. vard in TENE of the Poir of p or t] wing. 
Fox here produced a specimen of the c ofthis dibbled 
heat, which he said he must tell th at a time 
which they would think absurd ; mE itcertainly was impossible 
that it could be done by farm eneral, butit might be done 
y Pone and by those who BOCA o try experiments. 
Now, this specimen, which had been taken up at random from 
among many others, was the produce of a single grain of Wheat. 
It was sown on the 3d June, and reaped on the “oth November, 
and contained, in the whole,141 ears, This Wheat was dibbled in 
two feet between the rows, and six inches between each grain; 
and it all came up and tillered as they saw in the specimen 
before them. 
Mr, Gaunt had hada good deal of experience in his time ; 
and, asfar as his humble demens directed him, he M 
with Mr. Fox. Sixteen years aj e had a man from Do; 
caster, with three boys, and donis dt Season they dibbled ae 
him 25 acres ofland. It was the rule where this man came 
from to mix a sack of Rape dust with two bushels of Wheat. 
he implement which he used consisted of three bars, whichhe 
Pressed into the soil with his foot, and thus made three rows 
of holes at atime. He MEE the mixture recommended by 
this man, adding a quarter of Rape dust. The experiment an- 
Swered remarkably well, the produce being quite equal to that 
qus land where one-third more Wheat had been sown, He 
"und the process to be slow—about an aere a day, at 7s. an 
CERE he thought he would try to invent a machineto make 
ore holes, and to do that quicker, and his idea was that a 
fedium.sized round table, with holes in the edge and an axle- 
ree through, and seven or eight holes for bars in the edge, 
W answer the purpose. EE then made a calculation for 
o many in 
UN in ER 
each hole a certain ene of rend ure. The 
mot being sufficient soil to cover the Beans and SING 
they experienced some little difficulty in this respect, 
Which, however, they eventually overcame; 
Was that the Beans came up with fine rosy tops, an 
Proved to be an excellent crop; besides which, although he 
employed so many hands and incurred so much additional ex- 
Pense, he calculated that the bushel of Beans saved in each 
acre (by sowing two instead of three bushels) more than com- 
Pensated. The efficiency of dibbling certainly depended much 
Upon the season, that was, whether the weather was such as 
fabled them to proceed with the work after they had once 
had pos from time to time, to dibble 
; but he ought to tell them that 
Nhen he. pounds the pained Hn to answer so well with Uu 
M consequence of the want of a proper oenar of soil, 
tried Rape m but that did e effect DU 
D at the plants came up crippled. So he did five acres with 
Ones, at the rate of two quarters of bones per acre. He kept 
Tat crops as by dibbling. Last year he purchased some of 
fallers zten rowed” Wheat, which ho dibbled at the rate of 
gent IUE to seven acres, having previousiy made a calcula- 
ich showed that to have the rows nineinches, and the 
Do B qus inches apart, it would take four grains of Wheat 
touch hole, This was after the 5th of November, and it was 
90 late, for bad esther! interred However, he employed a 
ed many hands to n the Wheat and Rape-dust; the 
almaot first, in this iode: By doing this they trod the soil 
The Ostlevel, so that E was not deut to cover the holes. 
iS sulfered froi xps wed la gne com i tho want of 
me. The o denn that the a s ed n might 
emp] i " e thought the fact, that they could 
sve o Oy So many ha pon and that they could save one half in 
eom d derive greater benefit from their crops, was an ample 
om à to that argument. He had derived great advantages 
adve dibbling himself, and therefore he was certainly a great 
9cate of the practice, 
Won T. BEILBY 
State DLE SUE differed. 
6 
i Derally sown two bushels or two Wu anda half per ore 
go aes the ground, in his opinion; and he resolved not to 
thon, SOR two bushels and a half per acre in quU) but he 
to that ot it Was not practicable to sow much less on land similar 
Would. ii e occupied, which was of that character that it 
tiller p admit of SUNG so deep as to enable the grain to 
Last yea, manne specimen exhibited by Mr, Fox, 
least ee S gained more than he ever did before by sow: ing the 
Ütmerg so —about two bushels per acre. He believed that most 
Were much Ca more corn than was useful; but three pecks 
much too little. Hi ht th 
and ¢ e. He thought that two bushels of Bea 
Wo of Barley would be found as near the mark as might 
| be; but after all a great reat deal of course depended upon the 
season. Thin sowing, in his opinion, would not prove bene- 
ficial on the sort of land which he occupied, He did not call 
two bushels thick sowing nor thin sowing, although it was 
both, in comparison with the plans practi tised by some. 
Mr. x, of North Deighton, declared himself to 
be a dissentient to the doctrine of thin sowing. He held dif- 
ferent opinions from those entertained by the OE Airai and by 
Mr. Gaunt. He would not say, and Mr. Beilby, because he did 
notthink two bushels per acre to be thin sowing. He took 
that to be e medium eae Be he should. therefore take 
Mr. Beilby on his own sit recommended two bushels per 
acre in dendo to tht "ee on the same principle as he 
would recomm nend a party to insure his house or stock, con- 
silering it policy to pay a small RE but certain sum, 
guard against an uncertain but great loss. e subject, it was 
aid, was one of great importance, and if the conclusions 
UD had been drawn on the other side el quite correct, 
they were very important, because they showed a saving of 
one-half the cost of seed. then SEO there were experi- 
ments on an sides of the Hasson and in his opinion there EP 
een as many pro as con—as many o] posed to as in favour 
thin sowing ; and if any [genre was inclined to dispute this 
assertion, he would at once. tu he volumes before him, 
and he would at once Se Senden to the agricultural jour- 
nals and volumes on the table, in whieh were to be found 
BU instances of the failure of thin sowing. But his own 
erience was unfortunate for the advocates of thin sowing. 
He had pointed out two cro} p to a neighbour the other day— 
ne n sown at the rate of a bushel and a half per 
aere, and the other two bushels and a half, and even at present 
the difference between the two was very great. And this was 
not the only experiment; there were several others, which 
proved to his satisfaction that thin sowing would not answer 
upon land of a poorer description than that of EE friends Tire 
site, where the plants could find PR of food and depth, aud 
thus became those gigantic sort of things of which thee had 
then a specimen before them. He weed not tell EEn thatit 
was useless to put a seventy stone bullock into a mi 
of pasture; neither need he tell them that whilst Pun might 
make up an Trish beast upon such land, they could not graze a 
"giant ox;” and, similarly, on sueh soil they could not 
rely upon produeing, as a rule, such mammoth specimens 
of Wheat as the one on the table. But, looking at both 
sides, how did the rationale of wer question. stand ? ? 
i er one great obst to arrivin, 
facts properly t parties are too apt d Seabee results to 
wrong causes, a d draw Co pd from partial premises 
and isolated facts. Now, M was an excellenti farmer 
his character did not aed. b OR MISES Ne bid 
done a great deal by deep draining, ploughing, and manuri ring 5 : 
and there very likely was the secret of his success. But 
he thought was, that the first principle upon which he pues] 
his practice was not correct, and that in fact Mr. Davis com- 
mitted the fault of generalist ing too much from, at best, but. a 
limited groundworl avis says, * It is 
extraordinary fact that Shit Wheat is naturally so pri olifie. ^ 
plant as to yield a thousand, for one, the return for the seed 
sown is about tenfold.” And again, “ Wheat yields 30 grains 
per ear, and as the ordinary return off every acre is at mos 
about 30 bushels, it follows that this quantity, no ed how 
much has been sown, can at most have come from the growth 
of the ears of one bushel of Wheat, and, that is allowing only 
one ear to grow from each gra ut," says he, ‘instead of 
one grain producing one ear of "30 grains, it will anes 10 or 
12, varying from 60 to 80 grains eaci act, one 
bushel, had it room to tiller, would, instead of 30 US ne, pro- 
duce a hundred fold; so that half a bushel or less, under 
favourable circumstances, will produce the au bushels, and this 
is allowing sufficient for incidentals,” w, this 
might be correct reasoning in the Rhein cee an dues 
that they usually sowed from 2 bushels to 3 bushels, and reaped 
30, which was ten or fifteen-fold ; and they knew that grain on 
some land was capable of returning a ye fold tl the seed ; 
but this was not proof positive that it was beneficial in practice 
tosow solittle. There UN many abstract ped which are not 
carried into use. Thus it would be well if we could do with- 
out laws or customs’ duties ; thatidea was senti in theabstract, 
as it was to sell in the dearest and to the cheapest mar- 
kets ; but the Piraon D whether it Moo be beneficial on 
ju whole i in DS here he argued that the mathema- 
3 
E 
UST of thin sowing. ES great err 
of his statement; notin the fact of 2 Hae wae 
ducing 30 bushels, butin the assertion that 2 pecks were also 
sufficient, year after ci and under any e to 
supply plant, and t and contingencies. Amongst other 
casualties with Vio. Nen had to contend, 
ravages of the wireworm, slug, grub, frost, blight, mildew, &e. 5 
nd therefore he thought that they ought always, for the safety 
of the crop, to sow more than t xpected would grow. It 
qum said ps all pert e ome were liable to these 
Hauke: and this he granted, ot suffer alike from 
hem. If drop: sown on the “prineple that the quantity of 
ed sown should equal the number of plants the space will 
maintain, lost root a plant to the idum of 50 per pau the 
c suffered in nearly the same proportion ; while another 
Runs which was sown im the ordinary way, could dana 3 lose 
s many plants with little comparative damage. When we de- 
pond on a few roots, a loss slight in numbers is a large propor- 
tion of the whole ; while, on the other hand, the loss i is not felt 
because it is provided for ; and iE as pred ided for, because these 
losses are not exceptions, but i e field or other, and fom 
one cause or other, happen in Gat y years, They are rely 
the consequence of our climate and soils as loss of life in the 
army is theresult of an activecampaign, These are some of the 
evils that make the practice of thin sowing dangerous. And they 
are common to both systems but most S by p hat of thin sow- 
ing. And there D “others which t m of thin sow; 
was especially Thus upon aight B cud if the frost. 
came (and they Basel not guard against i t), it was liable to root 
oui old soils there was too great a loss roots 
perished, and in ROlover: stubbles the plant was more liable to 
milde Then, again, the harvests were retarded, and the 
EERE were coarser and more fri equently damaged than on the 
ordinary system, The manner in which some of these evils 
arise, he had three years a o pointed out. At that timehe said 
that to dibbling and all methods of planting or r sowing Wheat 
very thin there was this objection. The Wheat was apt to 
branch so much that d Wis peculiarly liable io be injured at 
the root by winds, &c., owing to the great leverage of a number 
Y. stems. The same accounted for Wheat Duns was thus 
broken becoming toad-legged, as it is termed, and producing 
an uneven sample. Another evil to fear waa that the free sup- 
ply, of the atmospheric gases, moisture, &c., arising from 
their being few plants, should stimulate the paren to put 
forth such a luxuriant foliage and such a number o 
stems, that granting that the weaker branches did un get 
broken down for want of root, the root would not be 
able to convey the matters essential go; the perfect is of 
each branch in the latter stages of i wth, a larger supply 
of nitrogen being required to perfect E gra HR than $ maintain 
the straw. The consequence of which would be a large crop 
of straw and a deficient one of gr E pom as regards quantity 
and quality. The case alluded t: g of a vineyard being 
sicat to the production of 2 T wi EE that it became in 
two or three years almost barren, the fact thatif our fruit trees 
be permitted" to braneh much they bear little fruit, and several 
cases which might be mentioned, where Barley ando ther grain 
have been stimulated by manure to the too great and quick 
production of foliage and straw, were familar illustrations of 
iR 
the evil to be feared from one root having to perform the func- 
tions of two or three, m to support mechanically and das 
cally several stems. these dangers explained why th 
harvest, as admitted ere by Mr. Mechi, should be retarded b: by 
thin sowing, and why there should be failures from uneven 
ripening, from mildew, &e., a loss in quality and quantity of 
grain, as in ie trials of Mr. Barclay, M.P., where the thin 
sown look the most luxuriant i in straw until harvest, when the 
grain turnad out inferior, was in one plot mildewed, and pro- 
duced 15 bushels per acre less than the thick sown, The thin 
sown grain also weighed 23 Ibs. less per bushel, apa sold o 2s. 
a quarter less than the other. The one making 18L 1s. per 
acre, and the other 10L. 2s. This experiment p esite to 
the Royal Agricultural Society, and was not the only evidence 
of these dangers, as we were told that Mr. Davis himself occa- 
py suffered from them. a correspondent of the 
^s Fai now Messenger, who visited the farms of Mr. D. last 
Tus said, *this view confirms my former opinion, that thin. 
EMT, is a PRECES experiment to be Led into, where 
two quarters per acre." Then, agai 
be feared from thin sowing. 
to be overcome ec deep ploughing and Hent hoeing ; but the 
former could ni nd as that of Mr. Beilby, 
himself, and omen for they SH Sot go deeper than 6 inches. 
before they came tothe reek: TANT HER HISP eli deep plough- 
ing would not prevent annuals growing on any soil when it was 
too wet to get on the land to hoe, no morethan it could prevent 
the attacks of grub or wireworm, the evil effects of frost, or 
make c the pus (of different ages so sizes) on one stem feed 
ike, ime, or produce a s rain. Mr. Mechi 
had Moeed E mut inciples of thin HE with as much suc- 
cess as many ; still he EERE that some of his arguments, like 
his razors, locus cut the hand that used them, Mr. Mechi, 
who was no doubt a spirited, k he be in this case too sanguine 
an agriculturist, said ** Why do not we cultivate our Wheat as 
we do our Turnips ? ?" What would be the result if we treated. 
our Turnips as es do our Wheat? Now what analogy was 
there between sand Wheat? As much, he conceived, as 
between a horse xu an elephant, which it was true had certain. 
parts and habits in common, but had also others exclusively 
their own, and required consequently a treatment adapted to 
their different natures. And Sea Turnips and Wheat 
were plants, each having specific properties — 
own organisation, and each requiring a method of cultivation 
special rand peculiar to themselves. $ were, indeed, plants 
ot only of a different botanical genus, but also of a different 
r; and the only analogy Deren Um was that they were 
both vegetables, and subject alike to 
large as possible, and by thin 
sowing they got their Turnips EUM proportio, 
ther hand, Wheat w: a its grain. It was ni 
ment, the en, that ouo crop wi 
another produced more bulb ds root under the same system, 
But it was also the practice to sow Turnips thick ; and i? there 
was any analogy bétween Turnips and Wheat,— Wheat must 
vent the ravages of the grub and other enemies. But, it would 
be said, you single out your Turnips with the hoe: and so they 
did, but the epe of that was not to grow seed, but, as he had 
show n, to get t if dier cuve. the Turnip 4 tor tts 
was “usual ‘or ordinary purposes, an 
obtained a BM. er ae quad tity of seed, add. ihe e crop uA less 
fom incendi damage ER when im n planted, and so man; 
br: anches were dependant on, and 
wind and rain by = stem and one root. So far then, even if 
it were Marne that Mr. Mechi could with propriety compare 
Turnip and Wheat cultivation, the comparison went against 
thin sowing. tif there really were no grounds for compari 
er dar Wheat and Turnips, there was some analogy be- 
n Wheat and Grass, for Wheat was a Ans of Grass, and. 
oF Y ori as the pasture plants. And these last we fins 
produce the best erops of hay and seed by heir closely Beo $ 
they are then said to be ‘well set,” and the cr op is hig! 
valued. We might then m more rationally contend cat 
this was an illustration of thick sowing Wheat than that Tur- 
nip cultivation was an evidence of the contrary. Another ER 
Mr. Mechi’s arguments is equally specious. lle says ‘ho: 
careful we are always to plant out at wide distances any 1s 
scarce seed which may be sent to us in a small quantity, in. 
order that we may reap more produce—and yet how is it we 
on't do so with our general crop?” A moment's thought wili 
show us the fallacy of this argument. The farmer sows a smal! 
quantity of seed over a large portion of land, in order that his- 
stock of seed may increase faster, and for this he Pee 
land, which is noi valuable as the seed. When sows 
generally, however, he looks for a crop per acre, CEU in 
put in ext e sure of two or three in retui 
extra. For instance, if we have a peck of able seed, and 
itis sown over half cre, and we reap fi 
sow it over half a rood we perhaps guys 
one ease we get 50 and the other 30 p! 
seed the former es stem gains the dest return, according 
to seed used, we have taken four times the land to. 
obtain it, and the. other method is the best per acre. Im 
ordinary cultivation, then, the 
a good produce per acre, al 
ae epe twenty-fold "2 bushels, than 
Having thus pointed out some of the evils whic 
to render the practice of thin E iM actieable, Mr. Han- 
nam proceeded to contend that w e farmer wanted was 
not the production of a peck of Wheat. at the rate of a hundred 
fold one year, and a complete failure the next, but a great acre- 
age produce, and that on an average of years, which he did not 
think could be attained by thin sowing. He did not deny that 
thin sowing might produce an extraor dina 
nd upon some soils; Tut there was the 
liable to suffer, and if it suffered at all from the incidental 
evils mentioned before, the failure was almost total, while that. 
sown in the ordinary manner only suffered partially, p this 
objection to his mind was conclusive that the advocates of the 
new system sought to make that which ought to be the RR 
tion, the general rule. s to individual experience, He and 
his father had tried from 1 bushel up to 3, and they had not 
found the thin sowing to answer. Their land was certainly in- 
ferior to some, but it was not over-run sith weeds nor was it 
impoverished, and tl they had been, so far as self was concerned, 
satisfied that it was not so safe and certain to use 1 bushel as 
to use about 2 or 23 bushels, which they had found a béo the 
quantity requisite “to insure the results from being seriously 
affected by the ravages which their pede, were heir to. For 
these reasons, he for wa said ‘‘not content” to the system 
Mr. Fox dvocated. He aware that they ali had but one 
n view, and he felt t that he had a gri 
tend with in opposing views supported by the prestige of its 
proposer's presence, and by his powers of argument, and backed 
HF 
E 
by the opinion of Mr. Gaunt. He had, however, as he said 
PA EARS 
— ee 
li 
| 
