BY T. STEPHENS; M.A., F.G.S. 93 



witli a fungus [jEcidium herheridis) found on the wild 

 bai-berry, and is said to have disappeared from some 

 localities when this hedgerow tree had been extirpated. As 

 regards smut, it is sufl&cient to know that the disease generally 

 springs from seed infected by the minute spores of the fungus 

 known by that name, which explains the use of sulphate of 

 copper or some other fungus destroyer, as a preventive, and it 

 is probable that the intermediate changes take place in 

 different parts of the wheat plant, reaching their final 

 development in the ear. It is well known that self-sown 

 wheat, such as grows on headlands, is very rarely affected by 

 the disease, and the probable explanation of this fact is that 

 it is not so much exposed to infection as that which has 

 passed through the steam-threshing machine. The myriads of 

 spores beaten out from even one smutted ear form a cloud of 

 impalpable slightly glutinous dust, which adheres to the 

 grain with which it comes in contact, and this applies also to 

 hand-threshed wheat, though in a much less degree. When 

 the machines first came into use, English farmers still pre- 

 ferred to use the flail for wheat intended for seed, because in 

 machine-dressed wheat some of the grain is often so much 

 broken by the beaters as to be unfit to produce healthy plants. 

 They do not omit in either case to use some preventive 

 against smut, the experience of generations have proved that 

 if properly applied, it very rarely fails to check its ravages. 

 Of course wheat selected from sound ears and rubbed out by 

 hand, as described by Mr. Barwick, would be in a condition 

 analogous to that of self- sown wheat, having been free 

 from exposure to the ordinary causes of infection. I doubt 

 very much whether any trials of seed at the Botanical Grardens 

 could be of much practical value in a matter of this kind ; but 

 further experiments by Mr. Barwick and other intelligent 

 farmers might prove interesting. As the mode of dressing 

 wheat against smut varies considerably, and some kinds of 

 treatment may do as much harm as good, I will conclude these 

 remarks with a brief description of the process adopted by 

 the best fanners in the Il^orth of England, where it was 

 always regarded as an almost infallible preventive. A solution 

 is prepared by dissolving powdered sulphate of copper in 

 water, at the rate of 2ozs. to a pint for each bushel of wheat. 

 The grain is emptied on a floor, a little of it is shovelled to 

 one side by one person, while another sprinkles the solution 

 over it, and this process is continued until the whole quantity 

 is gone over. The heap is then turned repeatedly, the men 

 working with shovels opposite to each other. After lying for 

 a few minutes the grain is ready for sowing either by hand or 

 machine. The seed ought not to be steeped in the solution, 

 but merely wetted. A too strong solution may kill the seed 

 as well as the fungus, and damaged grains are probably often 



