58 
roots start directly from the deep buried kernel, and these latter 
shoots are never attacked by the fly. A kernel but slightly cov- 
ered, on the other hand, sends up its blades at once directly from 
the seed; if these be attacked therefore, the whole is destroyed. 
Such is a brief but plain statement, we believe, of the argument 
of the King William Farmer. In other words, seed slightly 
covered can send up but a single set of shoots, and being attack- 
ed by the fly, the whole perishes; but seed deeply buried can 
send up a double set of shoots; those first appearing are attacked 
and destroyed; those which thereupon start directly from the seed 
are never infested by the fly. Admitting the facts to be as set 
forth, it amounts to this, that by deeply covering, the same quan- 
tity of seed in reality produces two crops; one, which is speedily 
harvested by the fly; and the other, gathered at a later day by 
human hands. To this procedure we have two objections. By 
adopting it, you do nothing whatever towards destroying the in- 
sect or frustrating it in the least in its operations. On the con- 
trary, you aim to provide food for it. You cherish it. You in 
effect say to it “be fruitful, multiply, and replenish the earth.” 
True, by giving it what it wants, it leaves us as much more. 
But it is rather humiliating to us “lords of creation” to rear 
crops “at the halves” and place ourselves in the rank of mere 
tenants to so ignoble a landlord! Again, this measure only shields 
us against the autumnal attack. It does nothing against that of 
the following spring. Nay, by providing so well for the first 
generation, it tends to make the second generation more numerous, 
and the spring attack consequently more severe. Thus much up- 
on the supposition that the facts are precisely as set forth by the 
King William Farmer. That he sincerely believed them to be 
correct, and that he was perfectly honest in the selection of the 
specimens which he forwarded to Mr. Garnett, we do not in the 
least.doubt. Indeed the encomium which Mr. G. has written up- 
on the character of his friend, must forever place him above all 
suspicions of insincerity or of any thing approaching to chicanery. 
But cur own observations impress upon us strongly the conviction 
that he is in error in one most important point in his argument, 
