THE TV-HEAT CULTUEIST. 



129 



But the correct answer is very obvious and brief. If a 

 soil is destitute of wheat-producing material, it cannot 

 produce a bountiful crop of that kind of grain. There 

 are many soils that will produce fair crops of Indian 

 corn, rye, barley, and oats, Avhicli will not yield a re- 

 remunerating crop of wheat. And why '( Simply be- 

 cause the roots of the wheat plant cannot find, in that 

 soil, the right kind of material that is necessary to form 

 the kernels. In one soil, the minute roots find an 

 abundance of material, which they may take up, for the 

 formation and perfect development of the kernels ; 

 while in another soil, the roots may send out their nu- 

 merous little hungry mouths into every cubic inch of 

 the soil, in search of material to produce the grain, and 

 not find it. This is the great difiiculty with a soil that 

 will not produce wheat. And, until such materials are 

 added to the soil, it may be cultivated and sowed in vain. 



All farmers — or chemists — who know anything, prac- 

 tically, about raising good wheat, will admit that the 

 best soil for raising good wheat contains a good propor- 

 tion of clay. Wheat requu-es a firm soil. Therefore, a 

 sandy soil is not a good one for wheat ; neither is a 

 mucky soil much better ; because they are both defi- 

 cient in those elements of fertility that are necessary to 

 form the kernels, and also in that firmness which is 

 so essential in a good soil for wheat. Yet I have seen 

 fair crops of wheat produced on a sandy soil. 



Our aluminous, heavy, slippery clay soils are by no 

 means the best soils for the production of either winter 

 or spring wheat ; although they will yield good crops 

 of wheat when well drained, and thoroughly pulverized 

 and manured. Our country abounds in soils of a mixed 

 character, which will produce a remunerating crop of 



6* 



