164 



THE SOUTHERN PLANTER. 



greater yield of wheat. I would here remark, that 

 the clover land which is earliest fallowed in sum- 

 mer, should be seeded in peas as a substitute for 

 the crab grass and weeds which usually are more 

 difficult to plough in, and are not so well calculat- 

 ed to improve the land. On this part of the clover 

 field, therefore, we have the fallow of two green 

 crops in one season, with no more ploughing than 

 otherwise necessary. These different means of 

 improvement, if judiciously applied, Avill fully 

 double the first corn crop, treble or quadruple the 

 wheat crop, whilst in the next round, with dimin- 

 ished applications of guano, each field may be ex- 

 pected to reach its highest average productive ca- 

 pacity in the absence of any direct application of 

 lime. 



This same system, for the most part, should be 

 pursued with the class of poor lands accessible for 

 the use of marl or lime, taking care, however, to 

 apply the usual measure of these to the ploughed 

 surface going in corn, whilst other manures raised 

 on the farm should be applied as top-dressing, early 

 in the spring, to the clover field. 



Of course these lands will be more rapidly and 

 permanently improved, and require less expendi- 

 ture in guano, on account of the large addition of 

 calcareous manures, and because, too, the guano 

 does not appear to act on them so efficient^. It is 

 proper here to remark, that especially on the limed 

 or marled land, unless it be eocene marl, ground 

 plaster should be sown early in the first of the 

 'Spring on the wheat, which will greatly benefit the 

 young clover. 



I regret that I have found it necessary, in order 

 to present my views on the subject of improving 

 and enriching poor land, to extend this essay to 

 such a length. I will simply add, that as far as 

 circumstances would allow, I have endeavored but 

 imperfectly, to practice the views here presented, 

 and that so far as I have succeeded in doing so, 

 the improvement of my land has certainly equalled 

 my most sanguine expectations. 



and inorganic speculation into which he had 

 plunged." What is precisely meant by the latter 

 clause of the preceding sentence, we do not pre- 

 sume to say, but will leave it to those whose men- 

 tal optics may be more acute, to decide. It would 

 seem, however, that the author divides speculations 

 into two kinds, organic and inorganic speculations. 

 At least such is the necessary inference, as the lan- 

 guage employed implies a division. Our highest 

 authorities in lexicography define speculation to 

 be a mental view — a notion — a thought, &c. We 

 can easily conceive how the mind may take a men- 

 tal view of organic or inorganic substances or 

 things ; and our physical organs of vision are often 

 delighted with a physical view of them ; but we 

 are at a loss to conceive how either could form any 

 conception of an " inorganic speculation." But 

 lest we might misconstrue the reviewer's meaning 

 upon a subject so abstruse, we would invite the 

 reader's special attention to the whole paragraph 

 from which the citation is made. 



After indulging in some further preliminary re- 

 marks, constituting a pretty considerable compound 

 of compliments and animadversions, into which 

 the two ingredients seem to enter in proportions so 

 nearly equal, that it is difficult to determine which 

 has the preponderance, he proceeds to dissect the 

 address; and alleges that, " the very fact of its ve- 

 ry careful preparation, is to my [his] mind, a suffi- 

 cient apology for venturing to expose the faults of 

 some of his practical deductions from his unsus- 

 tained and faulty theorising." 



In pointing out the sources from which growing 

 vegetables derive their carbon, Mr. E. used the fol- 

 lowing language : " This leading substance of all 

 plants is derived from carbonic acid in much the 

 largest proportion from the atmosphere which sur- 



their 



For the Southern Planter. 



A REVIEWER REVIEWED- 

 LOOSE. 



AN ODDITY LET 



Mr. Editor, — In the Planter for March, a com- 



» imiiiication appeared from Dr. F. B. Watkins, of 

 Ben Lomond, purporting to be a review of the ad- 

 dress 'deli vered. by Mr. Edmunds before* the Agri- 



' cultural Society of Virginia. 



'That essay is a remarkable production, and the 

 theories it attempts to establish, demand some no- 

 tice ; lest such practical farmers as have but little 

 knowledge of the sciences pertaining to rural eco- 

 nomy, might be induced to adopt the views they 

 inculcate ; and, in attempting to reduce them to 

 practice, fiaad themselves involved in considerable 

 loss and much useless labor. The character of the 



■ remarks with which the reviewer prefaces his cri- 

 ticisms, would lead us to suppose that he had de- 



• tected some egregious blunders in the address ; 

 and that he was about to expose the erroneous the- 

 ories which Mr. E. had sought to establish ; toge- 

 ther with the false deductions which had been 

 drawn from them. And the flourish of trumpets 

 ■with which he announces his intention to " run a 

 tilt against him " in the " vast field of specula- 

 tion," would indicate that Mr. E. might be left 

 hors de combat, " in the wild chaos of immature 



rounds them, and by assimilation through 

 leaves. The roots of the plants may furnish a 

 questionable, at any rate, a small proportion." If 

 these conclusions be facts, his reviewer boldly af- 

 firms that they " militate against all the previously 

 established laws of chemistry." Now, we would 

 merely suggest, that if these views are in conflict 

 with all the established laws of chemistry, it would 

 have been easy for his reviewer to have designated 

 some one of them against which they militated. 

 But he has not only failed to do this, but has like- 

 wise made a signal failure in his attempt to adduce 

 one single isolated fact in support of his allegation. 

 It is true, he says, that, " while I agree with him 

 cheerfully that the air is the great source, I cannot 

 admit that it is the only source, from whence plants 

 derive their carbon." Neither has Mr. E. so affirm- 

 ed, though the reader will observe that he is made 

 to occupy that position in the above quotation. 

 But, on the contrary, he says expressly, and that 

 too in the very passage cited by his reviewer, that 

 the "roots of the plants may furnish a questiona- 

 ble, at any rate, a small proportion." It is evi- 

 dently clear, that this passage in its contextual 

 meaning, has reference to the definitive proportions 

 of carbon which growing vegetables receive from 

 the soil and the atmosphere; and the term "ques- 

 tionable " has reference only to the definitive pro- 

 portions of this element derived from the respec- 

 tive sources of supply ; and not to the fact, (as in- 

 terpreted by his reviewer,) whether any part of 

 this substance is supplied from the soil. Prof. 

 Norton, as quoted in the review, supposes, (it is a 

 mere supposition, however,) that as much as a . 

 third of this element is furnished by the soil, and 

 the remaining two-thirds are obtained from the at- 



