74 
SOUTHERN CULTIVATOR. 
COTTON CULTURE-SOME SUGGESTIONS TO PLANT- 
ERS. 
Editors Southern Cultivator — With the wind in the 
Northwest, and the earth covered with snow, sleet having 
covered the earth and trees on the evening of the 10th, no 
work on hand, but “keep up the fires,” I have employed 
the day in writing and reading. 
Ithought of writing an article for the Patent Office Report, 
on the culture of Cotton, and to press ray views on the agri- 
cultural public, but the Report not coming out in time for 
this year, and with only extracts, I conclude to beg your 
indulgence, as your paper has, I believe, the next most 
extended circulation, I also beg that you will mark the 
article and forward it to the Patent Office. 
I only beg my planting brethren will try the project on 
an acre, report fairly, for or against, and try three years. 
If I am wrong, not much harm is done ; if right, then good 
will result. I ask “Broomsedge,” “Coke,” and others of 
my personal friends to try, and fear not. 
I am no inventor, though perhaps an innovator ; if I 
have come to conclusions warranting me in proposing a 
change, it is the result of accident, no smartness in it, 
at all. 
My proposal is simply, plant rows closer and leave 
stalks closer; on general quality of land throw up higher 
beds. In 1842 or 1843, I had left a part of my crops 
without the second thinning, for some reason I now forget. 
An experienced planter, of some 60 years of age, advised 
me to take out every other stalk, saying I would not make 
half a crop. About 1st of August I examined closely, 
counting bolls, forms and squares, and thought if I made 
no more than each stalk then had, that I would be certain 
ofa crop, sol “let her rip,” to use a vulgar expression. 
The consequence — the best crop the land ever produced, 
before or since. I have followed this plan, to some ex- 
tent, ever since. Not leaving as much, I admit, but be- 
cause my overseers have not the nerve. 
This year I am determined to try it on every variety of 
land what can be done, in confirmation or against. 
In a conversation with my friend, Dr. Wm. L. Balfour, 
of Madison county, one of the largest per hand planters in 
these United States, I find he places his success principal- 
ly to close planting — on his swamp (river) lands, Yazoo 
and Madi'on, whether the richest or the thinnest, he 
plants. He uses 8 inch hoes and passes the hoe through 
once, on thin lands; on rich lands, twice — thus leaving 
stalks, say, about 10 and 20 inches apart. I do not re- 
member the distance of rows, but this depends on land. 
The idea is to have stalks enough to insure a crop of bolls 
by the time the cotton should meet in the row, say by the 
middle of July. If the season be unfavorable, the latter 
crop is best any how; if favorable, so much more is made. 
Dr. B. makes 12 to 20 bales per hand on his river planta- 
tion. This may be doubted, but the documents can be 
produced. If beds be thrown up well, the weed does not 
grow so tall and sets its fruit closer, and thus will bear 
crowding. Shading land earlier prevents evaporation, 
and the burning up of the soil, and thus will the land wear 
longer. 
My desire two years ago, was to leave the usual dis- 
tance, but double stand (2 stalks) and so directed my 
overseer to do, for 1 to 5 acres. This I will try the pi’e- 
sent year, as well as single stalks and double stand. Our 
friend — seems to fear over production, which I 
do not. Let us get to a full crop as early as possible — 
4,000,000 bales — it will be our salvation. Land now 
making 500, 600 and 700 pounds of raw cotton will be 
turned to grain and grass ; more money will be made ; 
the South more independent, and the cotton region more 
in a body. Besides, if we can make what we can gather, 
say six bales of nice cotton, why not do so from five to 
eight acres, with two or four acres in grain'? 
If I am right, and only one acre in cotton be saved, a 
good will be done that will equal millions of dollars. I 
ask a trial. I ask none to try a new hypothesis, or a 
speculation. This is not either ; but the result of my ex- 
perience, which I have often referred to. 
Yours with respect, M. W. Philips. 
Edwards, Miss., Jan., 1856. 
P. S. — I have made this year 1300 pounds per acre on 
80 acres, where rows are, I think myself, too close, where- 
as on other land of same character with usual distance, 
not over 700 pounds, but in part due to the rot. 
DEEP PLOWING-APPLICATION OF MANURE. 
Editors Southern Cultivator — 1 had stopped taking 
the Cultivator for several years, because I become too 
feeble in health to read and profit by it, I commence 
again with your 14th volume. I have never written for 
your paper, and I now do so more to receive than to give 
information. I have been farming, and mixing little else 
with it, for fifty years; and though I profess to have dealt 
a little in science and theories, I have always profited more 
by experimental facts than by any discoveries from pursu- 
ing beautiful theories or scientific researches. In this 
connection, I would remark that my experience is at 
variance (on the subject of general deep plowing) with 
your doctrine of plowing deep, and frequently urged with- 
out limitation. 
When I have plowed thin-soil-land deep (particularly if 
by a turning plow) I thought that I invariably impover- 
ished — almost ruined it forever. Hence, I have conclud- 
ed that thin and, perhaps all land should be turned over 
only as deep as its own soil. That subsoils may be 
broke (made loose) profitably, I think is true ; but it 
should be done by the subsoil plow — never turning it 
over. 
Now, what I desire to knov/ of the Editors is, whether 
their doctrine of universal profit, by deep plowing is 
made up of any mixture of experience with theory and 
philosophy. Will they present to patrons that my no- 
tion, from experience, is a mistaken one; that soils are 
not to be turned at all, or if turned, not to be mixed with 
the subsoil; that soils are to be kept on the top; that 
they are impoverished in proportion to their admixture 
with subsoils I 
Again, our Editors urge that in applying manures to 
our lands, “we should turn them under, and no matter 
how deep” 
Here my experience is at war also. I think I have been 
most successful in the application of manures on the Lop 
of the land, not below the soil of the land. In favor of my 
position, here I may remark, that, as the Almighty has 
made the richest parts of all lands on the top, it -would 
seem reasonable for man, when adding manures, to place 
them on the top, where God has made the richest part of 
the formation. Perhaps, if thei'e is either science or 
chemistry in my positions here held, it belongs to the 
greater affinity of the atmosphere with the very top — the 
richest and most pulverizable parts of all soils or lands. 
We HOW have two very important facts before us, which 
farmers must know or practice in the dark : 
1st. He should know whether any soil can be made bet- 
ter by turning it umder deep, and mixing it with the sub- 
soil. 
2nd. Whether manures should be turned under deep 
when applied to our lands, or left on the top to be incor- 
porated with the top soil in reach of atmosphere. 
