SOUTHERN CULTIVATOR. 
75 
I know the beauty of theory is, that manures, exposed 
to atmosphere, are exhausted thereby — carried off, &c., — 
and yet I have found manure placed on the top (instead 
of being turned in deep) most profitable in production. I 
call on Southern planters particularly, to say whether they 
have not found ‘‘cotton seed,” on the very top, to be the 
most profitable application. The philosophy of all this, I 
grant, I do not satisfactorily see, any more than 1 can per- 
ceive how, “that, by planting corn in drills, and cvUing 
the roots on all sides, by plowing \lboth ways (like hilling 
it) makes the crops more abundant than the drill cultiva- 
tion. Yet, all will agree, I think, that experienced farm- 
ers only plant in the drill to prevent lands from washing. 
I desire here to elicit remarks from the Editors, as well as 
from any of the farmers writing for your excellent medium 
of useful information on these very important subjects ; I 
am, though, an old man, still in the dark — practicing in 
uncertainties — and I can confidently say to the Editors 
that they can never out-live the use and need of their 
labors; that both science and experience have only began; 
just progressing in their discoveries; nothing ended, nor 
endAng. The task before them is comparable to doctors 
of medicine, who, though professing to be learned in the 
science, are still taking periodicals (often the experience 
of centuries) to learn (if perchance they may) some more 
successful practice comporting more with the great beauties 
and truths of theory and science. 
In the most respectful manner I submit the above to the 
consideration of the Editors, and, having, really, a deep 
sense of their perseverance and great usefulness in our 
farming progress, hope to hear from them on questions 
upon which I do not pretend to be morftaptto have taken 
the right than the wrong side. W. R. 
CiUlodon, Ga., Jan., 185G. 
Remarks. — Theory in agriculture is of no value unlesg 
it goes hand in hand with practice. We have alway 
been the advocates of deep plowing, and will forever be so, 
because we have seen in our own practical experiments 
the great advantages derived from it; and having for years 
devoted our particular attention to this important theme, 
we have had a good deal of experience. We will try to 
answer the above questions of our esteemed correspon- 
dent according to the best of our knowledge. 
All roots have a tendency to grow downward in search 
of nourishment, and thus it is a, jmori evident, that the 
more liberty we give them the better the plants will thrive. 
In fact, by working the soil deeply, we enable the roots 
to roam where they will always find it moist and cool. It 
cannot, of course, be denied, that the surface (being com- 
posed of many vegetable substances, and improved by the 
; ammonia and carbon of air and rain) in general contains 
I more nourishment for the roots than the subsoil, but for 
I this very reason we prefer to have it turned under and 
mixed with the subsoil, in order that the plants may de- 
j rive the full benejit thererf. We have known poor piney- 
i woods land to be deeply worked, the surface being com- 
pletely mixed with the subsoil, and have seen the most 
surprising results. 
It is an undisputable fact that many of tbs fertilizing 
' constituents in manure are of so volatile a nature, that they 
rise and escape. If deeply mixed with the soil these con- 
stituents will, in a more or less degree, become fixed in 
the soil ; they not only serve as nourishment to the roots 
at a depth where the salts will easily become disolved by- 
moisture, but the fertiiisiing gasses will rise through the 
soil, which covers the manure, impregnating and fertiliz- 
ing it in a vast degree. We have often seen land so com- 
pletely worn out that it would not produce anything but 
“poverty grass and broomsedge,” worked to the depth 
of two feet, deeply turning under the surface together with 
a coat of manure. The operation was ridiculed by many 
farmers who believed in the old “scratching” system, but 
the results were amply sufficient to convince the most in- 
credulous of them ; for during a severe drouth it produced 
as fine a crop as we ever could wish ; and those very 
men who ridiculed the work were the first to adopt the 
same plan. We hold that manure is never worked in toa 
deeply. 
“The Almighty made the richest parts of all land on 
the top,” our correspondent says. He did so ; but He 
also said : “In the sweat of thy brow thou shalt eat thy 
bread;” and and in the alluvial soil of the swamps He 
showed us how much more fertile the lands were, when 
made rich for many feet in depth. 
Our correspondent is in favor of “top-dressing.” We 
must decidedly call it a “manure-wasting” method. We 
admit that a small quantity of the fertilizing constituents 
of the manure applied as top-dressing is washed down to 
the roots by rains, but by far the best portion is evaporat- 
ed and wasted. 
That plants do grow vigorously by top-dressing, 
is greatly to be attributed to the fact that such manure as, 
for instance, cotton seed, also operates as a mulching, the 
value of which is inestimable in our Sunny South, though 
not yet fully appreciated. For that purpose however, less 
valuable materials than manure ought to be applied, and 
the manure itself put deep into the ground. 
What our correspondent says about cutting the roots 
of corn on all sides, is, we think, in favor of our doctrine 
of working the soil deeply, and we think it may be illus- 
trated by an experiment we once made. 
We plowed a piece of sandy land fifteen inches deep, 
planted it in corn and cultivated shallow between the row's 
merely keeping it free from weeds, and disturbing but a 
few of the roots. Next to it we plowed a similar piece of 
land shallow, (4 inches deep) and cultivated deeply be- 
tween the rows of corn. As the roots, on account 
of the shallow plowing, spread widely over the surface, 
a great many of them were broken by the plow ; but as 
this injury only was partial, it operated like a pruning, 
and caused the plants to throw out a great many more 
roots, which, allured by the deeper plowed land between 
the rows, struck deeper than before; the corn conse- 
quently soon recovered from its check. Thus, though the 
second experiment gave a very good result, still the crop 
of the former was far superior to the latter, and the 
difference between the two crops was so marked as not to 
leave room for any dispute whatever; every one being 
clearly enabled to see for himself the advantages of deep 
plowing. 
With all due respect for our highly esteemed correspon- 
'dent, we cannot possibly give up our avowed doc- 
trine of vwrking the soil deeply, as it is not only based on 
