162 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
For the American Agriculturist. 
PREPARATION OP SOIL-TRANSPLANTING 
FRUIT TREES, ETC. 
It is a well known fact that the deeper and 
more thoroughly a soil is pulverized, the 
better it is for the growth of fruit-trees. It 
has, doubtless, been observed that where the 
soil is shallow, the growth of the tree is slow, 
and, in dry summers, scarcely at all, while 
that of another standing in deep soil but a 
few feet distant, is very rapid. What makes 
this difference 1 The soil may be no more 
fertile in the one case than in the other ; 
it may, even in the latter instance, be less 
fertile. The truth is simply this : in the 
one case, all the elements are made avail¬ 
able, while in the other they are not. It is 
impossible for the roots to penetrate the 
hard subsoil, and in these circumstances, 
we may no more expect a rapid growth, than 
a rank corn-field on two inch soil. 
A thoroughly pulverized soil is just as 
necessary for fruit trees as for grain ; and 
yet how few carry it out in practice. Near¬ 
ly all our agricultural journals are replete 
with instructions on the proper transplant¬ 
ing and culture of trees, and yet how few 
carry it out in practice. One good example 
will effect more than volumes written on the 
subject. A tree properly planted may be 
made to grow fifteen or twenty feet high in 
six or eight years, with tops as many feet in 
diameter, besides yielding a fair crop of fruit; 
and who would not rather pay eight or ten 
cents for the trouble, than only two cents 
and wait twice as long before any fruit 
could be expected. And yet the latter is too 
common among farmers. They acknow¬ 
ledge the error, but assign as a reason, that 
“ it is too much work to prepare the soil two 
feet deep, for every tree.” But planting an 
orchard, it should be remembered, is not a 
thing of yearly occurrence, and seldom takes 
place but once in a life time. And this con¬ 
sideration alone, should incite us to do it in 
the best possible manner. We can not cheat 
fruit trees, or even slight them, and expect a 
suitable reward. On the contrary, the reward 
is usually in proportion to the labor, which, 
be it little or much, is sure to display itself 
in one way or another. Deep and thorough 
preparation of the soil is, therefore, the first 
step in the cultivation of fruit-trees ; and as 
such an operation requires much hard labor, 
I propose to show the method which 1 have 
employed this fall, in planting about two hun¬ 
dred pear trees. 
For two years the soil has been plowed a 
foot in depth, well manured, and planted 
with corn. This fall I staked out the 
ground for the rows, and plowed the land 
with a Michigan soil plow, about ten feet 
wide, and 16 inches deep, actual measurement . 
This was done by going twice or thrice in a 
furrow. When one furrow was completed, I 
hitched on the subsoil plow and broke up the 
substratum at least ten inches deeper. A 
land being thus finished, the dirt was 
scraped out right and left from the place 
where the tree was to stand, to the depth of 
sixteen or eighteen inches. This left a spot 
about eight feet in diameter, from which the 
earth was removed down to the unbroken 
soil, taking care to leave the dirt as near the 
holes as possible, so as to facilitate the labor 
of filling them again. Having finished a row 
of holes, I stir up the subsoil with a spade 
and pick, ten inches dee'per, breaking all the 
lumps to pieces, and then throw in and mix 
together about three inches of the surface. 
I then hitch on the team, and by means of a 
back furrow, fill the hole about half full of 
dirt, on which is placed four or five bushels 
of well prepared compost, from the same 
yard. The manure is then covered over 
with dirt, and the tree set on about even 
with the surface, as the soil prepared in this 
way will settle, and bring the trees to the 
proper depth. Finally the best soil is placed 
about the roots, and a pile of dirt packed 
about the trees, so as to keep them erect 
during the winter. In the spring I shall re¬ 
move this dirt, and work in a good top 
dressing of compost about the roots.— 
Many of my trees, treated in this way, send 
out branches three and four feet long in a 
single season. And even the past summer, 
dry as it has been, some have grown two 
and three feet, and appeared to suffer but 
little from the drouth. Many of them, on 
the other hand, planted after the old style, 
have grown but a few inches, and some not 
at all. I have sometimes been ridiculed for 
being thus particular in preparing the soil; 
but the best defense I can make is, to show 
the difference between the result of the two 
methods. 
Ten years ago I transplanted a few trees, 
when the soil was broken only as deep as 
we commonly plow ; and, although the soil 
has been well stirred about them each year, 
still they have grown but little, and have 
yielded no fruit. This fall I am retransplant¬ 
ing them, as they should be. Where the 
soil is rather barren, all the subsoil is thrown 
out of the hole, and a wagon load of allu¬ 
vial or sods from the highway, is deposited 
in each hole. Ashes, bones, tan-bark, chip- 
manure, saw-dust, and all such materials, are 
well mingled with the soil about each tree. 
On my hard, compact land, I think as much 
of corn-cobs, and tan-bark, as of any other 
kind of manure. My ashes, instead of being 
deposited in the ashery for a year, or sold 
for a few cents per bushel, are immediately 
scattered around the fruit trees, and they re¬ 
turn me, in fine fruit and healthy trees, 
double what they come to in dollars and 
cents. One word more by way of obviating 
the objection against transplanting trees in 
this manner in the spring, because it inter¬ 
feres too much with the ordinary business 
of the farm. 
Let the ground or holes be prepared in the 
fall, or even in the winter, and then it will 
consume but little time in the spring to put 
out the trees. I am preparing the holes 
this fall for several hundred trees ; and, it 
the ground is not frozen, I intend to work at 
them during the winter. I throw out all the 
subsoil, to the depth of two feet, and eight 
feet in diameter, and let the frost and rain 
act upon it; and by the time the season for 
transplanting arrives, this dirt soil will be as 
fine as ashes. 
Whether this will pay, is a questien often 
asked me. Were 1 not assured that labor 
and money, thus invested, is not far better 
than cash at twelve per cent interest, I 
should abandon the operation at once. 
Lake Ridge, N. Y. S. EDWARDS TODD. 
Covering for Frames. —I notice that some 
of your correspondents are desirous of as¬ 
certaining what will make a good substitute 
for matting or other extensive materials for 
covering frames and pits. The general faults 
with all substitutes recommended are, weight, 
clumsiness, and their easy destruction. I 
beg to suggest the use of galvanized iron net¬ 
ting, and straw ; the straw being placed be¬ 
tween two pieces of netting, as thickly as 
desired, and the whole united at different 
points by wire, both to keep an uniform flat 
surface, and to prevent the straw escaping 
at the edges. A stout lath might be fastened 
at each end, whereby strength and a better 
holding upon removal would be gained. The 
iron wire is advertised at a low price, and 
most folks can find some spare straw. 
Southsea, Hants, Oct. 21. C F. PALMER. 
The difference between a carriage-horse 
and a carriage-wheel is this, one goes best 
when tired, and the other don’t. 
FOREST TREES. 
At a recent sit ting of the French Academy 
of Sciences, held in the city of Paris, M. 
Chevaudier developed a portion of the re¬ 
sults of five years’ study and experiments 
upon the manuring of forests, and the aug¬ 
mentation of their annual yield. This ques¬ 
tion has an interest in France which can 
hardly be understood in America, where the 
difficulty is rather to clear the ground of its 
woody growth, than to stimulate it to greater 
fruitfulness. Mi Chevaudier commenced his 
experiments in 1847, believing it as possible 
to assist trees in their growth as flowers, 
grass and animal plants. Why could not 
art interfere to restore to the soil the miner¬ 
al substances withdrawn from it by the roots 
of the trees, and by them conveyed to their 
trunks andbranches 1 Because woods spring 
up of themselves, and appear to flourish with¬ 
out the aid of man, was it not nevertheless 
probable that a system of amelioration of 
the soil might urge them to a more luxuriant 
vegetation 1 The great difficulty in the way 
of such attempts was the length of time ne¬ 
cessary to devote to them. When Franklin 
wished to convince his fellow-citizens of the 
good effects of piaster of Paris upon a soil 
deficient in lime, he simply sprinkled, in the 
midst of a meadow, a quantity of powdered 
plaster, tracing several words in huge letters. 
A few weeks afterward the lime had sunk 
into the soil, but the words traced upon the 
meadow stood out from the rest by the rich¬ 
er color and the double height of the vege¬ 
tation. But in order to convince one’s self 
in sylviculture, that such or such a manure 
or substance acts favorably or otherwise, 
study for whole years, and application of the 
system to a very large extent of land, were 
indispensable. After five years’ steady de¬ 
votion to this specially, M. Chevaudier com¬ 
municated the substance of his discoveries 
to the Academy. He commenced his ex¬ 
periments by choosing, among the substan¬ 
ces that their cheapness rendered accessi¬ 
ble, such as could restore to the soil the ele¬ 
ments of the azote or salt withdrawn from 
it for the support of the forest. As sources 
of azote, he employed the salts of ammoni¬ 
um ; as sources of mineral substances, he 
used wood ashes, which contain the whole 
mineral portion of the wood before its com¬ 
bustion. He also tried lime, the salts of pot¬ 
ash and of soda, the phosphate of bone lime, 
plaster, and the sulphate of iron ; and earthy 
substances, the residue of factories, or salts 
of potash and soda, (oxy-sulphuret calcium,) 
which had already been, and with advantage, 
tried in the valleys of the Vosges. It would 
be impossible to transcribe the tabular view- 
drawn upbyM. Chevaudier, which gives the 
individual history and the bill of health of 
five thousand five hundred and thirty sub¬ 
jects—pines, cedars, oaks, beeches, larches, & 
etc., etc. I have only room for the general 
conclusions, which may be divided into four 
categories : 1st. Substances whose fertiliz¬ 
ing action was more or less marked. These ii 
were, the oxy-sulphuret of calcium, the 
chlorhydrate of ammonia, plaster of Paris, 
wood-ashes, sulphate of ammonia, lime, non- 
calcined bones and poudrette. 2d. Substances 1 
whose fertilizing effect was slightly marked 
or doubtful. These were, the carbonate of I 
potash, coagulated blood, calcined bones, an i 
equal mixture of nitrate of potash, non-cal- 
cined bones, sulphate of iron and carbonate 
oflirrte, and an equal mixture of nitrate of 
potash and non-calcined bones. 3d. Sub¬ 
stances which seemed to have no effect at 
all—the carbonate of soda, the nitrate of pot¬ 
ash and sea salt. 4th. Substances which I 
seemed to have had an iujurious effect—the 
siilphate of iron, and equal mixtures of sul¬ 
phate of iron with lime. The residuum of 
soda and potash works, known by the name 
