18G7.] 
AMKRTCAN AQRTCUI.TUIUST. 
131 
lime for its prejiaration, the next volume ■will 
be better. The “ Caleudurof Oi>crations” con¬ 
tains many excellent hints, and will be very 
valuable to young farmers, and those of more 
experience read them with advantage. 
The article on “Tile Draining,” by George E. 
Waring, Jr., Engineer of .the Draining of the 
Central Park, has given me several new ideas 
which I hope to profit by. I had not thought 
of putting in “ silt b:isins ” in those parts of the 
drain where there is less fall, and where there 
is, consequently, more likelihood of the drain 
choking up from the deposit of fine 8;ind. Of 
course, in ordinary draining, we need not make 
such cxjicnsive atTairs as those used in the Cen¬ 
tral Park. A hole, dug two or three feet below 
the drain, and stoned up to keep the soil from 
falling in, is all that we can afford. But after 
drains arc covered up and are fairly working 
there is not much danger of their filling up with 
sedimenL The water filters through the soil 
and is as clear as the purest spring water. The 
chief danger is from the surface water washing 
away the soil, more or less, and running in large 
quantities into the drains. I have several places 
on my farm where this occurs. Of course this 
•water is not clear and may choke up the drains. 
Another important point which Mr. Waring 
calls particular attention to is “securing the 
outlet.” Of course it is not necessary to have 
such finished work as that represented in fig. 
2, page 5.). But I have had one or two drains 
which discharge large quantities of water into 
a deep open ditch, which, from neglecting to 
secure the outlet with stones, &c., have given 
me more trouble than a little. The soil is con- 
tinuidly falling in, and the tiles arc carried by 
the force of the water into the ditch. I have 
now built them up, rudely, with stones, but the 
•work would have been better done at the first. 
The only objection to Mr. Waring’s article is 
that it represents undenlraining as a work re¬ 
quiring such accuracy that few farmers would 
be able to carry it out alone. I have used 
a surveyor’s level more or less in laying out 
drains, but where a man is acquainted with the 
land it is not indispensable. Water is a good 
level, and m two or three cases has shown me 
outlets, during the wet weather in the spring, 
that I was unable to discover with the level. 
When drains are cut during dry weather, a 
level, measuring staff, boring rod, &c., are ne¬ 
cessary; but in ordinary farm practice draining 
is seldom done at such seasons. The work can 
be done much more easily in the spring, when 
the ground is wet and soft, than in the summer, 
when it is dry and hard. And in digging a drain 
where there is water, there is no necessity for a 
level to determine the grade. Cut the drain so 
that the water will run away from you, and a 
little experience will enable any man to clean out 
the l>otlom of the drain better than it can be done 
with a level in a dry season. ^V^here the water 
runs fast, deepen the drain a little, and you ill 
soon get a sufilciently accurate grade. 
The “ Finishing Scoop ” is an important tool, 
but there is not one man in ten that knows how 
to use it. The artist, in fig. 9, has not given the 
exact shaiw. The blade, or scoop, should be the 
same width its xvhole length, and it .should heper- 
fcctly straight at the bottom. It should be bright 
and sharp, with a wrought iron shank that can be 
bent to the desired angle, and if long enough 
and perfectly straight a skillful man can make 
the bottom of the tlrain as level as a carpenter 
can a ])iec 3 of board with a planer. iLiny 
farmers t.akc an old scoop shovel, bend up 
the sides and uses this to clean out the ditches. 
But it is too short to make good work. Good 
" finishing scoops” are not easily to be found. 
There is not one to be had in Rochester. 
The explanation of this astonishing difference 
is not so much (probably) to planting sets with 
only two eyes, as to the fact that No. 1 and No. 
Prof. Johnson’s account of the experiments 
made in Saxony on the ripening of rye and 
spring wheat should attract attention. The re¬ 
sults differ entirely from those obtained by ^Mr. 
Ilannam in England. Mr. II. found that wheat 
cut. two weeks before it was fully ripe gave a 
better sample, xv'orth G cents a bushel more in 
market, and yielded 4 per cent, more than the 
same wheat allowed to get fully ripe. Nearly 
all our agricultural wTiters have accepted these 
experiments as decisive on the point, and the 
majority of farmers cut their wheat at an earlier 
period than was the case twenty years ago. 
The experiments quoted by Prof. Johnson 
seem to prove that there is a decided gain in 
allowing grain to get fully ripe before cutting. 
One hundred grains of rye cut July 18th, when 
the “ kernels were firm, past the milk, straw, 
yellow and pretty dry,” weighed 203 grains; 
while a hundred grains, cut July 2Gth, when the 
crop was “ dead ripe,” ■weighed 222 grains. In 
other w’ords, a crop of rye that would yield 30 
bushels per acre, cut at the ordinaiy time, xvould 
yield 33 bushels if allowed to get dead ripe. 
The experiments on spring wheat do not show 
so great a gain, but “the advantage of allowing 
the grain to become dead ripe, instead of cutting 
just as it passes out of the milk, is about 5 per 
cent.” On a crop of 30 bushels we gain a bushel 
and a half by allowing it to get fully ripe. 
Of course it is very easy to lose this amount 
by shelling. But now that we have reaping 
machines which give us complete control of the 
crop, we need not be in such a hurry to cut our 
grain. We nee 1 not wait till it is dead ripe, but 
should let it get as near ripe as we can without 
running any risk of shelling. This conclusion 
carries us back again to the opinions of practical 
farmers when I was a boy. I can well recollect 
how my father opposed the new doctrine at first, 
but gradually relaxed a little and cut earlier, to 
avoid the risk of shelling. As usual, the truth 
probably lies between the two extremes. 
It has been supposed that by allowing gram 
to get dead ripe there was a loss of starch—that 
it was changed into woo<ly fibre or bran. But 
it seems that the rye cut July 18lh, when out of 
the milk, contained 72.2 per cent, of starch, 
while that cut July 2Gth, when dead ripe, con¬ 
tained 75.7 per cent—a notable increase. 
Prof. Johnson says, in ripening, “ the gr.ain 
becomes slightly, the straw and chaff consider¬ 
ably, in. (/Zufew or nitrogenous matters.” 
We suppose he does not mean that the grain 
contains any less gluten, but rather that it con¬ 
tains more starch; and this w^ould give a less 
percentage of gluten. Just as in a fat o.x there 
is no less meat (nitrogen) than in the same ox 
when thin, although the percentage xvould be 
less. And so in a fat kernel of wheat, there is 
no less gluten, but proportionally more starch. 
The most interesting part of Mr. Carpenter’s 
article on potatoes is the statement in regard to 
three neighboring fanners, who planted the 
same variety of potato (the Pinkeye Rusty Coat). 
1—Planted whole potatoes in hills 3 feet, 
apart. Yield 80 bushels per acre. 
2_Planted whole potatoes in rows 3 feet 
apart’ and 15 inches apart in the rows. Yield 
100 bushels per acre. 
No. 3—Planted the same distance apart as 
No 2 but with sets cut to only two eyes. Yield 
two hundred and sixty (260) bushels per acre. 
2, although they cultivated the land thoroughly 
up to July 1st, let the weeds grow up and choke 
the crop afterwards, while No. 3 kept his land 
free from weeds. All through the season No. 
1 and No. 2 had to “ mow the xveeds at digging 
time,” while in No. 3 “no weeds were to 
be seen.” This is the great lesson that we must 
all learn—that the land must be clean to produce 
maximum crops. If you take the weeds into 
partnership you cannot have the whole profits. 
They are the worst of partners. Tliey do no work, 
put in no capital, bear none of the expenses, 
pay no taxes and have very extravagant habits. 
It seems that Mr. Carpenter has been eminent¬ 
ly successful as a potato grower. His success 
seems to be due to three things; 1st. Change of 
seed; 2nd. Close planting, and 3rd, to thorough 
cultivation. He plants in narrow rows, only from 
two feet to two feet nine inches apart, cuts to two 
eyes and drops the sets from twelve to sixteen 
inches apart in the rows. He covers the seed 
with a plow from four to six inches deep. I do 
the same thing, and some of my neighbors told 
me I xvould smother them, or that, at all events, 
they would be a week or ten days later in get¬ 
ting through the soil than if covered lightly with 
a hoe. They may be a little longer in coming 
up, but you can plant that much earlier, and 
then harrow the ground to kill the weeds just 
as the potatoes are breaking the ground. If 
planted deep there is no danger of pulling up 
the sets or of doing any serious damage to the 
shoots. With Peachblows and other rampant 
growers three feet between the rows is near 
enough. If the land is in good order the tops 
will completely cover the ground. Flukes could 
be planted as close together as Mr. Carpenter re¬ 
commends with decided a<ivantage. 
Mr. C. puts ashes and plaster on the row's 
after the potatoes are up.. I have knowm plaster 
produce a good effect; but on my soil ashes 
have never been of much benefit to the potatoes. 
I should have more faith in 250 pounds of good 
Peruvian guano, sown broadcast and harrowed in 
before planting. The ashes and plaster might 
then be applied afteiwvards on top with more 
probability of proving beneficial. I have known 
300 pounds of Peruvian guano give an increase 
of nearly one hundred bushels per acre. This, 
however, was on land which, w'ithout guano, 
produced only 98 bushels per acre. On rich land 
the effect might not be so marked; I do not 
see why we cannot raise 300 bushels per acre. 
[eastjuehent op Unhusked Cokit in the 
B.—A Missouri correspondent propounds a 
stion, w'hich we must say, in our belief, de¬ 
mathematics or ordinary guessing. He asks 
a rule for the measurement of unhusked corn 
he crib. Were the cribs equally well packed 
m, the corn ears year after year, in any dis- 
very uniform in size and w'cll filled, (for 
bins and half-filled ears have nearly as much 
k as good ones), there might, perhaps, be a 
• given. But the fact is, no two kinds of corn 
be relied upon to have the same amount of 
k- on different land the same kind of corn 
[ not have the same quantity of husk and 
in proportion to the grain; even on the 
10 field in different years, the production will 
V creatly. After all, the variation will not be 
much in the number of ears produced, as 
the amount of shelled corn they will yield; 
ile the unhusked ears wull have much the 
le apparent size and amount of husks. 
