56 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
of a shilling in cash, except for the purchase of a paper 
of seed. The price of labor or board may be thought 
by some, perhaps, to be too low; or that the estimate 
of the quantity of labor bestowed on some of the opera¬ 
tions are not sufficiently high. Let such add any amount, 
to either labor or compensation, which good judgment 
may deem sufficient; still the expense of a plantation will 
be trifling, and within the means of any one who is desir¬ 
ous to embark in the business. The tree is very tena¬ 
cious of life; it will bear stripping of its leaves to a 
moderate extent, the next year after transplanting, and 
then begin to yield a return for its cost; the silk worm 
is healthy, and the attendance it requires can be perform¬ 
ed by children, aged people and females; its profits are 
greater, its risk less, and the labor it requires lighter, 
than any other farming operation; its production is 
easily and cheaply transported to market, and meets a 
ready sale, at a high price. 
Why, then, should our farmers longer delay to enter 
upon the raising of silk, by which they will enrich them¬ 
selves, render our country independent of foreign na¬ 
tions for our supply, and save at home those millions 
which are every year sent abroad for its purchase. 
R. WESTON. 
Sandy-Hill , Washington county, State of New-York. 
Light Crops, &c. in Illinois. 
Naperville, III. March 19, 1839. 
Last year, in this section, it was rather discouraging 
to farmers; on account of the drought, not one-half a 
crop was realized. Spring ivheat very poor—oats very 
light—last fall very dry; what winter wheat was sown, 
not one-half came up; I sowed fifty acres, and I do not 
think that over one-third of that came up. This spring 
some of it has shown itself, that did not make its ap¬ 
pearance last fall; what it will amount to, I cannot tell. 
The farmers here, generally, are afraid to put in fall 
wheat, from the fact that much of it kills out during 
winter and spring. I should judge that the system of 
farming in this country was bad. Before ploughing, they 
burn off the stubble, and all other matter which will 
burn; their straw, instead of converting it into manure, 
they pile up and burn to get it out of the way. Thus 
the land is left without support, except from the ashes 
made from the burning stubble and grass, which does 
not amount to much in my opinion. 
There is a kind of wheat in this country, which by 
some is called Italian, and by others Siberian; it is a 
hard flint wheat, large heavy kernels, weighs from 62 
to 65 lbs. per measured bushel. Our millers complain 
about grinding it, on account of its being so very hard. 
We have another kind here, that is also by some called 
Siberian, and by others Italian; this latter kind is large 
kernels, not so heavy or hard as the first mentioned 
kind. Can you, from my description, say which is 
Italian and which Siberian, or is it not either? I in¬ 
tend to sow thirty bushels of each kind this spring, so 
that I shall be able to determine which is the best yield, 
and most profitable. Respectfully yours, 
LEWIS ELLSWORTH. 
Artificial Crossing of Vegetables. 
Mr. Buel —Dear Sir—By frequently observing seed¬ 
lings of different species, and of the same family ma¬ 
turing side by side in the garden of the heedless farm¬ 
er, I am influenced by a disinterested endeavor to men¬ 
tion the subject of improvement and degeneration of ve¬ 
getables, by crossing. 
It is a very common saying with us, “ my seed has 
run out,” when in fact, instead of “ running out,” the 
plant, if rightly cultivated, may retain its first purity, 
and in most cases advance its fecundation, and be bene¬ 
ficially improved. 
With many, the common practice is, to select a place 
in the garden to propagate the beet/ turnip, cabbage, 
onions, &c. of the same and different species, all ming¬ 
ling side by side, seemingly not aware that although the 
parents may be of a different species, the progeny in 
the vegetable kingdom, as well as the animal, are in¬ 
clined to take a new form. It being the natural tenden¬ 
cy to mixture in corn, potatoes, cabbage, artichoke, 
turnip, beet and radish families. Therefore, to retain 
the present qualities of each variety, the different kinds 
should seed by themselves, remote from any other spe¬ 
cies of the family. 
Several species among the common productions of our 
country may be improved as well as degenerated. Among 
these are wheat, rye, oats, Indian corn, pease, beans, 
potatoes and the squash. 
The specific change in vegetables, as well as in ani¬ 
mals, can be produced only by a slow and gradual pro¬ 
cess, a valuable property which at first is merely acci¬ 
dental, may, from one generation to another, by a 
repetition of impressions, become at last confirmed and 
hereditary. 
When new properties are impressed on one genera¬ 
tion, they are in some degree inherited by the next, 
which, after receiving additional and stronger impres¬ 
sions of the same kind, at last, the? effect is carried to 
its ultimate point, by selecting the best for propagation 
from year to year. 
The new and choice varieties may be retained, if not 
carelessly allowed to grow among, or alongside of other 
inferior species, being exposed to impregnation by the 
male parent of its inferior, while in blossom. 
I have seen this strikingly illustrated, by an experi¬ 
ment on the pie plant or American rhubarb. The 
common yellow dock grew near this vegetable, and by a 
few crossings, a new variety was produced, which par¬ 
took of the nature of both. Your patron, 
SOLOMON W. JEWETT. 
Weybridge, 10th April, 1839. 
Millers’ Tolls. 
Burlington Co. N. J. 3d mo. 11th, 1839. 
Friend Buel —I had presumed that any thing more 
on the “ vexed question” of “ millers’ tolls” was inad¬ 
missible in your columns; but inasmuch as you have 
seen proper to open them again, not only in regard to 
an experiment which it was obligatory upon you to no¬ 
tice, but also some erroneous remarks of a personal 
character, on which account I think I am entitled to be 
heard again, after which I bid adieu to the subject and 
to your correspondent William A. Stone, whose optics, 
whether natural or artificial, are possessed of too great 
magnifying powers, presenting that to his vision which 
never existed ; for he cannot show in either of my com¬ 
munications where I have said that all the loss alluded 
to is to be attributed to fixed air, or that all solid bodies 
contain it; and I consider his declaration of it but a 
forced construction of my words, or the effusions of a 
volatile imagination that can dress off an idea in a garb 
of gossamer to please its own fancy or to suit its pur¬ 
poses. 
I consider it of no consequence what the natural cau¬ 
ses of the loss may be, or whether one or many. It is 
not them, but the effect of them that I wished to make 
known and am much obliged to our friend of Rahway 
for his assistance in establishing the fact. I also have 
made an experiment, confirming a part of my premises, 
viz: on the 21st of 1st mo. last, I accurately weighed a 
quantity of wheat brought to my mill belonging to a re¬ 
gular reader of the Cultivator, full as clean as is usual 
to take to mill. I then cleaned it and weighed again, 
and found it had lost 11 lbs per bushel, which add to W. 
A. Stone’s 10 ounces and it will make nearly 2 lbs. per 
bushel loss. But since your correspondent contends for 
causes, I am very willing to admit his first to be a 
prominent one, but his other lighter than air in every 
sense. But why does he account for only a part of the 
loss? Is he afraid of the explosion of fixed air? For 
can he suppose that air does not constitute a part of 
wheat, and that too in a fixed or condensed state, al¬ 
though it does not grow as large or as hollow as a 
pumpkin; for the milky substance he speaks of must 
either harden and condense, or clarify, as in berries. 
And what does his favorite Blair say ? Why that wa¬ 
ter, air, and all other fluids are in a certain space equal¬ 
ly solid with the hardest body. I am happy to congra¬ 
tulate him in converting ten-tenths of the agricultural 
community to the belief that more than one in a hundred 
parts of their wheat is water, and is absorbed by heat in 
the process of grinding. Seeing his proof is so posi¬ 
tive, for he says, he has lost 10 ounces per bushel; and 
as 960 ounces make one bushel or 60 lbs; and the 100th 
part of that is but 9.6 ounces, therefore it must be com¬ 
posed of more than 100 parts of water, and that it is 
much more philosophical to attribute the loss to it than 
to suppose it all to be fixed air as Mr. David Walton has. 
Now I have no objections to his philosophy being re¬ 
ceived. It will answer my purpose full as well; for it 
matters nothing to the farmer whether his grain loses 
by the form of air or water. The object I contend for 
is granted, and I am now perfectly satisfied. Respect¬ 
fully, DAYID WALTON. 
Millers’ Tolls. 
Medford, N. J. 3d mo. 9th, 1839. 
Friend Buel —From a previous editorial remark, it 
would appear you would not readily give insertion to 
further comments under this head; but seeing in a late 
number of your paper, not only the experiment called 
for by the editor, but an appendage of argumentative 
strictures on previously advanced propositions, I con¬ 
sider (if I meet with a corresponding liberality of feel- 
ling and sentiment from the proprietor) I can with the 
same propriety, take up a small portion of your paper 
as your correspondent, William A. Stone, who in his 
last, contends my former assertions are erroneous, by 
arguments, the principal facts on which they are found¬ 
ed it will be seen are incorrect. He considers it absurd 
to say wheat contains fixed or condensed air, “ which he 
says, he will not admit without plain proof; because if it 
contains air while in its milky state, it has more room as 
the grain grows.” This is an error of no small magni¬ 
tude. The grain with us contracts from its milky state 
as it ripens. I presume he was rather hasty in making 
this reply, or at least not prepared to, from actual ob¬ 
servation. Though to do him justice, it is believed the 
cause he assigned for the loss sustained during the pro¬ 
gress of the manufacture of his wheat into flour, is ob¬ 
vious, the effect variable, and the result as justly attri¬ 
butable, (from the profound data of O. Evans, whose 
experiments no doubt were rigidly exact as his own,) 
to the escape of fixed air or the loss occasioned there¬ 
by. But in opposition to the demonstrations of O. E. 
and to prove the impossibility of my assertions, with re¬ 
gard to fixed air, he exultingly declares thisWise man 
has discovered what no philosopher has done before 
him; referring to his favorite author, and says, Blair’s 
definition of solidity, “ is that property which every 
body possesses of not permitting any other body to oc¬ 
cupy the same place with it at the same time.” Here 
he has inappropriately used the quotation of Blair, and 
for his further information, I will annex, verbatim, the 
illustration and experiment of this author belonging to 
his definition. 
Illustration. — “ If a piece of wood or metal occupy a 
certain space, before any thing else can take possession 
of that space, the wood or metal must be removed.” 
Experiment. — “ If some water be put in a tube closed 
at one end, and a piece of wood be inserted that fits the 
inside of the tube very accurately, it will be impossible 
to get the wooden piston to the bottom of the tube un¬ 
less the water is taken away.” 
2d. “ The experiment may be made with air instead 
of water.” 
Corollary. —“Therefore, water, air and all other 
fluids are in a certain space equally solid with the hard¬ 
est body.” 
I cannot conceive how your correspondent, from these 
quotations, can invalidate my previous assertion ; for a 
few considerations will show, that two bodies of exter¬ 
nal figure or form, (for these are essential properties of 
all bodies,) without regard to their size, composition or 
inherent properties, cannot exist in the same place at 
the same time. The author, in this experiment, has no 
allusion to the substances which, by union or chemical 
combination, form these masses. Analysis has shown, 
that during the decomposition of wood are obtained a 
quantity of water, an acid, several kinds of air, and 
there remains carbon, a black porous substance called 
charcoal. These quotations from this author only prove 
solidity to be essential to all bodies, and before one can 
occupy the space of another in identity, the latter must 
be removed or annihilated, which is not acquired by 
human aid. Since the power of Omnipotence was re¬ 
quired to create something out of nothing, that same 
Omnipotence will be required to reduce any thing again 
to nothing. His inference from that quotation cannot 
be admitted; thus his anticipations on this score are 
completely frustrated, while my proposition remains 
good and authentic. It would be more wise, at least 
more exemplary, if this man before making public ha¬ 
rangues on the wisdom of others, would be more lavish 
in giving his own publicity. The critic catches at the 
word fixed or condensed air, (which I connected as syno¬ 
nymous terms, and are equally appropriate as his own 
“ loose” air,) for there is as much reason to believe it 
exists in a fixed as a “loose” free state. In his last 
communication I find no proof against the point I con¬ 
tend for; and from the determination Oliver Evans 
made to write on this subject, I believe justice was his 
motive, and his knowledge deduced from experiment 
and observation; who for many years pursued the bu¬ 
siness of a miller, and understood the mechanism of 
mills for grinding wheat and other grains, and at that 
time was the most skilful millwright and experienced 
miller in this or perhaps any part of the United States. 
From renowned authority, I assume my statement to 
be correct, and do scrupulously adhere to it until the 
contrary shall be proved. Respectfully, &c. 
SILAS WALTON. 
Suggestions to Builders of Stone or Brick Houses 
—Asphaltum Pavement. 
New-York, March 18, 1839. 
J. Buel, Esq.—Dear Sir—Having been engaged in 
building some fifteen years, and feeling much indebted 
to others for the useful information I have received 
during that period, I will offer a few remarks in an¬ 
swer to the second and third queries of your subscriber 
at Morristown; and although they may not benefit him 
much, they may be of service to those who have yet to 
erect country dwellings. To such I would say, never 
erect a house of brick or stone, unless overruling cir¬ 
cumstances compel you to adopt that course. If so, fur 
off all your outside walls with joist or strips of plank, 
and, lath and plaster on them, instead of plastering on 
the walls. By so doing, a part of the evil arising from 
a stone or brick building, may be obviated. It is a 
common opinion, that all the objections to stone and 
brick buildings in exposed situations, arise from the 
walls receiving moisture at the surface. That injury 
does arise from this cause, there can be no doubt; but 
as human ingenuity and skill can overcome it, it sinks 
into insignificance. The irremediable evil exists in the 
condensation of vapor, with which, I presume, every 
one who drinks cold water in summer, is acquainted.— 
The walls of an isolated stone or brick building, will 
retain the cold they have imbibed during winter, until 
May or June; and holding an unequal temperature 
with the atmosphere, will condense all the vapor which 
comes in contact with them. We often see the water 
running down the walls and windows, and find the 
rooms chilly, damp and uncomfortable, while the air 
out of doors is bland, warm and delightful. This fact 
could be established by a thousand witnesses, while the 
cause remains almost unnoticed. A stone palace and a 
stone prison are alike in one respect at least, and both 
are destructive of health and comfort, unless they are 
kept warm by fire, and well aired, until midsummer. 
I would not increase the chills of those who suffer the 
evils of a stone or brick house in the country, or any 
exposed situation, but if T could, I would prevent an in¬ 
crease of the evil. It may be asked why these effects 
are not experienced in cities where most of the buildings 
are composed of brick, I answer, they are more com¬ 
pactly built, and the walls protect each other and seven 
in ten of the rooms have fire in them continually during 
winter. To your correspondent at Morristown,(and there 
are others there suffering with him from the same cause,) 
I would say, if your walls have not been painted or white¬ 
washed so as to prevent the cohesion of mortar, take two 
parts, by measure, of clean sand, and one of good fresh 
burnt lime; slack dry; mix and use while hot or warm; 
lay the coat on thin and float it; finish up like hard finish 
