92 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
der with an amazing expansive force.” “ 2d. Philoso¬ 
phers have usually assumed that the particles of fluids 
are round and smooth, since they are so easily moved 
among one another.” This supposition will account for 
some circumstance belonging to them. If the particles 
are round, there must be vacant spaces between them, 
in the same manner as there are vacuities between can¬ 
non balls that are piled together} between the balls 
smaller shot may be placed, and between them still 
smaller, or gravel or sand may be diffused; in a similar 
manner a certain quantity of particles of sugar can he 
taken up in water without increasing its bulk; and 
when the water has dissolved the sugar, salt may be 
dissolved in it and yet the bulk remain the same; and 
admitting that the particles of water are round, this is 
easily accounted for. Mr. Walton further states “that 
he has found by careful experiment in grinding rye, 
(weighing fifty-six pounds per bushel,) that it lost three 
and a half pounds; and many experiments in grinding 
grain it lost from one to five pounds per bushel; which 
loss could not be accounted for any way, better than 
supposing it to be the escape of fixed air. 
In answer to which, I asserted in my first communi¬ 
cation that Mr. D. Walton presumed to make it appear 
than one bushel of grain contained more than one bushel 
of loose air; and then go on to prove it by the philoso¬ 
phy of D. Blair, which says “that air weighs three 
hundred and twenty-four grains for every one thousand 
cubic inches, and that it is nine hundred times lighter 
than water.” I then state that there is two thousand 
one hundred and fifty and forty-two one hundredths cu¬ 
bic inches in a bushel; therefore, if one thousand cubic 
inches of air weighs three hundred and twenty-four 
grains, two thousand one hundred and fifty and forty- 
two one hundredths cubic inches of air will weigh one 
ounce nine dwts. but no more; and before he confines 
more loose air in a bushel of grain than one ounce nine 
dwts. he will be obliged to employ some artificial power 
to aid nature in her wonderful and mysterious work of 
its germination. 
In answer to which, Mr. D. Walton says, “ the one- 
tenth which is the lawful toll in this state, with what 
the millers in this part of the country extract in the pro¬ 
cess of cleaning, (and that too without the waste of 
grain,) would amount to more than the tenth part of 
the original weight of the grain when taken to mill; 
and until he proves that there is no unavoidable dimi¬ 
nution of weight in, the grinding of grain, or that it can 
be attributed to some other cause more certain than the 
departure of fixed air, my statements remains sound and 
unrefuted. And further, Martin’s philosophy expressly 
says, that this fixed air as it is roused, expands itself 
into a million times more space than it filled before in a 
dense body; or in other words, in the position in whieh 
nature placed it “in her wonderful and mysterious 
works of formation.” In answer to which I stated, that 
I had ground and bolted under my own inspection, two 
bushels of wheat, weighing one hundred and twenty 
pounds, and that it lost in the process of grinding one 
and one-fourth pounds, on the two bushels, which of 
course, will make a loss of ten ounces on one bushel; 
and then asseit that I do not believe that the average 
loss in grinding twenty bushels would exceed seven ounces 
per bushel. Now the mystery is, how to account for 
this loss. I will account for a part of it in two ways, 
viz. first, the dampness of the grain is absorbed by the 
heat caused by the friction of grinding, (which damp¬ 
ness or water, Blair says is nine hundred times heavier 
than air;) of this fact any person may convince himself 
by putting his hand up in the top part of the leader that 
conveys the flour from the stones; he will find it wet 
and pasted with damp flour; and in the second place, flour 
coming from the stones, hot and parfectly dry, the finest 
and dryest of it will rise into the air, there remain until 
impregnated with its dampness, then settle into every part 
of the mill. I then say, 1 consider it much more philoso¬ 
phical to attribute this loss of weight to the dampness, or 
water contained in the grain, than to suppose, as Mr. D. 
Walton has, that it is all fixed air. I then wish him to 
prove that there is more air in any species of grain, than 
the open portions of said grain will contain of loose air, 
[or if he prefers the term better, air in its natural, free 
state]; the only way he can make it appear, is, that the 
air is condensed, which I will not admit without plain 
proof. I say it is confined, if there should any appear 
in the grain, but do not believe it to be condensed. It 
is folly to assert that there is condensed air in grain; 
for this reason, before it can be condensed, the grain 
must diminish to a smaller substance than that from 
which it originated. Or as I have before stated, if it 
contains air at its formation, the air has more room as 
the grain grows; the grain may shrink some from the 
size it once attained, but before it can condense the air 
it must shrink to a smaller substance than from which 
it sprang; it may be argued that the grain receives the 
air all the time it is growing; if so, the air is not condens¬ 
ed; for that moment the grain begins to shrink, the air 
will leave it through the same passage it was received. 
I asserted that I thought he would be disappointed if 
he expected to convert nine-tenths of the agricultural 
community to the belief, that the grain they raised is 
even one-hundreth part air. I will here inform him the 
number of bushels of loose air, (or air in its free, 
natural state,) it will take to weigh lib., 5lbs. and 
121bs. It will take to weigh one pound or sixteen 
ounces, eleven bushels and one quart, to weigh five 
pounds, fifty-five bushels five quarts, to weigh twelve 
pounds, one hundred thirty-two bushels, twelve quarts; 
now in the fist place this one pound or eleven bushels, 
one quart of air, is to occupy a space of only 1-60 part 
of a bushel, (if it should be wheat weighing 60 pounds 
per bushel,) for if there is a loss of 1 pound, that is 
one-sixtieth of a bushel, and if this loss is condensed 
air, it will take 11 bushels and one quart of loose air 
to weigh 16 ounces or 1 pound, and provided his loss is 
3 1-2 pounds as he has stated it to be, in 56 pounds of 
r y e s§: 5 it this loss is fixed air it will measure 
38 bushels 19 quarts, and must occupy a space 
of gf; 6 parts of a bushels. As this is my last corn- 
munition upon this subject, I will observe that I have 
considered what Mr. Silas Walton has had to say upon 
this subject, beneath my notice. He has been quoting 
from Oliver Evens, Martin, and Blair, but is so self 
conceited, that he thinks their wisdom is nothing com¬ 
pared with his. I will assure him before he confines 
one-half the quantity of air he wishes to make exist in 
a bushel of grain, it will explode, and fracture his skull 
notwithstanding the thickness it appears to be. Respect¬ 
fully yours, WILLIAM A. STONE. 
Attention to Silk recommended. 
Shrewsbury, N. J. June 19, 1839. 
Judge Buel —Dear Sir—Will you through the medi¬ 
um of your widely extended paper, call the attention of 
the American people to this one single subject, viz.:— 
Growing raw silk in the states for home or foreign mar¬ 
ket, as an additional resource to the country, free from a 
confusion with every other subject which various wri¬ 
ters and speakers appear to confound with it; such as 
importing silk goods, manufacturing silk goods, the ad¬ 
vantages of wearing silk, SfC. My object is to concen¬ 
trate the public mind to one single subject at once.— 
The question is not (in my humble opinion,) whether 
we import twenty-five millions of dollars worth of silk 
annually, or fifty millions, or none at all, or large 
amounts in iron, hemp or other staple orfancy articles; 
for if we imported one hundred millions in silk, and could 
export to advantage the same amount in the produce of 
our country, we need not go to raising silk, (or seek 
any other resource to pay the debt,) or to manufactur¬ 
ing silk to prevent it. But the first grand question is, 
Does the whole of our imports exceed our exports? and if 
so, how much? In investigating this question, if aba- 
lance is found against us, how shall we improve our 
system of national economy, so as to keep an even ac¬ 
count with other nations? My answer is, increase the 
resources of the country, in some way or other, equal to 
the wants of the people, or such revulsions as the past 
will be a natural consequence of trading beyond means, 
and will return again in due time, as sure as the return 
of Summer and winter. If we had a despotic govern¬ 
ment, the despot might retrench expenses of living, the 
peasantry could be compelled to dispense with silk, and 
all other imported goods, both dry and wet; but free 
trade is the motto of a free people; so retrenchment is 
out of the power of a free government. A free and so¬ 
vereign people will eat, drink and wear what they 
please if they can get it. Now how shall we prepare 
to pay the balance annually counting against us in Eu¬ 
rope, or turn the balance in our own favor ? My answer 
is, go to raising raw silk in the north and west, and on 
the exhausted cotton and tobacco lands of the south, 
and add that to the cotton and tobacco of the south, and 
if the tables are not turned in less than ten years, the 
American people are not what I take them to be. We 
want union of effort. It interests the whole community. 
It would puzzle me to tell which class would be most 
benefitted by the improvement, the commercial, manu¬ 
facturing or farming community; or the north, the west 
or south. In my humble opinion, it would tend to ce¬ 
ment the Union, and secure peace at home and abroad; 
it will make the interest of all of the states more gene¬ 
rally one interest; it would be a good backer to our 
commercial community, and raise and secure their cre¬ 
dit abroad, and would tend to facilitate trade, and se¬ 
cure peace with other nations, and especially England, 
as she could obtain her raw silk of us in trade, and can 
raise none herself. Now would not raw silk equal in 
amount to the cotton in the south, be a help to the 
commercial class in times like the past, and would it 
not enable the manufacturing class to set their wheels 
agoing sooner in case of another revulsion ? And would 
it not be a profitable additional branch of farming?— 
Now, sir, will you give the ideas of an illiterate farmer, 
(submitted with humble deference,) a proper investiga¬ 
tion, and expunge or add what you think proper, and 
couch the whole in proper language, and lay this single 
subject iairlyand squarely before the American people, 
and I’ll be bound they’ll not be slow in seeing their own 
interest. Yours, &c. LYCURGUS. 
EXTRACTS, 
On the Selection of Grain Seeds, Hoots, &c. 
[j From, the Mark Lane Express ] 
The grand and distinguishing characteristic of plants 
over inorganic matter—that which characterizes their 
latent powers and living functions, is their susceptibili¬ 
ty of improvement; animals have it to a certain degree, 
but not nearly to such an extent as plants, for the pro¬ 
ductive faculty of the former cannot be increased like that 
of the latter. As is well remarked by Mr. Sharon Tur¬ 
ner, most agreeable and surprising transformations have 
arisen from this property. The rose is the product of 
cultivation; the original plant from which all our beau¬ 
tiful varieties have proceeded is considered by botanists 
to have been the common wild briar. Our plums are 
cultivated decendants of the sloe; the peach and necta¬ 
rine of the common almond tree; filberts are the im¬ 
provements of the wild hazel; the delicious apples 
whose species may 1 now be reckoned by hundreds, are the 
cultivated successors of the small austere crabs and 
wildings, which swine will scarcely eat; the original pear 
is a petty fruit, as hard and crude as the former; our 
cauliflowers, cabbages, and other domestic vegetables, 
may be regarded as almost artificial products, so much 
has human skill had to do in their production. 
If then so great a susceptibility of improvement exists 
in the productions of horticulture, it becomes a question 
of great interest and momentous importance to ascertain 
whether or not the different species of grain, roots, and 
grasses, employed in agriculture are possessed of a like 
inherent susceptibility. It is a well known fact that 
grain, if allowed to degenerate, returns into a state very 
similar to that of some of our coarser grasses, which of 
itself is a very strong argument as respects the point at 
issue. But we have still more unequivocal evidence that 
wheat, even in what may be denominated its present im¬ 
proved state when compared with the inferiority of its 
supposed original, is possessed of ilie principle of pro¬ 
ductiveness to an extent fully as great as the vegetables 
mentioned in the above quotation. In proof of this, we 
would refer to the experiments instituted by Colonel Le 
Couteur on the different varieties of wheat, as fully de¬ 
tailed by him in a valuable pamphlet which we have 
just perused, and which we would recommend to the 
careful consideration of every agriculturist. Colonel 
Le Couteur began seriously to cultivate the important 
plant of wheat so as to procure the several soils distinct 
from each other, and at the same time note the experi 
ments made on the culture, produce, weight of the grain, 
and qualities of the corn, flour and straw. He has kept 
a most minute account of the experiments, and taken the 
greatest care to preserve the best sorts in their purity, 
and the result of his experience is, that he believes the 
proper mode of cultivation of wheat is yet unknown or 
unpractised. The Colonel, before he turned his atten¬ 
tion to the selection and purification of wheat, consider¬ 
ed his crops tolerably pure, yet on Professor Le Gasca, 
a celebrated botanist, examining them, he selected from 
them, twenty-three sorts, of which some have since 
been discovered to be three weeks later in ripening than 
others, which circumstance accounts for the many shri¬ 
velled, ill-grown grains in a sample of wheat, arising no 
doubt from the unequal growth of the many varieties 
that link in the purest crop. The importance of ascer¬ 
taining the qualities of the different varieties of wheat, 
is well exemplified by Col. Le Couteur in respect to their 
relative value as to produce of straw. The quantity of 
straw produced from a single ear of one of his best va¬ 
rieties, No. 1, Jersey Danzig, was 31b. 3oz. of wheat, and 
31b. 9oz. of straw, only 6oz. more straw than wheat; No. 
2, “Album Densum,” produced 21b. 12oz. of wheat and 
more straw than wheat; No. 5, “ Coturaneum,” six 
ounces more straw than grain; and No. 8, “ Koelen,” 
41bs. 4oz. of wheat and only 31bs. 13oz. of straw. The 
next, No. 9, the Red Compact, produced only 21b. 9oz. of 
wheat from 31bs. 15oz. of straw, an excess of one pound 
six ounces of straw over the grain in this last, whereas 
the former, No. 8, a most excellent and superior variety, 
there was an excess in grain of seven ounces over the 
straw. Col. Le Couteur justly observes, that by a pro¬ 
per system of culture, it must appear obvious from these 
facts that wheat should be brought to such perfection, 
as to produce more grain than straw; Nos. 8, 10 and 13, 
varieties selected and tested by actual practice, having 
done so. Now by reference to the article “British hus¬ 
bandry” chap.—page 154 of that excellent work, the 
farmer’s series of useful knowledge, we find it stated 
that “ the straw is generally reckoned to be about dou¬ 
ble the weight of the grain.” We believe this maybe 
perfectly correct as far as regards ordinary husbandry, 
yet if the results obtained by Col. Le Couteur’s experi¬ 
ments are of any value, we must conclude that the pro¬ 
per culture of wheat, if known, is unpractised. 
These experiments, however, were notconfined to the 
weight or productiveness of the different varieties of 
wheat; on the contrary the Colonel continued his re¬ 
searches from the straw and grain, on to the meal itself, 
in order to be fully satisfied which of the sorts under 
experiment contained the greatest proportion of meal or 
flour, and the result nearly proved that the most produc¬ 
tive sort in grain was also the most farinaceous. A cir¬ 
cumstance of a very important nature was elucidated in 
the progress of these experiments, and proves the com¬ 
parative advantages to be derived from actual practice, 
skill, and observation, to that of science alone for the 
purpose of testing and proving the merits of the different 
varieties of grain. Professor Le Gasca with all his ex¬ 
perience and botanical research, was impressed with the 
notion, that a variety of No. 14 was one of the most 
productive, while it was proved by actual experiment to 
be the most inferior of the fourteen sorts tested, evinc¬ 
ing the positive necessity of comparative experiments 
to ascertain the relative produce of wheat, which the 
theory alone, even of the learned Professor, could never 
have discovered, he merely having judged from the ex¬ 
ternal appearance of the wheat, its squareness and com¬ 
pact form; than which, nothing could have proved more 
deceptive. 
We have frequently in the course of these letters in¬ 
culcated the advantages of a change of seed grain, and 
the adaption of certain districts for producing the diffe¬ 
rent varieties in greater perfection, than that of others, 
and we are glad to observe, that Col. Le Couteur arrives 
at the same conclusion. It indeed must inevitably stand 
to reason, that the fine white wheat which is grown on 
a rich fertile loam suitably retentive of moisture, can; 
