THE CULTIVATOR. 
105 
many ingenious, fine spun arguments in opposition to 
the opinion which I hold in common with numerous 
other agriculturists, but no proofs whatever have ac¬ 
companied them, and therefore I must remain an in¬ 
fidel, until they are sustained and corroborated, by such 
facts, as should always be deemed indispensable to es¬ 
tablish any practice whatever, in any of the various 
branches of husbandry. To collect these facts is a slow, 
and most tedious process, not very flattering to that 
pride of opinion which delights in speculative theories 
of our own elucidation, and sickens at the mere thought 
of the labor necessary to make, to watch, and to record 
accurate experiments in agriculture- In no other way, 
I think, can we account for those differences of opinion 
as to matters of practice, which are often found among 
our brethren, where all the facts are on one side. But 
to refuse to believe in that which we cannot explain, 
unless in some way that tickles our own vanity, gave rise 
to the sect of sceptic philosophers, and it is to be feared, 
will keep up the breed as long as the world stands. Let 
me not be here misunderstood. Far be it from me to 
object to theory and speculation, provided the sole ob¬ 
ject in concocting and maintaining them, be to arrive 
at truth. As this should be the aim of all, I am in fa¬ 
vor of the utmost latitude of discussion in the honest 
pursuit of it. But I do, and will forever protest against 
that practice which is far too common amongst us, of 
regarding plausible and apparently scientific conjectures, 
so much more than the actual results of experiments 
fairly and accurately made, as not unfrequently to in¬ 
dulge our fancies with the former, even in direct oppo¬ 
sition to the latter. Take, for example, the two con¬ 
flicting creeds as to the best mode of applying manures, 
and test them by the uniformly concurringresults of the 
several experiments which I have stated. All these re¬ 
sults undeniably prove, that the surface application was 
best; although the kinds of manure differed considera¬ 
bly. And what have we in opposition, any facts what¬ 
ever? Notone; and only the conjecture, that the evapo¬ 
ration from surface spread manure must carry off the 
greater and best portion of the food of plants therein 
contained. But that such evaporation cannot thus act, 
seems to me to be unquestionably proved by every fact 
I have mentioned: for, if it did, then the land of sum¬ 
mer cow-pens ploughed up as soon as removed, would, 
in every case, have produced better crops, than that of 
the unploughed, instead of doing it in none. Similar re¬ 
sults too must have followed in the other cases I have 
stated, although I have never seen nor heard of their 
doing it in any. The effects however, which really have 
taken place, (facts though they undeniably are,) hap¬ 
pen to contradict, as plainly as we see the nose on a 
man’s face, certain preconceived fictions, or ingenious 
theories, if you please to call them so—quoad manures 
—in the propagation of which much paper and ink has 
already been consumed, much head-work is still em¬ 
ployed; and what is to be done ? Shall all this labor, 
all the ponderous volumes elaborated by it, all the cogi¬ 
tations in support of those theories, which are now tak¬ 
ing the rounds in our agricultural papers—shall all be dis¬ 
carded as things serving only to show how much fonder 
men are of their own speculations, than of facts the 
occurrence of which brings them no credit for remarka¬ 
ble talents ? Or, shall we still cling to these theories, 
maugre the facts, merely because we have already shed 
so much ink, and spent so much time in laborious ef¬ 
forts to sustain them ? I can answer only for myself by 
saying, that I will ever abide by facts in preference even 
to my own opinion, whenever they conflict with each 
other. But in regard to the subject now under consi¬ 
deration, I believe there is a perfect accordance between 
them. Your subscriber however, may possibly think 
that I have “jumped too speedily to my conclusions;” I 
will therefore, respectfully offer to him such explana¬ 
tion of the operation of surface spread manures, as has 
been satisfactory, at least to myself. Should it prove 
so to him, I shall have gained my object in complying 
with his request. 
My belief, founded on the facts already stated, is, 
that all the fertilizing substances of manures are solu¬ 
ble in water, and will remain uninjured themselves, and 
useless to plants until the solution begins, whether they 
be deposited on or under the earth’s surface. I also be¬ 
lieve, that this solution is caused by every fall of rain, 
and is immediately absorbed by the subjacent soil, which 
absorption results from two causes; first, the principle 
of gravity, and secondly, the stronger attraction of the 
earth than of the atmosphere, for every substance in 
solution which constitutes the food of plants. More¬ 
over, that the earth never parts with this food, when 
thus absorbed, to any thing but the plants themselves ; 
for it is their peculiar aliment, and not that of the at¬ 
mosphere, whose existence, for ought we know to the 
contrary, is entirely independent of it, although its 
agency seems essential to the health and vigour of all 
plants. If this were not the fact; if, (for example.) the 
earth did give the best and greatest portion of this food 
to the atmosphere ; or, if it escaped from surface spread 
manure, before gravity and attraction could impart it 
to the earth, then the evaporation which is supposed to 
be the medium of conveyance, and which is known to 
be constantly going on from the soil, would, in process 
of time, certainly render it barren, even without any 
cultivation whatever. Yet neither total nor partial 
barrenness is ever known to be produced by any other 
cause, than incessant culture without manure. That 
evaporation does take off something from manure while 
in a moist state, is proved by the offensive smell which 
constantly exhales from it until it is entirely dry. This 
smell is excited by a gas which is said by some, to con¬ 
tain the most valuable portion of the food of plants- 
But admit the fact, where is the proof this portion be¬ 
ing lost? I say there is none. On the contrary, we 
have what I think a conclusive reason for believing, 
that this food is immediately given by the atmosphere 
to the tops of plants, as more suitable to them than to 
their roots. My reason for this belief is, the result of 
the following experiment which I have known to be re¬ 
peated several times. All the bark was taken off’from 
around the body of certain young trees, in a ring about 
three inches wide, for the purpose, in the first case 
which I saw, of ascertaining whether this process would 
not kill the tree. But to the surprise of us all, not 
more than a year or two elapsed, before that part of 
the body above the ring became obviously larger than 
the part below, and this difference in size increased 
every year afterwards, as I had frequent opportunities 
of noticing. 
Another reason why I believe, that manures act bet¬ 
ter, if spread on the surface of land, than when buried 
under it in the customary manner, is, that in the first 
case, the rain water carries the dissolved substances no 
deeper than the roots of most of our cultivated plants 
always grow, unless they are forced out of their natural 
course; and there these substances remain fast held by 
the earth’s chemical affinity, until the stronger attrac¬ 
tion of the spongioles of the roots begins to act upon 
them. But in the second case, that is, where manure 
is ploughed under as soon as spread, all the food of 
plants contained therein, being placed at once quite as 
deep as their spongioles naturally grow, and this too, 
before the rains begin to dissolve it, the subsequent so¬ 
lutions caused thereby, necessarily sink still deeper, and 
generally beyond the reach of the plants for whose 
nourishment they are designed. In no other way can I 
account for the long noticed and invariable superiority 
of crops produced by surface spread manure, to those 
produced by that which was ploughed in. To me there 
appears to be but this alternative, either to deny the 
facts already stated, which I myself have often wit¬ 
nessed, or to explain them, (if we must theorise on the 
subject at all,) in some such way as the one which I 
have just-offered to your subscriber, and to such olhers 
of our brethren as may choose to examine it. Permit 
me further to add, that on this subject nature herself 
seems to offer us a useful lesson, if we were not too wise 
in our own conceits to be taught by such an instruc¬ 
tress ; for I know not a single exception to her practice 
of depositing on the earth’s surface, all the putrescent 
substances of every nature and kind, which appear de¬ 
signed to preserve her fecundity. 
In close connexion with this subject, there is one other 
matter on which I will take the liberty to express an 
opinion, although your subscriber has not asked for it. 
This is, in regard to the beststate in which manure can 
be applied. So far as my own experience enables me 
to judge, an experience confirmed by that of many others 
in whose practical knowledge of the subject I have great 
confidence, I believe that the fresher it is, the better; 
for in such state, so much less will suffice, than in any 
more advanced stage of putrefaction, that time, labor, 
and value are all saved in the application: while none 
of the alledged “ burning ” ascribed to the manures be¬ 
ing “too hot,” ever occurs, if the quantity used be les¬ 
sened in proportion to its freshness. This injury to 
plants, if I mistake not, is always caused by excess in 
the quantity, and not by the quality of the manure we 
apply to them, although the two things are often con¬ 
founded, and thereby contribute to the perpetuation of 
error in regard to the nature and operation of all fer¬ 
tilizing substances. There is not, I believe, an agri¬ 
culturist of any experience in our country, who has not 
had frequent opportunities of witnessing numerous facts 
to prove the correctness of these opinions. But, as I 
before remarked, we are all vastly fonder of our own 
fancies, than of facts in opposition to them ; and conse¬ 
quently pass all such without notice, or, when too strong 
and obtrusive to be entirely disregarded, we spare no 
labor nor pains to force them, as far as we possibly can 
to subserve some previously conceived notion which our 
silly pride forbids us to abandon. This obstacle to the 
progress of all improvement, but especially in husband¬ 
ry, is one of the most pernicious of our besetting sins; 
and but for this, it seems to me impossible that any con¬ 
troversy should still exist in regard to the best manner 
and state in which to apply manures to land. Two or 
three years, at most, would have been amply sufficient 
to establish the most beneficial practice, if all those 
whose special interest it is to ascertain it, would have 
diligently and impartially resorted to comparative ex¬ 
periments, accurately and assiduously made for the pur¬ 
pose, rather than to speculating and theorizing about it. 
But it can never be too late to make such experiments. 
Let me therefore, most earnestly, but respectfully re¬ 
commend to your subscriber, who has done me the honor 
to ask my opinion, as well as to all others who may 
still have doubts on the subject, forthwith to commence 
making trials of the different methods of applying ma¬ 
nures, and also of the different states in which it is ap¬ 
plied. The opinions of experienced men are certainly 
well worth consulting, in regard to all matters connected 
with their respective trades, professions or callings; 
but we should never implicitly take them as guides for 
our own practice, any longer than until we can have 
leisure to test their correctness by actual experiments. 
When a number of these concur in producing the san e 
uniform result, it is a matter of very little comparative 
importance, how others may endeavor to account fcr 
the fact, as the fact itself is the all important thing, es¬ 
pecially in every practical art. But this war between 
speculation and practice, between nature’s own doings, 
and our fanciful ways of accounting for them, is des¬ 
tined, I fear, never to cease, so long as such a thing re¬ 
mains in the world, as pride of opinion. Let a man 
once commit himself so far, either in speaking or writ¬ 
ing, as publickly to deliver what he considers an argu¬ 
ment in support of his “ ipse dixit,” and there are a 
hundred chances to one that he persists in it to the day 
of his death. 
In thus complying with your subscriber’s request, I 
may perhaps have said more than either he or you ex¬ 
pected or wished. If I have done so, I must rely for 
my excuse, on the proverbial garrulity of old age, un¬ 
less your own kind feelings will suggest a better, I re¬ 
main, dear sir, yours very respectfully, 
JAMES M. GARNETT. 
On Road Making. 
South Lee, Mass. June, 1839. 
Judge Buel —Sir—The improvements in the science 
of road laying and building, in the March number of 
the 6th volume of the Cultivator, I highly approve of, 
so far as it is carried; and if no better system is pro¬ 
posed you will make such use as you please of the fol¬ 
lowing suggestion: Let the road in its construction imi¬ 
tate or copy the rail-road as near as practicable; that is, 
keep the wheels level, and go with an inclined plane 
from one bar or breakwater to another, and make the 
bars as seldom as the safe keeping of the road will admit; 
but when necessary, make them efficient, with perma- 
nen t materials with from two to three feet rise, according 
to the levelness or pitch of the ground, always making 
provision for both wheels to rise simultaneously, never 
allowing the travel to sink from the summit of the 
break, below the natural descent of the land; and also 
never allow an oblique bar to be made on the travel, for 
that throws the load upon one wheel or side, which 
racks or strains the vehicle, jeopards a high load, strains 
the animals, discomposes the passengers and deranges 
the whole concern; whereas, when a road is built as 
above, should accidents happen from restive animals or 
other causes, you are far less exposed to upsetting than 
when oblique breaks are in the formation of the road. 
Having realized the folly of the general practice in road 
building, and witnessed the vast amount of funds wasted 
by thoughtless road commissioners, or surveyors of our 
highways ; and where the experiment has been made, 
I have seen it conclusively demonstrated, that from fifty 
to seventy-five per cent have been wholly thrown away 
by unscientific overseers ; therefore I approve of large 
districts being apportioned to men of liberal minds, in 
building as well as in locating our common highways, 
as a means to avoid the evil consequences which often' 
arise from a limited selfishness, which operates to the 
mutual disadvantage of the taxpayer and the traveller. 
Yours, &c. A RECENT SUBSCRIBER. 
Heavy Sheep. 
Spout-Run, June 14, 1839. 
Hon. J. Buel— Dear Sir—Since your readers are 
chiefly agriculturists, the following notice may be some¬ 
what interesting in the Cultivator. 
When the sheep at Spout-Run were sheared, on the 
18th of May, a yearling ram and five of the ewes were 
weighed, as follows: ram 174 lbs. his fleece 5 lbs; 1st 
ewe, 196 lbs. fleece 5 lbs; 2d ewe, 174 lbs; 3d ewe, 190 
lbs. fleece 7 lbs; 4th ewe, 164lbs. fleece 5 lbs; 5th ewe, 
164 lbs. her fleece 5 lbs; only two are considered at all 
above the average weight of the flock. The wool was 
clean washed, otherwise the fleeces would have weighed 
froip 7J to 11 lbs. and the ewes were all suckling lambs. 
These two considerations taken in view, it is believed 
to be the greatest exhibit of weight of carcass and fleece 
made in the United States by a flock of ewes. These 
sheep have been raised and improved by my friend, Mr. 
Ths. H. Burwell, of Spout-Run, Clark county, Ya.— 
Respectfully yours, &c. A SUBSCRiBER. 
The Farmer should Read and Think. 
Schenectady, May, 1839. 
J. Buel —Dear Sir—We learn from the most skilful 
anatomists, that the brain of all vertebral animals is of 
rapid growth and increase, from conception to birth, 
when the brain of all such animals in the scale below 
man, is complete and full as at maturity of age. Some 
evidence of this may be observed from their activity and 
facility of helping themselves to food, &c. With men 
it is otherwise, which may also be observed from his 
inability to do any thing for himself in infancy. 
The brain in man, is also of the same rapid growth 
from conception, but is not complete at birth. It con¬ 
tinues the same rapid increase in volume and improve¬ 
ment, till the seventh year of age, when it is also com¬ 
plete, and is fully developed, as at mature age, with 
little increase to seventy years. All the increase and 
volume of the brain after birth in man, is wholly want¬ 
ing in all other animals. This fact shows plainly the 
beneficence of the great Creator, in bestowing on man 
greater gifts than on any of his creatures. 
When the brain has become complete in man, at his 
seventh year, it is like a large blank book full of leaves, 
ready to receive impressions. He now becomes a moral 
being, with capacity for intellectual improvement, as 
well as physical. He is now to learn his relations to his 
God, as the great and beneficent giver ; to himself, as 
the immediate field of operation ; and to his neighbor, 
as the comfortable and convenient fellow associate, in 
the mutual uses and improvements of the immense good 
gifts of the great Creator in the relations here, and of 
the infinitely greater gifts and provisions for a better 
