VOLUME I. 
MOORE'S RURAL NEAV-YORKER, 
PUBLISHED WEEKLY. 
Office in Burns’ Block, corner of Buffalo and State 
streets, {entrance on State,) Rochester. 
CONDUCTED BY D. D. T. MOORE. 
(Late PubUslier and Associate Editor Gen. Fanner.) 
L. B. LANGWORTHY, Associate Editor. 
Corresponding Editors: 
ELON CO.MSTO CK an d II. C. WHITE. 
Educational Department by L. WETHERELL. 
PROGRESS AND IMPROVEMENT. 
ANCIENT PLOWS AND PLOWING- 
We continue our extracts from Ancient 
Agricultural Literature in the last London 
Quarterly, by condensing some curious in-’ 
formation on Roman Plowing. 
The reviewer quotes the following from 
Dickson’s “ Husbandry of the Ancients,” 
as the result of elaborate investigations:— 
“ The ancients had all the different kinds of 
plows that we have at present in Europe, j 
though perhaps not so exactly constructed. 
They had plows without mould-boards, and 
plows with mould-boards; they had plows 
without coulters, and plows with coulters; 
they had plows without wheels, and plows 
with wheels; they had broad pointed-shares, 
and narrow-pointed shares; they even had, 
what I have not yet met with amongst the 
modems, shares not only with sharp sides 
and points, but wdth high-raised cutting 
tops. Were we well acquainted with the 
construction of all these, perhaps it would j 
be found that the improvements made by 
the moderns in this article are not so great 
as many persons are apt to imagine.” 
Of the manner in which the four plow- 
ings given their wheat fallows were execu¬ 
ted, there is much obscurity. We are not 
certain from a single expression in Pliny 
which relates to it, whether the furrows 
were nine inches deep, or only nine inches 
wide, but from the amount rated as a day’s 
work for a yoke of oxen, suppose it must 
mean the latter. ^hey were not, however, 
very superficial, for Pliny will not allow a 
depth of three inches to be a plowing, but 
calls it a scarification. As moreover in the 
“ prosindere,” it was not unusual to attach 
six or eight oxen to one plow, it seems prob¬ 
able that once at least in the fallow course, 
the land was stirred to a considerable depth. 
There ai-e several maxims about going be¬ 
low the root" of a.. weeds. We should 
bear in mind that the Roman plow did not 
of necessity turn a furrow though it was 
capable of doing so by a direction given to 
it by the holder. Our word furrow, implies 
a slice of land turned over—whereas their 
word, sulcus, implies only a certain breadth 
disturbed and lightened up. The object of 
their fallow plowings, was to stir the land 
to an even depth. To effect this they pre¬ 
scribed very narrow and equal breadths and 
very straight lines. They had not the 
trouble which we experience from the cir¬ 
cumstance that the plow, in going and re¬ 
turning, turns the slice opposite ways. The 
Roman plowman returned on his own traces 
and one criterion of the perfection of his 
work was, that the surface should be left so 
even as to make it difficult to discern where 
the plow had gone. The overlooker is rec¬ 
ommended to walk over the newly plowed 
field, and to thrust in repeatedly a pointed 
ed stick, by which he will discover wheth¬ 
er any land be left unmoved. 
In order to ensure perfect culture their ! 
second plowing was always across the first. 
The chp,racteristic of Roman plowing was 
precision. To move uneven breadths was 
called to plow sulco vario, and was much 
condemned. Baulks were called scamna, and 
were said to diminish the crop, and bring a 
bad name upon the land. He who plowed 
crooked was said to prevaricare', whence, 
says Pliny, the phrase prevaricate was im¬ 
ROCHESTER, M. Y.-THURSDAY, OCTOBERS, 1850. 
ported into the law courts, and applied to 
those who were crooked in their statements. 
From another term in plowing comes the 
word delirious. ,To change the application 
of the Reviewer—we wish some skillful hus¬ 
bandman would import these Roman max¬ 
ims into this country, where nineteen plow¬ 
men out of twenty, either prevaricate or 
are delirious. 
The ancients attached great importance 
to plowing. Theophrastus, one of the 
earliest writers, says no crop must be rais¬ 
ed without all its summer plowings. Cato 
forbids his bailiff to plow land when it is wet, 
or to venture upon it with cattle or cart.— 
Columella, Pliny, and Palladius, say 
that if you meddle with land when it is wet, 
you lose the Avhble season, nor will the soil 
recover itself for three years. How little is 
there new under the sun! n. 
MERINO vs. SAXON SHEEP. 
Mr. Moore: — In the Rural New- 
Yorker of Sept. 12, I noticed a communi¬ 
cation from “A Farmer,” who runs down 
the Merino Sheep, to the credit of the Sax¬ 
ons. Now I do not wish to get into any 
discussion as to the merits or demerits of 
the Merinos or the Saxons. I prefer to 
leave it to people’s own taste and loca¬ 
tion to keep the kind which is the most 
profitable to them; but I don’t wish to see 
the Merinos judged and condemned in this 
blind kind of a way. 
There is as many different qualities of pure 
Merinos as there is different breeders — 
some breeding very fine wool and others 
coarser and heavier fleeces. The only way 
to judge of the quality and profit of a man’s 
flock, is to know the quantity they shear per 
head,, and the price obtained for the wool. 
I slippose “ A Farmer ” has been impos¬ 
ed upon by some eastern speculator, and 
turned ofif with some mixture of Merino 
and Native, called pure imported Paulars. 
The imported Merino sheep have very even 
and fine wool, and but very little difference 
in the quality of the wool of the different 
kinds. As to the Paular Merinos, accord¬ 
ing to the best authority there is not a pure 
Paular in the United States, nor has there 
been for the last thirty years; the different 
kinds were mixed together, which was an 
improvement over either kind separate. 
Now I consider it due to the public for 
“A Farmer” to come out and give his 
name and place of residence — and if he 
has, or knows of a flock of superfine Saxon 
sheep that will average 4^ to 5^ per head, 
give the exact number of the flock, the 
quantity they will average per head, the 
price obtained from the wool, where sold, 
and what flock bred from, and then they 
can judge as to the quality and profit of his 
sheep, compared with the hairy Merinos. 
East Avo7i, N. Y., Oct., 1850. c. w. h. 
Remarks. —Without wishing to interfere in the 
discussion, we may be permitted to make a passing 
remark or two. “ A Farmer ” is not the man to 
“ run down” any breed of sheep, to the credit of 
another, unless he can prove his position—and we 
think ho had no intention of doing so in any ca.se. 
C. W. H. is mistaken as to his having been “ im¬ 
posed upon by some eastern speculator;” for we 
believe “A Farmer” has been one of the most 
careful and extensive breeders of both Merinos 
and Saxons in the State—his flocks at one time 
numbering o.ver a thousand choice animals. He 
is Iherefore capable of judging for himself, and not 
likely to be imposed upon by any one. However, 
we are glad C. W. H. has called out “ A Farmer,” 
for we know of no man in this section of the 
Union better qualified, by both experience and ob¬ 
servation, to discuss the question. 
As to ‘‘ A Farmer ” coming out and giving his 
name, &c., we may remark that he gave us his 
name and residence, which is more than friend C. 
W. H. has done—for we have only his initials.— 
But, although our rule is to publish no article with¬ 
out the writer’s name, we give the above, not¬ 
withstanding it smacks somewhat of ” running 
down” the Paulars.— Ed. 
RURAL ARCHITECTURE, 
TENANT HOUSES. 
Mr. Moore :— Although I have no fault 
to find with the inimitable Rural — indeed 
consider it the paper, tind before all others, 
among several of which myself and family 
have the reading — yet there is one sub¬ 
ject upon which I could hope its pages 
might give us more light. The matter to 
which I allude is Rural Architecture—more 
especially that portion of the subject em¬ 
bracing Tenant Houses, and cheap cottages 
for both town and country. As I am a re¬ 
cent subscriber, perhaps you have liscussed 
cheap houses in the early numbers of the 
volume which I have not received; if so 
please specify. • 
The subject is an important and inviting 
one, and opens a vast field for improvement. 
The attention that has been given to it for 
some five years past is very evident in the 
neat and improved .appearance of many 
farm and other buildings throughout the 
country—and also in the inquiries made by 
many for information as to the most mod¬ 
ern styles and economical modes of build¬ 
ing. This is well. And it must be encour¬ 
aging to those of you who have labored for 
improvement in this important bimch of 
the art of living comfortably and prettily, 
and still within one’s means. Yet tlie agita¬ 
tion of the subject, and a lack o^proper 
knowledge by the masses, have produced 
some queer looking results iii more than 
one section of “ our common country,” as 
the “ national ” politician would say. I have 
recently witnessed some attempts at orna¬ 
mentation and fancy coloring on ill-con¬ 
structed buildings, in rather inappropriate 
locations, which have led me to the sage 
conclusion that the owners were not entire¬ 
ly posted up in all the minutice of cottage 
architecture. Indeed, from some little ob¬ 
servation, I have “ come to reckon ” that 
the subject is one concerning which it may 
be truly said “ a little knowledge is a dan¬ 
gerous thing ” — and for that very reason 
I mean to conquer the rudiments by asking 
questions and consulting proper authorities, 
before experimenting too largely. 
But my present object is, or was in the 
outset, merely to request you if convenient 
to give a plan of a cheap cottage, or tenant 
house. I am one of those unfortunate per¬ 
sons who own more land than can be cul¬ 
tivated with home or family help, and there¬ 
fore employ two or three men who have 
families. They now stay in old, dilapidated 
buildings (one a log house, buUt “long 
time ago ”) formerly occupied by persons 
who have sold me their homesteads and 
gone west. Now I wish to remove these 
old eye-sores, and erect in their places 
cheap, and yet neat and convenient, cotta¬ 
ges. This is the head and front of my sto¬ 
ry, and if you or any of your correspond¬ 
ents can give me any hints or suggestions, 
the same will be duly appreciated. The in¬ 
formation sought will not only benefit me 
individually, but the public at large. 
Yours, J. B. H. 
Ontario County, N. Y., Oct. 1850. 
Remarks. — Though it was our intention 
on starting the New-Yorker to devote con¬ 
siderable space to Rural Architecture, we 
have of late somewhat neglected the sub¬ 
ject. Hence the request and suggestions 
of our correspondent are perfectly in order, 
and will liave a salutary influence by inci¬ 
ting us to a better performance of duty.— 
We shall hereafter give more information 
on the modus operandi of constructing 
Farm Buildings, Cottages, School Houses, 
(fee.—embracing many original designs, with 
the estimated cost, and other particulars. 
Among the plans we have already given, 
J. B. H. is referred to the design of a La¬ 
borer’s Cottage, published in No. 8, and 
that of a Farm or Suburban Cottage in No. 
14*of the Rural. We think the one first 
mentioned, or the one which we give below, 
will meet his views. The following plan 
we published in the January number of the 
Gen. Farmer for 1849. That we think it 
about right the reader will perceive from 
the remarks which follow the description: 
IMl, iM 
^1i JluTili 1 
1 ' 11 
j 
«l 1 i i i 1 ] 11 
In planning our dwellings we men oTsmall means 
find it prudent to consult more the length of our 
purses, than our desires for the ornamental or even 
the most perfect convenience. But we are glad if, 
in such approximations towards the latter as our 
means and knowledge permit, we can at all gratify 
our jense, vague and crude it may be, of the pic¬ 
turesque and beautiful. I am not sure that the 
least possible expenditure necessary to the produc¬ 
tion of a comfortable dwelling is^ot entirely com¬ 
patible with the most classical correctness of 
parts and proportions, and adaptation to site and 
scenery. However this may be, it does not seem 
to me to be often done. I do not flatter myself that 
I have done, it in the plans and perspective eleva¬ 
tion which I send you herewith. 
FIRST FLOOR. SECOND FLOOR. 
But when fatigued by a hard day’s labor, I take 
my seat in the front or parlor end of our one room, 
(A,) and while listening to, and being rested, by 
the prattle of the Avee ones, or talking with a guest 
I am under no apprehension of being disturbed by 
the needful opening of some door; and looking 
across the cooking stove,” see my good wife busied 
in preparing our evening meal, with the pantry 
door, door to the wood-house, cellar door, and door 
side of the stove, all in her own end, where hus¬ 
band, cMdren, and guest are out of her way—I 
think I have happened to make a pretty large room 
<jf lOj feet in fhe clear by 18, to say nothing of 
the recess, 4^ by^ feet, where, in an emergency, 
we can quite conveniently place a bed, though we 
have two comfortable bedrooms*(a a) up stairs, 9 
by lOj, and 9 by 13 feet, with closets, where the 
bed places are not against doors or windows. 
Our entry (B) is only 3 feet 9 inches by 8 feet 
2, but it does very well to hang overcoats and hats, 
and save wife and children from the cold blast of 
an open door in a stormy day. The pantry (C) is 
of the same size; but having shelves 14 inches 
wide running the whole length of the right-hand 
side, and a broad shelf across the end to roll dough¬ 
nuts on, with its little flour and meal bins under¬ 
neath, we think it very convenient. Our wood- 
house (D) is 12 feet square, and 8 high; d, in the 
chamber plan, represents the roof of it. I mean, 
in the spring, to put in it a cistern close to the cel¬ 
lar wall, and cover it with rough boards, which ex¬ 
tend over one-half the area of the wood-house, 
which, with the addition of a sink and pump, will, 
make us a good summer kitchen. 
Now, Messrs. Editors, when I take an outside 
look at ou? cottage, I cannot help thinking that 
the proportions, 16 by 19, with 12 feet posts, and 
its brave little rectangular roof, (it looks steeper, 
more gothic, in the house itself, than in the draw¬ 
ing; I don’t know why, the proportions are the 
same,) its little addition for hall and pantry of 10 
feet 8 inches, by 4 feet, 10 feet posts, with its gable 
end, are pretty fair. And though it is built of 
rough, upright planks, battened, (it is battened al¬ 
so on the inside, and the laths nailed to the battens;) 
their rough casings, as well as the cornice battens 
* The stove is placed directly under the chimney, 
which is built from the chamber floor. 
-i NUMBER 43. 
and water-table, lime washed a slightly lighter 
stone-color than the planks, the efiect is to me 
yet, with its terraced foundation, its projecting wa¬ 
ter-table, its perfectly plain though .somewhat 
prominent cornice, and its tessillated windows, A^th 
rather pleasing. And when we get our little Chi¬ 
nese verandah, 4 by 4 —built on the foundation for 
it, which you see I have marked on the ground 
plan—to shelter the front door, and our fruit trees 
shall have groAvn, we think the tout ensemble will 
be quite an advance upon the Yankee-cheap archi¬ 
tecture that we see all about us. g. s. g. 
Remarks. —There is a sad lack of appropriate¬ 
ness and convenience, as well as of taste, beauty 
and true economy, in most of the dwellings occu¬ 
pied by the rural population of America. We 
vote for an entire and thorough reform in this 
matter, and intend to. do our share to consummate 
an object so desirable. As an initial step in this 
reformation, we commence at the foot of the lad- 
der, by giving the preceding plan of a Cheap 
Cottage for tenants, laborers and freeholders of 
small means. Such a cottage as our correspond¬ 
ent describes will cost from .^150 to .f225—accord¬ 
ing to finish, cost of materials, (which varies in 
ditferent localities,) and vVhether built on the cash 
or “dicker” system. We like the design much, 
and think our readers will unite with us in our 
admiration of its combined conveniences and at¬ 
tractions. 
“BIRDS AND INSECTS.” 
A “protective” chapter by a nevv-englander. 
In No. 16 of your excellent paper, the 
Neav- Yorker, is an article fron\ N. G., who 
calls himself a “ a young farmer,” and who 
says he “ was led to sum up in his own mind 
the many ills that flesh is heir to, in the 
scourge .and annoyance of both bird and in¬ 
sect,” which, he tells us, “ made a most for¬ 
midable array,” Ac. In the 21st number of 
the. same, is another from the same pen, 
written as it appears, in reply to an attack 
upon his positions, in which he declares his 
belief that the wheje race of birds and insects 
is a “ curse to man,” and that their annihi¬ 
lation “ would conduce to his welfare.” As 
I suppose his communications have already 
been noticed, I shall confine myself to a few 
general observations. 
In the first place, your corre.spondent N, 
G., does not appear to be in a proper frame 
of mind to judge correctly on this subject; 
for he has evidently looked only at the 
dark side of the picture, and hence has 
made himself believe that there is “ no vir¬ 
tue ” in the feathered, or insect world. 
*Hence, in the second place, he entirely 
overl<X)ks the good done by either, and 
greatly over-estimates the amount of mis¬ 
chief done by both; for, of the evils Avhich 
he enumerates, many may be easily pre¬ 
vented, many others seldom occur, and oth¬ 
ers are scarcely felt— although when bro't 
together and put on paper, they make “ a 
most formidable array.” But, 
In the third place, the question now to be 
considered, is not, “ Why were birds and in¬ 
sects created?” or “ Cut hono?” “what 
good do they do ? ” although both these 
questions can be answ’ered quite satisfacto¬ 
rily to many minds; (perhaps N. G. may 
not be one of them;) but the fact is, they 
were created, and are in the world, and|SO 
are we, and if we do not like the world as 
it is, we may alter it, if we can, or leave it 
if we choose. “ Why they were made,” is 
not a practical question; but, “ What is now 
(i. e. in the present state of things,) our 
duty“ our interest;”—“our true policy," 
—is. It is evident that we cannot rid our¬ 
selves entirely of the evil, (if such it be,) 
whatever we may do, or however much we 
may fret and chafe about it; and we may in¬ 
crease it by an injudicious course of action. 
Let us then, on the one hand, suppose 
that all the insects in the world were at 
once, and totally destroyed. The birds be¬ 
ing thus deprived of one, and that a prin¬ 
cipal means of support, would increase their 
depredations upon the labors of the hus¬ 
bandman, who might then have just cause 
