F 
i 
< > 
ill 
i 
) 
) 
S 
VOLUME II. NO. 37. 
MOORE’S RURAL NEW-YORKER: 
A. WEEKLY JOURNAL, DEVOTED TO 
Agriculture, Horticulture, Mechanic Arts and Sci¬ 
ence, Education, Rural and Domestic Economy, 
General Intelligence, the Markets, &c., &c. 
CONDUCTED BY D. D. T. MOORE, 
ASSISTED BY 
J. H. BIXBY, L. WETHERELL, and H. C. WHITE. 
Contributors and Correspondents: 
ROCHESTER, N. Y.—THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1851. 
-i WHOLE NO. 89. 
L. B. Langworthy, 
William Garrutt, 
S. P. Chapman, 
David Ely, 
Myron Adams, 
H. P. Norton, 
T. C. Peters, 
F. W. Lay, 
T. E. Wetmore, 
R. B. Warren, 
Archibald Stone, 
Chester Dewey, ll. d., 
.1. Clement, 
D. W. Ballou, Jr., 
R. G. Pardee, 
I. Hildreth, 
Jas. II. Watts, 
W. K. Wyckoff, 
W. H. Bristol, 
Wm. Perry Foog, 
S. Luther, 
L. D. Whiting. 
And numerous others—practical, scientific, and literary 
writers—whose names are necessarily omitted. 
The Rural New-Yorker is designed to be unique and 
beautiful in appearance, and unsurpassed in Value, Purity 
and Variety of Contents. Its conductors earnestly labor 
to make it a Reliable Guide on the important Practical 
Subjects connected with the business of those whose inter¬ 
ests it advocates. It embraces more Agricultural, Horti¬ 
cultural, Scientific, Mechanical, Literary and News Matter 
—interspersed with many appropriate and handsome en¬ 
gravings—than any other paper published in this Country 
SHF” For Terms, &c.. see last page. 
PROBHESS AN® IMPROVEMENT. 
<1 
GUANO AS A MANURE FOR WHEAT. 
Friend Moore: —May I trouble you for a little 
information in regard to the time and manner of 
applying guano as a manure in growing wheat? 
Should it be sown or spread on the ground be¬ 
fore or after plowing? If after plowing, should 
it be cultivated in?—or should it be applied after 
the wheat is up in the fall or spring? 
I see statements that from 150 to 200 lbs. are 
used on the worn-out lands in Virginia. Would 
land that already yields 30 bushels or more, per 
acre, require that quantity? 
Upon what soils does it prove of greatest bene¬ 
fit—upon those dry and gravelly, or those of the 
contrary character? Or, can it be used to a great¬ 
er advantage upon spring crops?—and, if so, to 
what and how shall I apply it? 
If vou will answor the above through the Rural 
or otherwise, I will try and send you an account 
of the result of its application. Wm. Clark. 
Lakeville, Livingston Co., N. Y., Aug. 20, 1851. 
From the best information we have been 
able to gather in relation to the use of gu¬ 
ano and its application, we have prepared 
the following reply to the queries of our 
correspondent. 
In regard to the time and manner of 
using it as a manure for the wheat crop, 
the editor of the American Farmer, most 
excellent authority upon the subject, gives 
the following directions: — “The guano 
should be mixed with plaster at the rate of 
110 lbs. of guano to 25 lbs. of plaster, 
sown broad-cast, and plowed [or cultivated] 
in as soon after as possible; the ground then 
to be harrowed until a fine tilth is obtain¬ 
ed, preparatory to sowing the wheat, which 
should be covered to the depth of not more 
than two or three inches. Water-furrows 
should then be formed and the field rolled 
across the furrows.” The depth which the 
guano is buried “is not material, as the 
plants will find the guano whether covered 
four, six or eight inches.” 
The great fertilizing principles of guano, 
are the phosphate of lime and ammonia, 
both very volatile in their nature. Hence, 
they should not be exposed to the sun or 
rain unless mixed with plaster or some 
other absorbent. Muck is a good material 
for composting with guano, and where 
cheaply and easily procured, we think no 
better fertilizer could be used than 200 lbs. 
of guano, with five cords of muck and one 
bushel of plaster, intimately mixed and left 
in heap a short time* and then applied to 
an acre and plowed in, immediately before 
seeding. A top dressing of five bushels of 
ashes, leached or unleached, is recommend¬ 
ed as a profitable application, after sowing. 
It is characteristic of guano to exert its 
greatest effects upon very poor lands, be¬ 
cause in these the phosphates and ammo- 
ni<V which constitute its peculiar value, are 
most deficient. Upon such soils its power 
is seen in the large increase of the crop at 
once—while, where a good crop is already 
produced, its effects must appear unpropor 
tionably less. The authority already quo¬ 
ted says that, “unless the soil be very poor, 
200 lbs. is enough—if very poor 3u0 lbs. 
to the acre should be applied.” In the 
case above mentioned we should try 100 
lbs. per acre, and await the result. 
As to the soils most benefited by its ap 
plication, we believe sandy and loamy soils, 
and well-drained clays, show its effects, as 
well as those of all other manures, longer 
and more visibly than those of the contrary 
character. 
Guano is a valuable manure for spring 
crops as well as for wheat, and can be prof¬ 
itably applied to any or all of them. But 
those who have barn-yard manure for this 
purpose will first use that, as it gains noth- 
ing by lying unemployed, and supply the 
deficiency by composts of muck, guano, and 
other fertilizers. In the use of guano, re 
member the volatility of its constituents, 
and that it must be accompanied by ab¬ 
sorbents or immediately plowed under, or 
a large portion of its value will be dissipated 
and lost. 1 
We hope friend Clark will be able to 
give our readers a good account of the re¬ 
sult of his experiments with guano as a 
manure. 
THE GOOD FARMER. 
And who is the good farmer? is a ques¬ 
tion that may well be asked. 
kiom the fact, that many have errone¬ 
ous ideas about the proper management of 
the farm, first we may ask, is it the one 
that can boast of tilling the greatest num¬ 
ber of acres ? Is it the one that can tell 
you of the large surface hd has gone over, 
yet cannot inform you of the mode or man¬ 
ner of preparation, or the means he has 
employed in fertilizing the soil,—in which 
lies the secret of neat and profitable farm- 
ing ? Is it the one that plants and sows 
more than he can attend to in a proper 
manner, and consequently meets a loss of 
time, seed, and land ? Or is it the one that 
keeps double the number of stock his pas¬ 
ture will afford grazing for, and therefore 
cannot keep them in a good condition, so 
perchance they find their way into his 
neighbor’s field to appease their hunger ? 
We contend that such examples cannot 
come within the range of good farming.— 
And they are not uncommon in their oc¬ 
curence,—we might cite you too many such 
of our acquaintance. 
But the good farmer never makes his 
calculations beyond his means, and his pow¬ 
er to fulfil. He never tills more land than 
he can till properly, and perform the amount 
of labor necessary to secure to himself an 
abundant harvest. He never allows one 
crop to succeed another, unless the land is 
manured or otherwise enriched, so as to 
preserve its fertility, and enable him to reap 
bountifully. And his number of stock is 
proportioned to the number of acres he 
has under improvement, and no more than 
he can keep in a thriving condition. 
And allow us here to remark, the good 
farmer enjoys that happiness and plenty 
which flow from a well regulated system of 
cultivating the soil—he is free from those 
vexations and cares w'hich continually har- 
rass him who has no system or order in his 
farm affairs. 
Ransomville, Aug. 20, 1851. 
FOOT ROT IN SHEEP. 
The State Fair. —For regulations, &c., 
of the approaching Exhibition of our State 
Society, see 6th page of this number. 
I have noticed during the progress of 
the season, in several agricultural journals, 
communications on the subject of “ Foot- 
rot in sheep.” This disease seems again to 
have made its appearance; and it is deeply 
to be regretted, for although not necessarily 
a fatal malady, it is still, one of a most 
troublesome character. It prevailed exten¬ 
sively in the years 1839 and 18401 But 
since that period until the present time, it 
seems to have been unnoticed, and probably 
has not appeared. The communications on 
this subject, to which allusion has been 
made, have uniformly advanced the opin¬ 
ion, that this is a “ contagious ” disease; 
and, of course, there has been no lack of 
caution and advice, to prevent its spread 
from this source. 
The experience of 1840, has taught the 
farmer the use of appropriate and efficient 
curative remedies. But it has not taught 
him, as I conceive, the true nature and 
cause of the ailment. 
Now, I do not hesitate to advance the 
opinion, that the foot rot is neither a con¬ 
tagious nor infectious disease, in the com¬ 
mon acceptation of these terms,—that is, 
neither contagious nor infectious in the or¬ 
dinary mode of its introduction into, and its 
spread among, a healthy flock. By “ con¬ 
tagious” I mean, communicable through 
the atmosphere by respiration; as the small 
pox, measles, &c. By infectious, I mean, 
communicable by contact, by innoculation, 
that is, by the application of virulent 
matter to a healthy subject, where there is 
a slight abrasion; or in case of extreme 
virulence, where the part is entirely sound. 
Now, the virus of the foot-rot is so poi¬ 
sonous, that I do not deny the possibility of 
communicating the disease by inoculation; 
that is, by receiving the virus into some 
part of a sound body. But I have no be¬ 
lief that this is actually the mode of its 
communication. I have no belief, when 
ulceration has taken place in the foot, 
that matter enough is posited upon the 
ground, to communicate the disease by the 
tread of a healthy foot upon it. I do not 
say it is impossible. But I do say, it is so 
nearly impossible, that I have not the re¬ 
motest thought, that this is ever the mode 
of its communication. 
Now, I consider the foot rot in sheep, an 
epidemic disease—the same as influenza, 
whooping cough, die.—having its origin in 
natural causes—induced by atmospheric 
influence, or diet, or both. And why 25 or 
40 out of an hundred should be affected 
and the residue, subject to the same causes, 
should escape, I can no more tell, than I 
can tell why 25 or 40 out of an hundred 
persons, in similar circumstances, should 
have the influenza and the residue should 
escape. 
That the disease is generated in a healthy 
foot, (as assumed by many,) in consequence 
of mud and filth enclosed by the envelop 
that sometimes covers the ball, I no more 
believe, than that it is received through the 
horns. The disease does not commence in 
the ball of the foot. It commences between, 
the claws, at, or near the spot where the 
horn of the hoof unites to the flesh. At 
its commencement, it exhibits the appear¬ 
ance of a slight inflammation, as if chafed, 
or scalded. The animal at this stage is 
slightly lame. It soon becomes a sore, with 
slight maturation, and somewhat fetid. It 
now attracts the maggot-fly, is quickly filled 
with maggots, and unless destroyed they 
soon consume the entire ball of the foot— 
A diseased forefoot, being brought in con¬ 
tact with the side of the animal when in a 
lying posture, deposits on the side, some i 
portions of the fetid discharge. This at¬ 
tracts the fly, and the side is soon alive with 
maggots, that eat through the body in a few 
days, causing death. 
I have said the disease originates in na¬ 
tural causes— from atmospheric influence, 
or diet, or both. I consider it immediately 
induced, by an acrid state of the juices of 
the animal—that in some seasons, and on 
some locations it will prevail, and at other 
seasons it will not—that the discharge, from 
the large pore, or issue which exists in the 
‘‘ROTATION OF CROPS” IN THE FOREST 
leg, j us t above the parting of the claws, be¬ 
ing diseased and acrid, scalds the flesh be¬ 
tween the claws, which is always tender— 
the part becomes inflamed —fetid matura¬ 
tion succeeds—the fly is invited to his work, 
and soon completes the mischief. 
I have stated, what I consider to be, 
the immediate cause of the disease. Now, 
as to the proximate cause, it cannot be ex¬ 
pected that I should be able to explain, 
how, or why, the wetness or dryness of the 
season should produce it —or whether it 
may be caused by the food of the animal 
— by eating sour, unhealthy or poisonous 
herbage, thus vitiating the animal juices 
or whether a miasmatic influence in the at¬ 
mosphere might so affect some portion of 
the herbage, as to vitiate the animal secre¬ 
tions, thus causing the acid discharge of 
which I have spoken. Facts we often know, 
when the reason of those facts we do not 
know. If we knew the original, specific 
cause of this malady, we might apply pre¬ 
ventives. If we do not know it, we must 
apply remedies. With these we have be¬ 
come familiar, and they need not here be 
repeated. 
In my own case, I consider the disease 
to have originated in my flock. They had 
before been perfectly healthy for a long pe¬ 
riod. No disease had ever appeared among 
them. They were on high land,—watered 
by fine springs —not a rod of wet, stagnant, 
swampy ground—remote from other sheep 
—and not a hoof from any other flock had 
been introduced among them. ’They were 
seen daily, and the first exhibition of the 
ailment was a slight lameness all at once, of 
a dozen lambs about two months old. Im¬ 
mediately some of the older sheep became 
lame; and during the season, some 80 to 
100 out of three or four hundred, were af¬ 
fected. 
At first, the diseased were separated from 
the sound. And afterward, for a while, as 
an experiment, the separation was omitted. 
But I found no unexpected increase of new 
cases, when they were all together—nor 
imagined any diminution of new cases, 
when they were separated. I can realize 
no difference in the care, management, lo¬ 
cation, and circumstances of the flock, the 
season of the disease and any previous sea¬ 
son, except in one particular. Previously, 
there had always been salt in troughs in the 
fields, during the entire season. Some how 
it had been omitted this season, and was 
only .fed occasionally to them. Whether 
this omission had any effect in producing 
or admitting the disease, I know not. If 
my theory is correct, that it arises from a 
vitiated state ol the animal secretions, and 
if salt exerts a healthy influence upon the 
animal, possibly the want of it may have 
had some effect. Were the disease ao-ain 
D 
to appear, besides applying remedies to the 
affected part, I should forthwith change 
their location, so as to try the effect of a 
change of atmosphere, and a change of pas¬ 
turage. Farmer D. 
Rochester, August, 185?. 
If you wish to see a hundred thousand 
representatives of the genuine “ upper ten” 
—and the products of their skill and indus¬ 
try—set your face State Fair-ward. 
In an article on “Agricultural Chemis¬ 
try” in the Rural, of Aug. 7th, the author, 
O. Turner, Esq., speaking of the growth 
of timber, makes use of the phrase “were 
it not that th(|re has been no rotation of 
crops”—implying that the same kinds of 
timber always grow in the same localities. 
I think Mr. T. in error on this point. That 
there is no sudden, or general, rotation is 
doubtless ture. But to determine the 
question of rotation in this case, requires at 
least careful observation; and so far as my 
observation extends, that rotation is suc¬ 
cessfully accomplished in a course of years 
or generations. , 
Several years ago, while passing through 
Athol, Warren Co., N. Y., I noticed a strip 
of land several rods wide, on which all the 
large trees had been cut down, and a new 
growth had sprung up, varying in height 
up to 20 or 25 feet. The cutting had been 
made several years before, for the purpose 
of constructing a state road. The timber 
on each side consisted chiefly of hemlock, 
with a sprinkling of spruce, and at a dis¬ 
tance could he seen a few pines, patches of 
maple, &c. The new growth mentioned 
above, was made up almost entirely of ma¬ 
ple, beach, poplar, birch, with occasional 
evergreens, among which (if recollection 
serves me,) the pine predominated. I re¬ 
member a similar phenomenon in Amster¬ 
dam, Montgomery Co., N. Y., where a 
small “ wind-fall” through hemlock woods 
had grown up with deciduous trees. 
It is well known that a young fruit tree 
will not thrive where an old one of the same 
species has lived and died. This I have 
seen tried in several instances, and have 
never known one instance of complete suc¬ 
cess without the use of extraordinary pains, 
in the way of changing and enriching the 
soil. 
Prof. Mather, in his 1st “Report on the 
Geology of the State of New York,” (1837,) 
page 68, says, in relation to the “Rotation 
of crops”—“ This' is finely illustrated in the 
successive natural changes in the growth of 
timber in our forests, one growth, (i. e., a 
growth of one kind,) being regularly suc¬ 
ceeded by another.” So also, Prof. Em¬ 
mons, (see as above, page 105,)—“The 
second growth of timber will differ in kind 
from the first,” die. Hence, it appears, that 
“ rotation” is observed in all cases .vhere 
the removal of one growth is sudden, ex¬ 
cept perhaps in the case of those kinds of 
timber which readily send up a new growth 
of shoots as fast as the older trees are cut 
away; as, the chestnut, the alder, die. These 
however, are not real exceptions, since there 
is no succession, the root not being destroyed. 
In regard to standing forests, therefore, 
it is fair to conclude that the same succes¬ 
sion is kept up, though unobserved on ac¬ 
count of its slow and gradual progress.— 
Whoever has much familiarity with the 
woods, however, must have observed, that 
when an old tree has fallen, (being turned 
up by the roots,) and decayed, there will 
generally be found on and near the pile of 
earth at the root, several young trees of dif¬ 
ferent species from their fallen predecessor. 
Let this process be continued for a term of 
years, or generations, and time will effect a 
“ rotation” which the short period of hu- < 
man life might fail to witness—a rotation < 
which would be effected as fast, and as soon 
as the growth and maturity of the trees of ] 
a forest will allow. Geological investiga¬ 
tions indicate the same result; fossil, (not 
carbonized,) wood being found where it had ’ 
grown, of species entirely different from 
that now growing in the same locality. 
Down East, August, 1851. H. 
