OCT. 25 
726 
FARMERS’ CLUB—DISCUSSION. 
Selecting Seed Wheat. 
T. B. Terry, Summit County, Ohio.— 
Professor Plumb’s letter about wheat- 
growing, on page 666. interests me much ; 
but there is just one point in which his 
practice and mine differ. ’Which is right ? 
is tne question I have been asking while 
reading his article several times, and 
thinking over my own experience as I 
read. Professor Plumb’s wheat is all 
thrashed together and put in bins. Then 
It is graded with a fanning-mill and the 
“ large-sized grains ” taken from the whole 
lot are used for seed. This I understand 
from his letter to be his regular practice. 
He says he does so “ each year at thrashing 
time.” Now, this is exactly what I did for 
several years, when I first began growing 
wheat. I ran my wheat through a mill, 
grading it so as to take out about half, 
which would be large, plump kernels. The 
smaller grain was sold at the mill. At 
present my practice is to select, when 
cutting the wheat, a half acre which prom¬ 
ises to yield more than any other part of 
the lot. I notice particularly where this is 
and when the wheat is drawn to the barn, 
this is taken last and put by itself on top 
of the bay. Then it is thrashed first and 
my own seed saved from it. My soil is not 
uniform in quality. One could find spots 
yielding at the rate of say, from 20 up to 
50 bushels per acre. Seldom is there a year, 
I think, when I cannot pick out a half acre 
that will yield at the rate of from 20 to 25 
bushels, or twice that amount per acre. 
But, now, where does the plumpest 
wheat grow ? Where do I find the largest 
berries ? In the thin spots every time. 
Where do I find berries of large average 
size, and more or less shrunken some 
years ? In the richest parts of the field, 
where the growth is great, and the crop 
more or less lodged. If we thrash the 
grain and mix it and then grade out the 
largest berries, we shall be likely to get 
most of our seed from the parts of the 
field that yielded the least. Is the plump 
individual berry the best one to sow, 
without regard to the conditions under 
which it grew ? This is what I would very 
much like to know for a certainty from a 
series of careful experiments. Professor 
Plumb is just the man to find this out 
for us. 
I take the wheat from the best half-acre 
and run it through the fanning-mill in 
such a way as to take out merely the 
screenings—the very small and badly 
shrunken grains. In most seasons these 
would amount to one bushel out of from 20 
to 40. All grains of fair size are left in the 
seed. Perhaps you ask: Why not grade 
the wheat from the best half-acre ? Well, 
which heads contained the largest grains— 
the small ones with a few kernels, or the 
longer ones that had twice as many? I 
have thought for some years that the 
former did, and I do not care to plant 
them to the exclusion of the others. If it 
were practical to select the best heads from 
the best half-acre, and then the best berries 
from them, I would like to do so ; but as 
far as my present knowledge goes, I do not 
care to grade my seed from the best of the 
field, except to take out the very poorest. I 
have not jumped at this conclusion as a 
matter of theory, for it is the result of a good 
deal of observation, and still I presume that 
nine farmers out of ten who go out to buy 
seed wheat would select fine, plump grain, 
from a field which had yielded 20 or 25 
bushels per acre, rather than an inferior¬ 
looking article somewhat smaller and per¬ 
haps a little shrunken, from a field which 
they knew had yielded 85 or 40 bushels per 
acre. 
In 1887 the weather was such that our 
heaviest grain shrunk considerably. When 
drilling, I tried to have no one see what 
poor-looking seed I was using. People 
would doubtless have thought me a very 
careless farmer, to say the least. But what 
was the result ? Forty bushels of fine grain 
per acre from one lot and 36 from the other, 
the season being favorable. This year we 
had very wet growing weather in the early 
part of the season, followed by dry, hot 
weather just before harvest. As a result, 
my best wheat again undertook more than 
it could carry out, and was somewhat 
shrunken. That on the lighter portions of 
the field was all right. I selected seed from 
the heaviest part, without regard to the 
plumpness of the grain, for most of my 
own sowing; but to see if any difference 
could be detected in the growth, I drilled 
in one acre with the plumpest graded seed 
I could select. Both came up at the same 
time, and I can see no difference in the 
growth at present. I would like to thrash 
the acre by itself; but a farmer can hardly 
THE RURAL N 
carry an experiment so far as that. I have 
three varieties of wheat that I must keep 
separate, and that is all I can attend to in 
the hurry of harvest time. But I would 
like to have Directors Plumb or Thorne or 
Roberts, or all of them, study up this 
matter for us. 
In reading this over, it seems to me that 
I have perhaps exaggerated the difference 
in quality between the thick and thin parts 
of the field. This was done to make my 
points plain. Some readers might infer 
that heavy wheat is apt to be of inferior 
quality. Mine is usually all good, with not 
so much difference in the size of the berries 
as some might think from what I have 
written. 
Too Much Crop. More Money 
Wanted. 
T. E. Bullard, Saratoga County, N. Y. 
—Mr. Terry’s articles draw out so many 
remarks that it is evident many are think¬ 
ing about him—what he is doing and what 
he writes. I am no exception, and would 
like to express a few thoughts which have 
been suggested by reading over the articles 
written by him and others in The Rural. 
Mr. T. grows splendid crops at a good 
profit, and knows how to make good use of 
the money he makes. But if we all, or a 
large majority of us, grew such large crops 
would we, or he either, be able to do so at 
a profit, or even get pay for our labor ? If 
the farmers of this country owned their 
farms (according to statistics, a majority 
do not, having to pay rent to landlords or 
interest to mortgagees), the low prices 
which would result from such crops would 
cause no harm; for other things would 
soon be correspondingly lower in price. 
But rent and interest do not decrease cor¬ 
respondingly with the decrease in the prices 
of farm products, and consequently large 
crops would be of no benefit to us, as a 
whole. 
The public debt is a good illustration of 
this. It would take more bushels of grain 
to pay it now than it would have done at 
the time it was contracted. The entire 
wealth of the country is being rapidly con¬ 
centrated in the hands of a few. It cannot 
be otherwise so long as the entire surplus 
of wealth created each year is not enough 
to pay the interest which is due to the 
holders of notes, mortgages, bonds, etc.; 
consequently the interest drawers are 
gradually scooping in the principal, and 
will continue to do so whether our crops 
be large or small. We must have more 
money in circulation and at a lower rate of 
interest. It is just as much of a mistake 
for the public to have too little of the 
“ medium of exchange ” as it is to have too 
few cars, wagons or boats, and as no one 
but the government can furnish it, it is its 
duty to supply all that is necessary, and at 
the least possible rate of interest. Why 
should not the government store our wheat 
and corn, and issue greenbacks to represent 
the whole value, less the cost of storing ? 
And it need not be afraid to keep a fair 
stock on hand; it would be desirable in 
such a time as Ireland is passing through 
just now. But, better still, why not adopt 
the measure advocated by Senator Stan¬ 
ford P Are not the farms of this country 
as good security for the issue of certificates 
as its silver, and it would certainly be less 
difficult to keep them from running away. 
The financial system which allows us only 
a very little money at six per cent, or more 
has soon to be replaced by something less 
niggardly, or we shall have as numerous a 
class of tenant farmers in this country as 
are now impoverished in others. 
R. N.-Y.—Are you willing that manu¬ 
facturers should have the same privilege P 
If the government can buy and sell grain, 
it can in the same way buy and sell manu¬ 
factured goods and machinery. If it is to 
help the grain and cotton farmers, should 
it not also help the fruit and truck or dairy 
farmers ? Again, if money is to be loaned 
on farms, why should it not be loaned on 
other real estate as well as on other non- 
perishable property, like buildings and ma¬ 
chinery ? Farmers cannot, in justice, de¬ 
mand for themselves legislation which 
they would deny to other workers. The 
possible consequences of a universal im¬ 
provement in culture are no argument 
against the desirability of an individual 
effort to improve. 
Believes In Annexation. 
H. T. Lawson, Ontario, Canada.— 
Owing to the passage of the McKinley Bill 
barley-growing will, in my opinion, have 
to be entirely abandoned in Canada, be¬ 
cause for fattening stock corn can be grown 
a great deal cheaper. Cheese-making and 
fine stock-raising are the only branches of 
agriculture that can be profitably carried 
EW-YORKER. 
on should the American people deny us the 
privilege of trading with them. Absolute 
free trade with the Americans is the only 
thing that will make us farmers pros¬ 
perous, for the simple reason that we have 
no market to which we can ship our pro¬ 
ducts so cheaply as to the United States. 
We have had 12 years of “protection,” 
which has run the country over $200,000,000 
in debt, and, in the whole history of Can¬ 
ada, the farmers have never received - so 
little for their produce and labor as during 
these 12 years ; but the time is coming— 
and I believe it is not very far in the future 
—when the American and Canadian people 
will be one, and the countries united, and 
not until then, in my opinion, will this 
section prosper. I am a true-born “Cana¬ 
dian ” and am perhaps as loyal to my 
country as any one else; but when I go 
over to the United States and see the busi¬ 
ness and bustle there, I come home feeling 
that we are 100 years behind the times. It 
is too bad that things are as they are; but 
the manufacturers are ruling the country 
and the sons of labor have not yet 
awakened to their true plight. 
Datura True From Seed. 
W. B., Detroit, Mich —In The Rural 
for October 4, I notice this statement: 
“ The double golden datura does not come 
true from seed at all.” If the Datura 
chlorantha flore pleno is meant, I beg leave 
to say that it has never failed to come true 
from seed for me, and I have planted it for 
the last three years successively. The seed 
referred to in The R. N.-Y. must have been 
mixed. I do not wish to “crack up” or 
“ run down ” any one’s seeds, but I do wish 
to emphasize the fact that that datura is a 
distinct species, and consequently does 
come true from seed. 
“ The Issue In Pennsylvania.” 
W. M. Bbnninger, Northampton Co., 
Pa.—F or the past two weeks I have been 
traveling and speaking in different sections 
of this State, and consequently am prepared 
to give an account of the progress our 
Keystone farmers and laborers are making 
in political matters. In the first place, I find 
they fully understand the character of the 
political campaign, and that unorganized 
as well as organized workers, regardless of 
party inclinations, study and discuss the 
situation among themselves, and of the 
final result I entertain no doubt. Farmers, 
as a class, move slowly and carefully; but 
when they have once properly started, they 
move mightily. Those of our State under¬ 
stand under whatbircumstance the farmers’ 
tax bill was recently defeated. They know 
the difference between the two candidates 
for governor, and have already chosen the 
one on whom they can rely for relief and 
comfort. They know that the promises of 
the past have not been fulfilled, and such 
violation of pledges will undoubtedly re- 
cieve its proper reward. Even “ back- 
woods ” farmers realize that they and their 
fellows are paying heavy taxes to combina¬ 
tions. trusts and monopolists. Those few 
farmers who do not yet fully comprehend 
the situation of the different party interests 
of the country I would advise to thoroughly 
study and investigate the picture and care¬ 
fully read the poem in The Rural New- 
Yorker of September 27, entitled “ The 
Farmer Goes Up Head.” The farmers and 
laborers also know that honesty, industry 
and sobriety are sure in the long run to be 
liberally rewarded. 
The Free School Book Question. 
DeL. Stow, Wayne County, N. Y.— 
“ Should the State print and furnish school 
books to the pupils of our public schools P ” 
Answering the proposition as a whole, I em¬ 
phatically say no. Were books furnished 
without expense, the pupils would hold 
them in little esteem, and would not take 
proper care of them, or consider them of 
much more value than the advertising 
matter gratuitously distributed. On the 
other hand, I believe that the State should 
adopt, prepare and print a full set of text 
books, and supply them at cost or at a 
nominal sum above the cost of production. 
The Reports of the Court of Appeals are fur¬ 
nished in this way, and as a resu It, an octavo 
leather-bound book is furnished at a cost 
varying from 75 cents to $1.25, according to 
the terms of the contract. Books that under 
present system cost $1.50 could be furnished 
by the State at from 40 cents to 60 cents 
each, and the price of no ordinary school 
book ought to exceed $1. The present sys¬ 
tem is an unmitigated evil and simply 
favors legalized robbery, its effect being to 
prevent the poor from procuring books at 
all in many cases. As a member of the 
school board, I have myself been approached 
with bribes to secure the introduction of 
new books into the school, and after hav¬ 
ing publicly denounced this action, I have 
seen the books of the parties who offered 
the bribes adopted at a schedule of prices 
that was simply extortionate. My proposi¬ 
tion is that school books should be furnished 
by or under the control of the State at fixed 
prices which, in no event, should exceed 10 
per cent above the cost of production, the 
same line of policy being adopted as to 
school books, that is now pursued in re¬ 
spect to the Reports of the Court of 
Appeals. 
Lima Bean Pods and Vines as Stock 
Feed. 
J. R. Franklin, Essex County, N. Y.— 
In The Rural of September 13, we are 
asked what stock will eat green Lima bean 
pods. I have fed them to borses for more 
than a dozen years, usually in connection 
with chaff and ground feed. Most horses 
are extravagantly fond of them. Of course 
they must be fed like any other green 
food—not too much at a time. They are 
said to be dangerous food for cows and 
very dangerous for pigs. Let me also say 
that I -have been surprised that otherwise 
careful farmers and truck raisers allow 
their Lima bean vines to dry up on the 
poles and become worthless. As soon as 
frost strikes them or they have finished 
bearing, strip them from the poles at once ; 
put them up in bunches and feed them to 
cows. I have fed literally tons in this way. 
They are a very rich food if fed while green 
and succulent. 
W. A. F., Homewood, Pa.—M r. Jerry 
boasts of having sold $237 worth of straw¬ 
berries from less than half an acre. I sold 
over $600 worth of blackberries from less 
than an acre and used as many as Mr. 
Terry did if not more, and the cost of culti¬ 
vation was less than that for Mr. Terry’s 
half acre. 
THE ADVANTAGE OF TRANSPLANT¬ 
ING ONIONS. 
A late bulletin from the Ohio Experi¬ 
ment Station says that the practice of 
transplanting onions when young, is not 
common among gardeners, but it has many 
advantages which seem to have been over¬ 
looked. Seeds under 40 different names, in 
eluding about 30 varieties, were sown in 
the greenhouse on February 25, 1890. They 
came up promptly, aud the young plants ad¬ 
vanced rapidly in growth, being six to eight 
inches in hight by the middle of April. As 
soon as practicable two beds or plats of 
ground, were prepared, side by side, in one 
of which the young onion plants grown in 
the greenhouse were planted. 
In the other bed seeds of the same vari¬ 
eties were sown in the ordinary manner, 
in all respects, except that of transplant¬ 
ing; the onions in the two beds were treated 
exactly alike. The two beds were manured 
and cultivated alike, and twice during the 
season, when the weather was dry, both 
were irrigated. At the proper time the 
onions in the bed where the seed was sown 
were thinned, so as to stand the same dis¬ 
tance apart as those that had been trans¬ 
planted, which was three inches in the row, 
the rows being one foot asunder. The dif¬ 
ference in the two beds was very marked 
from the start. Those that had been trans¬ 
planted commenced to grow at once, none, 
so far as observed, dying in the operation. 
Not only were the transplanted onions 
much larger at all times during the season, 
but they had a healthier appearance, be¬ 
sides being more uniform in size. A con¬ 
servative estimate at any time during the 
season would have placed the yield of the 
transplanted onions at more than double 
that of the others. 
At the first weeding both beds were 
weedy, but while the weeds were as large 
as the onions in the bed where the seeds 
had been sown, making weeding difficult 
and slow, the task was comparatively 
easy in the other bed. At the second weed¬ 
ing it was necessary to remove many of the 
small onions in the bed where the seeds 
had been sown, au operation which is 
equivalent to an extra weeding. The work 
of weeding was but one-half as much on 
the bed of transplanted onions as on the 
other. Counting the extra trouble of 
growing in the greenhouse and transplant¬ 
ing, the work on the two beds was about 
the same for the whole season; that is, 
transplanting adds nothing to the cost of 
growing the crop, aside from the necessity 
of a greenhouse, hot-bed or cold-frame, in 
any of which the plants can be started. 
