i89o 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
853 
NOTES FROM THE RURAL GROUNDS. 
The Rural Thoroughbred Flint Corn. 
Now that the economy of ensilage is being discussed 
well nigh over the entire country, it is of the first import¬ 
ance that those varieties of corn should be selected which 
are the best adapted to the purpose. It is difficult to ex¬ 
plain why the big-stalked, tall-growing Southern dents 
should, by many, be preferred to Northern kinds which 
have smaller stalks and, proportionately, a greater amount 
of leaves. In this connection we propose to secure for the 
Rural Thoroughbred Flint a thorough trial, by offering to 
all applicants a small trial packet for next season’s plant¬ 
ing. It has been raised by certain members of The R. N.- 
Y. family for upwards of 50 years and, for the greater part 
of that time, far away from other fields of corn with which 
otherwise it would probably have become mixed. It is 
peculiar in many ways. Length of ear and size of kernel 
have been the chief considerations in the selection of seed. 
The ears are often 14 inches long with eight rows, and 
about 55 kernels to the row. The kernels, as will be seen 
from the illustration, Figure 412, are very broad and 
though not “ dented ” are softer than those of ordinary 
kinds of flint. The color is a dull white. In the climate of 
Northern New Jersey and Long Island it never fails to 
mature, though during cool, wet summers the entire 
season is required. How much further north 
it will fully ripen, or ripen sufficiently to 
meet the necessities of the silo the writer is 
not Informed. 
Now for the plant. The average stalks 
from single seeds will be a fraction over 
four, as grown in a moderately fertile soil. 
In richer soil the suckers would increase. 
As shown in the illustration, drawn from 
a photograph taken on September 1, there 
is, as to size and height, little difference 
between the main stalks and the suckers. 
In fact, it is impossible to say “ which is 
which.” Most of the stalks bear an ear and 
the yield of grain is usually 75 bushels to 
the acre; while over 90 bushels were raised 
in an exceptionally favorable season. The 
illustration shows a plant with seven main 
stalks (from one seed), while the height 
(September 1) may be closely guessed at by 
the height of the man beside it, which is 
five feet six inches. 
The leaves are all broad, those from the 
top nodes being nearly as broad as the lower 
ones, and many of them are three feet long 
and four inches wide. The joints are un¬ 
usually close together, so that the leaf area 
is immense. Another notable peculiarity 
of the plant is its remarkable root system, 
the roots being so numerous, strong and 
far-reaching that the plants never lodge. 
Heavy gales may break the stalks, but we 
have never seen a fallen plant. The ears are 
borne low or midway and will average un¬ 
der proper cultivation four to a plant. 
When the variety’s great suckering habit 
is considered, it will be seen that the plants 
must be given ample space. One plant to 
every 12 square feet of soil is enough; that 
is to say, plants should not be left closer 
together than four by three feet, or an 
equivalent distance, though to insure a full 
stand the seed may be planted as closely 
together as may be .deemed necessary to 
secure that result. 
WEIGHT OF THE STOVER AND YIELD OF 
GRAIN. 
The plot was divided into two parts, each 
one-fortieth of an acre. The first plot re¬ 
ceived 30 pounds of Bradley’s corn fertilizer, 
or at the rate of 1,200 pounds to the acre. 
The yield was at the rate of 36,670 pounds 
per acre; that is, plants and ears. The 
yield of grain was at the rate of 103 bushels 
per acre. 
The second plot received at the rate of 
600 pounds per acre of the same fertilized. 
The yield in ears and stover was 34,674 
pounds to the acre. The yield of shelled 
corn was at the rate of 77 bushels to the 
acre. Due notice will be given when applications for this 
corn will be in order. 
else. I am away from home a large share of my time and 
find very many wells the water from which tastes and 
smells very badly indeed, and In every instance it comes 
from wells that are nearly full. On the contrary, when I 
find good water it is from deep wells in which the water 
never gets very high. I believe the water from shallow 
wells is purer than that from deep ones, because the water 
in the former is drawn out soon after it has flowed in, 
while in the other case the water is, in great part, made 
up of surface drainage, and has become more or less foul 
from stagnation and lack of aeration. c. M. ltjsk. 
' SOME NEW JERSEY NOTES. 
The white potato rot has played havoc with the other¬ 
wise good crop in this county ; but where potatoes 
were planted early enough to mature before the heavy 
fogs came, the rot did slight if any damage. I have 
learned that a disk harrow far excels a plow for fitting 
both white and sweet potato ground for wheat sowing both 
in the time saved and in the better condition in which 
the soil is left; if one laps exactly half the field will be left 
smooth. I have always thought that a liberal dose of 
potash would benefit sweet potatoes, and this year I sowed 
400 pounds on a little over an acre; but when I dug the crop 
I could not see any effects either good or bad; but the ap- 
SINGLE PLANT OF THE R. N.-Y. 
From a Photograph. 
THOROUGHBRED FLINT. 
Fig. 412. 
STIR THE STALE WATER. 
I have dug at different times and in different localities 
three wells. When they were first dug the water did not 
taste all right. I attributed the bad taste to the earth and 
stones. One of them is 30 feet deep, and I used to water 
seven horses at it and at the same time we used the water 
from it in the family. There never was better or purer 
water, and this continued so long as we watered the horses 
and were drawing large quantities from it each day. I 
used it for about 12 years in this way. Then I dug a well 
near my barnyard and put a windmill over it to pump 
water for my stock. From that time I did not water horses 
at the old well and the water began to taste and smell badly 
shortly afterwards. The well filled up so that there were 
nearly 15 feet of water in it. I have abandoned it entirely 
and get my water from the new well, on account of its 
purity, because so much water is pumped from it for 
stock. Neither slops nor anything else impure can be 
found within four rods of the old well. I have attributed 
the bad taste and smell to the fact that the water stands 
so long. I believe I am right. I can see no reason why 
water will not get stale by standing as well as anything 
plication may do good on future crops grown there. I use 
a six-foot side bar mower and am able to cut my grass 
quickly when the conditions are the best, and I can not see 
that there is any increase of draft over that needed for a 
narrow-cut mower, my team working it much more easily 
than three horses work my twine-binder and the extra 
work it does counts In the hay field. E. G. brick. 
Salem County, N. J. 
FARMS AND FARMERS IN 1910 1 
DR. T. H. HOSKINS. 
Prophesy and visions of the future are not much in my 
line; but so far as the general drift of things agricultural 
can be foreseen, it appears to me that we are tending to 
segregation of the agricultural class more and more into 
proprietary and tenant farmers. The margin of profit in 
all unmonopolized industries tends to become smaller 
and smaller, in consequence of competition. The average 
farmer barely makes a living; the poor farmer goes behind 
and loses his farm; while the intelligent, wide-awake, pro¬ 
gressive, yet careful farmer still has the opportunity to 
succeed and acquire a competency, and even, under favor¬ 
able conditions, to become what (at least among farmers) 
is called “ rich.” Who are to be the occupants, respect- 
ively, of these positions ? The farmer has to compete in 
the labor market with other employers of labor. Organ¬ 
ization among the laboring classes tends to crowed up 
wages, or at least to prevent their decrease. This keeps 
up not only the price of labor to the farmer, but also the 
price of all products of labor, other than his own. Now, 
how can this competition be nullified? Each manufacturer 
endeavors to nullify it by seeking the best conditions, in 
the best machinery, the best location, the most careful 
supervision, and the closest study of the markets. The 
farmer who aims at success has exactly the 
same outlook before him, and the same con¬ 
ditions to meet. Can he do it without an 
adequate education, or training in his art, 
without adequate capital, without a proper 
location, without a knowledge of the mar¬ 
kets, and the ability to fully meet their 
requirements ? 
To come right down to a practical case— 
my own, yours, or our neighbor’s. Can we 
hire labor to work a poor farm, poorly 
located and equipped with inferior stock 
and implements, and “make it pay ? ” It 
is impossible. A man may take a poor 
farm and work It himself alone, in any 
way he can, or will; and he can live—for he 
must live so or quit—upon what he can 
produce there. It is only a question of 
endurance. There is no chance for profit, 
unless the products of his own personal 
labor will yield him something over “a 
living.” The country is full of such farms 
and farmers. I have been taking pains for 
24 years to ask town officers in Vermont 
wherever I have been (and I have traveled 
about the State a good deal), how much 
clear profit was made, on the average, on 
the farms of their respective towns, and 
every one has said that $50 a year is too 
high an average. 
Yet in that $50 is the possibility, and the 
only possibility of progress and prosperity 
for the farmers of a State. In Vermont it 
would be an increase of agricultural wealth 
amounting to $1,750,000 a year. Our as¬ 
sessors’ returns do not, I think, show any 
such annual gain in rural wealth. Figures 
that do not lie may sometimes deceive. 
There may be more prosperity on our farms 
than is apparent; but if I can judge, the 
large majority of American farmers are 
either standing still, or going backward. 
Standing still is going backward, if the 
farms are losing in condition of soil, or 
value of improvements, wood lots, stock, 
tools, etc. 
The time is now practically gone by when 
the American farmer can live on the ac¬ 
cumulated wealth of the soil. The time is 
at hand—right at the door—when a farmer, 
even to make a living, must be educated to 
his business. Then, if he has enough cap¬ 
ital, he may be a proprietary farmer. If 
he has less, he may be a tenant farmer. If 
he has little or none, he must be a farm 
laborer. Form of government is not going 
to save us from this result, which has been 
already reached In every other civilized 
country where the original native fertility 
of the soil has been reduced below a cer¬ 
tain point. Farming is going to “ pay ” in 
the future even better than in the past; but the profits 
of farming are going to fewer men, more or less, as they 
are more thoroughly trained to their business. “ He who 
would bear the palm, let him deserve it.” 
Individual Cow Tastes. —That cows do have individual 
tastes and preferments in regard to food I have no doubt. 
But that they are pronounced enough when good sound hay 
and grain are fed to make it profitable to discriminate in 
feeding a herd, I seriously doubt. I find in feeding good 
ensilage and oat or wheat grains that to all appearances 
each consumes her ration with relish. Still I think a little 
variety in some instances is desirable, so that in feeding 
ensilage as I do, I now and then change the grain ration 
for a week or so. Varying the diet of cows often stimu¬ 
lates the appetite and aids digestion, and the more a good 
cow can eat with a relish the greater or richer will prob¬ 
ably be her yield of milk provided she assimilates all she 
eats. Petting one cow in this way may pay, but catering 
to the several tastes of the cows in a large herd would 
hardly do so. JOHN GOULD. 
Portage County, Ohio. 
Some Canadian Notes. —Fall wheat has proved one of 
the best crops, some farmers having from 30 to over 40 
bushels per acre; still on many farms the yield was under 
20 bushels. Why ? Because the land was not properly 
prepared and many of our farmers will not buy artificial 
fertilizers. “ What! ” say they, “ pay from $3 to $4 for fer¬ 
tilizers? It would be folly.” Yet their next door neigh¬ 
bor does so, and reaps over 30 instead of under 20 bushels, 
and the following year cuts two tons of clover, while his 
neighbors cut only one. The improvement in machinery 
has made farming much easier. There are now no tired 
backs from cradling and binding, and with improved cul¬ 
tivators there ought to be a much larger area under roots. 
I feel confident that any farmer who will sell only his 
wheat and live stock, and feed all his coarse grain and hay 
can with a small outlay on artificial manures make his 
land produce, on an average, over 35 bushels of wheat to 
the acre, while with the aid of barnyard manure all his 
other crops will be in proportion. c. J. F. 
Delaware, Ont. 
