1858 . 
THE CULTIVATOR 
115 
The Kohl Rabi. 
In a late number of the Irish Farmer’s Gazettee, 
we find some remarks on the Kohl Rabi in which it is 
strongly recommended, “ as a valuable addition to the 
field root crops now in cultivation.” From some cause, 
not well understood, the turnip in many sections has 
degenerated and become much disposed to “ fiugers 
and tees,” and the other diseases which have rendered 
it of late so very uncertain a crop in England. 
The kohl rabi is proposed as a substitute for the tur¬ 
nip, as it presents us ail the qualities required for this 
purpose. It is perfectly hardy, and will stand severe 
frosts better and keep in store for a longer period than 
the Swedish turnip. It also resists the attacks of the 
fly and grub. Its feeding qualities have been fully 
tested, and all kinds of stock are exceedingly fond of 
it. When fed to milch cows it does not impart that 
turnip taste to the milk and butter, as is frequently 
the case when cows are freely fed with turnips. 
The average weight per statute acre, has been from 
27 to 31 tons, of tops and bulbs. 
The seeds of the green and purple topped varieties 
have been extensively distributed through the agency 
of the Patent-Office, during the past two or three years. 
As far as we have learned, they have fallen short of the 
Swedes in productiveness or weight per acre. But in 
all cases that have come to our knowledge, the seed of 
the kohl were sown at the time of sowing the turnips. 
This is too late for sowing rabi seed. The Gazette 
says : u The seed is sown in a well-prepared seed-bed, 
about the end of February, in drills about a foot apart; 
and in May they are transplanted in the field (when 
the plants are six or eight inches high,) in rows about 
two feet asunder, and eighteen inches apart in the 
rows.” 
We have grown the Kohl the three past seasons, and 
have been somewhat disappointed as to the product, it 
being much less than that of Swedes. But our seed 
has not been sown till about the middle of June—six 
or eight weeks too late. 
We advert to this subject now, for the purpose of 
imparting seasonable notice as to the time of sowing 
the seed. 
---— 
Farming on the Prairies. 
Editors Country Gentleman —I propose to point 
out some erroneous opinions that exist among ourselYes. 
In the first place in regard to manures. When appli¬ 
ed to our soil before sowing small grain, they are a pos¬ 
itive injury, increasing the length of straw, causing 
the grain to lodge and rust before filling, and prevent¬ 
ing its coming to maturity. When applied to corn, it 
has as good an effect here as anywhere. Potatoes 
should never be planted in this prairie soil until the 
second year after manuring, as it causes the rot as a 
general thing when the rains are seasonable. 
I see by your “Notes on the West,” that you re¬ 
ceived the idea from information obtained here, that 
manure was of no benefit to meadows; but I think dif¬ 
ferently. From my limited experience in grass lands, 
I should in all cases recommend a good heavy top dress¬ 
ing in the fall, and I engage to show as good results 
from such treatment, as any other section of the coun¬ 
try whatever. Our meadows here are very much neg¬ 
lected. They are pastured in spring and fall, in wet 
or dry, and then when grass stands light on the ground, 
it is attributed to the soil. One other reason for light 
crops of grass for three years past, has been the drouth. 
The ground has not been wet down three feet in three 
years. All the rain usually falls while the ground is 
frozen, and all the water runs off, and when the spring 
comes dry weather sets in, and continues so. I think 
a little more care will supply us with as good timothy 
and clover meadows as the Empire State can boast. 
The crop of Millet I showed you when here, proved 
an entire failure from three causes—first, it was sown 
too early—second, weather too cold ; ground froze hard 
after sowing—and 3d, it was too dry till after harvest; 
but I have every confidence in the “ weed.” I shall 
try it again, and hope to succed better next time, as 
nearly all who tried it succeeded well, and some on the 
poorest and lightest soil in this section. D. D. G. III. 
-- 
Terms for Leasing Farms. 
Some one has inquired in The Cultivator, for the 
just terms for working land on shares. 
There are three rates of division of the products of 
the farm, between the owner and the lessee. 
First—Where the proprietor furnishes all the stock, 
team, tools, seed and plaster, and pays the wear and 
tear and the taxes, and takes two-thirds of the products, 
and the tenant one-third. 
Second—Where the tenant does the work, and fur¬ 
nishes the stock, &c., and pays the wear and tear and 
taxes, and takes two-thirds, and the owner one third. 
Third—Where the stock is owned equally by both 
parties, and the other expenses equally divided, and 
the profits equally divided. 
These rules of division seem to be indicated by, or 
rather seem to indicate the fact that one-third of the 
produce of the farm should pay the interest on the va¬ 
lue of it, that one-third should pay for the labor, and 
one-third should pay the other expenses and the inte¬ 
rest on the value of the stock. This is nearly true in 
regard to good land, for it is plain that the difference 
in working good land and poor is very great. It takes 
all the products of some farms to pay the expenses of 
carrying them on. 
It is a very fair division between the proprietor and 
the farmer, in the proper cultivation of good land, to 
follow the rule last indicated. The parties have an 
equal interest, and mutually co-operate in the business. 
This is rather better for the farmer than the rate first 
mentioned. 
I have before me a record of the income and ex¬ 
penses of a farm managed on this plan, which shows 
the general correctness of the above rates. Where the 
farmer does the labor only for one-third of the proceeds, 
his income will be rather less, but it is expected in this 
case that the proprietor will have greater responsibility 
in the business. And in the case where the farmer 
owns the stock and pays all the expenses, for two-thirds 
of the proceeds, a degree of skill and responsibility is 
demanded, which justifies a greater reward. 
We glory in the social position of the American far¬ 
mer, who generally is the proprietor of the soil he cul¬ 
tivates ; but it is favorable to young men that there are 
some superannuated or retired gentlemen—their fa¬ 
thers, perhaps—who are glad to commit the laborious 
part of the business to those who are capable and ac¬ 
tive, but without much capital. I do not know of a 
