“to improve the soil and the mind.” 
New Semes. ALBANY, JANUARY, 1850. Vol. VII.— No. 1. 
Letter from Prof. Norton. 
Analytical Laboratory, Yale College,) 
New-Haven, Conn., Dec. 1, 1849. 1 
Editors Cultivator —It is with much pleasure, 
that I once more commence a series of regular con¬ 
tributions to your columns. My Letters from Eu¬ 
rope, continued through nearly three years, with 
one intermission of three or four months, gave me a 
species of introduction to your numerous readers, 
which has since, in many cases, proved not only 
agreeable, but useful. 
In attempting to renew, and as I hope, extend 
my acquaintance, I have no longer to depend upon 
the novelty and variety of another continent for the 
interest of my communications, and must confine 
my descriptions for the most part, to regions which 
to us seem more prosaic, in our own land. Yet, af¬ 
ter all, this lack of strange people and strange cus¬ 
toms in my present letters, will be excused, if my 
endeavors to illustrate plainly and intelligibly some 
points of improved scientific agriculture, are suc¬ 
cessful. This will still, to many of your readers, 
be traveling in a new country, and writing of things 
that they have never seen. 
The .first great work of every person who elevates 
himself to any of the scientific departments of ag¬ 
riculture, when wishing to make an impression up¬ 
on practical men, should be to convince them that 
he regards practice in its proper light; that the re¬ 
sults of intelligent experience are always consider¬ 
ed by him worthy of attention. Let me then say at 
once, that I look upon science as an auxiliai’y to 
practice. We all know that good corn and wheat, 
may be grown, and have been grown, by men who 
scorn the very name of science; that large cattle 
may be fatted, that good plowing may be done by 
them. We know that the world has been fed even 
to this day, by the skill of farmers, who would be 
called by some scientific enthusiasts, men utterly 
ignorant of first principles. So they were of first 
scientific principles; they could not mention in sci¬ 
entific language, tho proper angle at which the axe 
should enter the tree, but they could show it sunk 
to the helve; they could not name the substances 
that make up the straw and grain of wheat, but 
could point to fields yellow for the harvest; they 
could furnish food for themselves and families, where 
Liebig and Johnston together, with all their sci¬ 
ence, would find it difficult, unassisted, to sus¬ 
tain even their own lives. 
Thus much I acknowledge, practice can do with¬ 
out science, but science cannot do without practice. 
The question now comes up, would not both be be- 
nefitted by union? I have said that practice can do 
without science, but would it not do better with its 
assistance? The practical man can raise good 
crops and good animals, can keep his farm supplied 
with good implements, but could he not w’ork to 
better advantage and with more certainty, if he 
knew more as to the nature of his animals, the com¬ 
position of his. crops and soils? Can any reason¬ 
able man deny that knowledge upon these points, 
would be an immense advantage to him in every de¬ 
partment of his farming operations? The most 
prejudiced opponent of innovation, will, I think, 
scarcely attempt to controvert this general propose 
tion. Once admitted, they cannot consistently re¬ 
fuse attention to an explanation of particular 
points, to proofs that a majority of practical men 
are ignorant of much that they ought to know’, even 
with regard to common details of their profession. 
After what has already been written, this remark 
will not be misunderstood; it will be seen that I do 
not intend to decry practice, but to say that it is far 
from perfect, and may be decidedly improved by the 
addition of a little scientific knowledge. 
It may be objected that this knowledge is unin¬ 
telligible to the ordinary farmer; that it only confu¬ 
ses, and thus leads him into numberless errors; but 
I think that the main features involved in the appli¬ 
cations of science, may be made simple and plain 
to all; this has been proved in the works of Prof. 
Johnston, where a vast amount of knowledge, gain¬ 
ed by the researches of scientific men, is presented 
in a perfectly simple and practical form. 
The great difficulty is, that most waiters on such 
subjects introduce many hard words, and rather ob¬ 
scure theoretical views; these, together w’ith an ab¬ 
sence of direct practical application, discourage 
the plain farmer at the outset; he says —“ I can 
make my living as my fathers have done, without 
worrying my brains over this book learning, which 
after all, may be perfect nonsense.” My object has 
been and always wdll be, to explain everything, so 
that the farmer can think for himself, and can see 
whether any new views presented really have a 
practical bearing or not. The next great difficul¬ 
ty, after simplicity of language has been attained, 
lies in the fact that in a single letter, it is impos¬ 
sible to embrace all of any particular subject or de¬ 
partment. There are some points' almost always 
left unexplained, or some details omitted, w’hich are 
necessary to the uninstructed reader. For this rea¬ 
son, I have decided to take up a particular subject, 
and continue it through several letters, or as many 
as may seem needful. Among those that have oc¬ 
curred to me, one of the most important, as well as 
interesting to the farmer, is that of manures. Some 
readers may think this a misapplication of the word 
interesting, but such cannot be true farmers, for to 
