378 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
he can be justly censured for the approbation which the 
public are pleased to bestow upon his labors. 
It would seem that the writer in the Agriculturist 
intends to have something wrong understood by the repe¬ 
tition and italicising of the phrase “ indefinite friendly 
relations ,” but what that something is, or what is intend¬ 
ed by the use of the phrase, is beyond his conception, as 
he knows of nothing criminal in any of his friendly 
relations, whether definite or indefinite. 
Having given his positive and unequivocal denial to 
these charges in all their length and breadth, the editor 
of the Cultivator trusts that he will be pardoned for ad¬ 
ding, that for the four years, (1840, 1, 2, and 3,) that he 
was Secretary, so strong was his desire to do all in his 
power to place the Society upon a sound and stable foot¬ 
ing, that he devoted himself most untiringly to its inte¬ 
rests—finding a room for its Committee meetings, fur¬ 
nishing the stationery necessary—preparing the vols. 
of Transactions, reading the proof-sheets, and attending 
to the distribution of the vols. when printed, without 
any other “ fee or rew r ard,” either directly or indirect¬ 
ly, than the consciousness that he was thus essentially bene¬ 
fiting the great interest of agriculture, to which he 
has devoted a large portion of his time for the last 
15 years. In addition to his services, the actual expen¬ 
ses he incurred on behalf of the Society, and which he 
paid out of his own pocket, averaged from $50 to $100 
per annum. 
That he was not paid directly for these services, was not 
because the Society was not willing to pay him, but be¬ 
cause he did not wish to be paid, his only object being to 
aid the Society. That he received no benefit from the 
Society in an indirect manner, was because he positively 
refused it. The Executive Committee proposed to make 
the Cultivator its official organ, to authorize the publica¬ 
tion of its correspondence therein, and would have done 
it, had not the editor himself objected to it, which he 
did for the reason that it might be expected to create un¬ 
pleasant feelings on the part of those interested in the 
publication of other similar journals in the state. For 
the same reason, he has repeatedly refused to second 
resolutions which have several times been made to give 
volumes of the Cultivator as premiums. Even at the 
last State Fair at Utica, several vols. of the Cultivator 
were awarded by viewing committees as premiums; 
but to prevent all cause for jealousy, the Editor called 
the attention of the President of the Society to the fact, 
and requested his assent to an alteration of the award so 
as to read vols. of the Society’s Transactions instead of 
vols. of the Cultivator. Thus careful has he been, in 
every instance, where any thing has come up that would 
look like favoritism to the Cultivator, to prevent even 
“ the appearance of evil,” and he defies any one to point 
to an instance where he has received either directly or 
indirectly, even one cent for labors “ professedly be¬ 
stowed without fee or reward.” To the truth of the 
statement here given, he ventures to say that every 
member of the Executive Committee, who was in the 
habit of attending the meetings frequently enough to 
make himself acquainted with the facts, will bear testi¬ 
mony. 
Having thus shown that there was not a shadow of 
foundation for these charges, is it using too strong lan¬ 
guage to pronounce the utterrer of them an infamous slan¬ 
derer? That his infamy may be proved, and the brand 
officially placed upon his forehead, theeditor of the Culti¬ 
vator has directed his counsel to demand the name of the 
writer of the article, that he may be prosecuted for 
the libel; and if the name of the author is refused, 
he will hold the editor and publisher of the Agricultu¬ 
rist responsible. He will also demand of the Society, as 
alike due to it and to himself, that it appoint a com¬ 
mittee thoroughly to investigate these charges, that 
their entire groundlessness may be shown on the most 
competent testimony. 
There are some other things in the article to which 
we ha.ve alluded above, which require notice. The 
first is in relation to the cost of printing the Society’s 
Transactions. The price of legislative printing is fixed 
by law, and consequently it did not make a particle of 
difference as to cost, whether the Report was sent to the 
Senate or to the House. The writer states that the 
amount “ paid to the printer to the Senate for it, was about 
$7,000,” and that “ the profit on it, was stated to him by 
a printer, at $2,000.” This would leave $5,000 as the 
price for the work, after deducting the profits. Now it 
so happens that the exact sum paid to the printer to the 
Senate for the work, was $4,329.13, being $670.87 less 
than this veracious writer puts the actual cost of the 
work. 
In a previous paper this same writer charged that Mr. 
Thomas, who condensed the papers for the last vol. of 
Transactions, had omitted articles from others to make 
room for his own. The falsity of this having been 
shown, he now charges in effect that the premiums have 
been awarded by the Executive Committee, through fa¬ 
voritism to Mr. T. It is, therefore, proper to say, W'hat 
this writer must have known, that the premiums on the 
three essays of Mr. Thomas, were awarded by three 
different sub-committees, of one of which Mr. John¬ 
son, the present President of the Society, was chairman; 
of another, R. L. Pell, Esq., of New-York, and of the 
third, H. S. Randall of Cortland. 
It would be an insult both to the Society and common 
sense to reply to the assertions respecting the manage¬ 
ment of the Society being under the control of the Culti¬ 
vator. A mere reference to the names of the officers is 
a sufficient contradiction of this ridiculous charge. That 
we have possessed (he confidence, so far as we know, of 
all the officers, during the years of our connection with 
the Society, is to us a matter of gratulation; but that we 
have in any way abused it, remains to be shown. 
PERMANENCE OF LIME AS MANURE. 
J. Watson, in the Journal of the English Agricultural 
Society, states that a piece of ground containing 166 
acres, on which little grew except heath, was more than 
doubled in value, by a good dressing of lime, applied on 
the top sward. This was done about 15 years ago, and 
totally eradicated the heath. “ The lime to this day ap¬ 
pears in full action, as its effects annually testify, from the 
richness and sweetness of the herbage, the texture of 
which has been thoroughly changed by the action of the 
lime. The deep green hue and luxuriant appearance of 
this land in spring and autumn, form a striking contrast 
with those adjoining, which are Still unimproved. The 
soil is a thin moorish loam in a high climate, resting on 
the greywack formation.” 
BENEFITS OF AGRICULTURAL SOCIETIES. 
Dr. J. W. Thomson, who has been either secretary or 
president of the New-Castle (Del.) Ag. Society, from its 
organization ten years since, in resigning the latter sta¬ 
tion at a recent meeting, among other things, said—“ A 
county, for which nature has done so much, would, in 
all human probability, without their example and exer¬ 
tions, have gone on in her “ old paths and accustomed 
ways.” But, when all see and appreciate the rapid and 
improving state of her agriculture; in ten years, doubling 
her crops, and adding, as estimated, more than a million 
of dollars to the value of her stock and real estate, they 
must say that the progress of your Society is “onward;” 
and its success has been as complete as its benefits have 
been widely diffused.” A vote of thanks to Dr. T. “ for 
his devoted exertions for the benefit and prosperity of 
the society during the eight years of his presidency,” 
was unanimously adopted,—a tribute most justly due to 
his untiring efforts in favor of agricultural improvement. 
James Canby, Esq. was then elected President; C. P. 
Holcomb, Cor. Sec’y; James Webb, Rec. Sec'y; also ten 
vice-presidents, board of directors, &e. 
Diseased potatoes. —Accounts from England as weh 
as from the continent, speak of the serious damage to 
the potatoe crop by disease. The London Examiner 
says, “ Externally the disease indicates itself by a moss, 
or fungus, producing a decomposition of the farinaceous 
interior.” 
