50 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
the wheat of last year, when threshing' it in his barn. From this 
it would seem that' the worm is continually multiplying, as de¬ 
scribed by Bauer, or that it remains a long time as a maggot ere 
it changes to a chrysalis, and that, like some of the aphides, it 
produces several generations with once copulating. 
SILK CULTURE. 
To comply with the request of several corespondents, we insert, 
to-day, the directions, prepared by request of the State Agricul¬ 
tural Society, for sowing the seed, and rearing the plants of the 
White Mulberry. We cannot confidently recommend, until after 
further trial, in our northern climate, the culture on a large scale, 
of the morus multicaulis, though we think it probable that it af¬ 
fords a better material for silk than the common white variety. 
The French periodicals furnish another instance of failure to pro¬ 
duce this species genuine from its own seed; while the North¬ 
ampton papers are pertinacious in insisting that the seed will pro¬ 
duce, and does produce, the like of its maternal parent. These 
contradictory opinions are easily reconciled, without imputing er¬ 
ror to either side. The mulbei'ry forms no exception to the sex¬ 
ual law which governs in the vegetable as well as in the animal 
kingdom, and which is made subservient to the interests of the 
gardener as well as bi-eeder. Hybrid varieties of plants, the pro¬ 
geny of parents of different species, but of the same genus, are 
annually coming to our notice. The cabbage and turnip, when 
allowed to intermix their pollen, produce hybrids—so of the me¬ 
lon and squash. Now the Northampton seed came from India, 
where it is probable there was no other species of this genu- 
growing in the neighborhood, and the seed would of course be 
pure. In France and Italy, other species of the mulberry are 
common and extensively cultivated, and the blossom of the morus 
multicaulis undoubtedly became fecundated with the pollen of 
these, and the progeny became hybrid. 
We have no doubt the silk culture will ultimately succeed, "and 
constitute an important branch of our national industry, if it is 
not paralyzed by the blighting influence of associated capitalists. 
There is no business better suited to the economy of the farm, 
and to people in moderate circumstances than this. It enables the 
otherwise unproductive inmates, females and children, to turn 
their labor to good account. But we are afraid that large esta¬ 
blishments, with corporate powers, will tend rather to retard than 
to encourage this branch of inral labor, except in their immedi¬ 
ate neighborhoods, where it can be made subservient to their cu¬ 
pidity. There will, however, be failures in this as in every other 
business, in which men embark with more zeal than knowledge. 
We remember the subject produced no little excitement some 
half a centuiy ago, in Connecticut, when that state gave a bounty 
for planting mulbei-ry trees. We were then familiar with the ma¬ 
nagement of the silk-worm, and assisted oft in gathei’ing leaves 
for their food. The excitement and zeal soon died away, but is 
now renewed with far better prospects of success. The least we 
can advise every person to do, who wishes to succeed in the cul- 
ture of silk, is to subscribe, without delay, for one of the monthly 
papers which are expressly devoted to this subject. Address F 
G. Comstock, editor of the Silk Culturist, Hartford, Con.—en¬ 
close a dollar bill, and you will receive one or two copies. 
LEGISLATIVE AID TO AGRICULTURE. 
The indiffei-ence of our legislature to the interests of agriculture, 
or rather their pertinacity in denying to those who seek to pro 
mote these interests, any facility which may enable them to give 
more efficiency to their labors, is a matter of surprise to some. 
The State Agricultural Society made (wo respectful requests : 
one, that the legislature would offer a liberal premium for the dis- 
coveiy of an effectual preventive of the injury this part of the state 
is now suffering from the grain worm,—which, if it led to the desir¬ 
ed discovery, would in all human probability, have saved millions 
to the state,—and if no discovery had ensued, would not have 
cost the state a cent. The other request was, to graixt the com¬ 
mon corporate powers to an association of gentlemen, who might 
be desirous of embarking capital—not to obtain usurious interest, 
—but for the purpose of advancing the best interests of the state, 
by the establishment of a school on a libera! scale for instruction 
in pi'actical agriculture, in the arts, and in those branches of use¬ 
ful knowledge which are calculated to impi’ove and embellish so¬ 
ciety. Not a cent was asked from the public treasury, nor was it, 
to our knowledge, contemplated to ask such aid at any time here¬ 
after. This petition had attached to it the names of some of the 
best and most distinguished citizens of our state. Both of these 
applications failed—and failed too, we believe, in consequence 
either of the illiberal prejudice, or of the profound wisdom, of a 
committee of three, or of a single individual, and the pei’fect indif¬ 
ference to the subject of other honorable senators. The first men¬ 
tioned application was not treated with common courtesy, if, as 
we are informed, it was not deemed worthy of being reported up¬ 
on. It was presented in the senate, and referred to the committee 
on agriculture. The latter was presented in the assembly, where 
a bill passed with but three dissenting voices. In the senate it 
went to the committee on agriculture, who reported it, at the heel 
| of the session, with numerous amendments changing altogether 
j its character, and rendering it, if it had passed, unsuited to the 
ends contemplated by the petitioners. 
We can make great allowance for honest prejudice—we can 
allow for, though we cannot commend, fastidious precaution— 
and we can appreciate the force of political feelings, which are 
too apt to claim the paramount homage of men now-a-days ; we 
can do all this, without being able to discover any substantial rea¬ 
sons, worthy the dignity of grave senators, or compatible with 
their high public duties, for the marked hostility of the senatorial 
committee, to the propositions of the State Society; or the passive 
acquiescence of the senate in that hostile feeling. 
AGRICULTURAL BOOKS. 
We have been requested, by a coiTespondent of the Genesee 
Farmer, to furnish a list of agricultural books, suitable for a far¬ 
mer’s library. This we do cheerfully, remarking by the way, 
that the number of American books is very limited : and that in 
selecting those of foreign origin, we must take much chaff* with 
the wheat. The elementary principles of husbandry are pretty 
general in their application while the practical operations of dif¬ 
ferent countries must necessarily be variant, not oixly on account 
|of difference in climate and soil, but in productions for the mar¬ 
ket, price of labor, habits of the people, &c. No European sys¬ 
tem of practice is therefore exactly adapted to our wants, though 
it may embrace much that is highly beneficial. 
Independent of the memoirs that have been published by the 
agricultural societies in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, and by 
the Society of Arts and Board of Agriculture in New-York, the 
American works on agiiculture, that we have been acquainted 
with, are, to name them in the order in which they appeared: 1. 
| Dean’s New England Farmer ; 2. Boardley’s Husbandry ; 3. Ara- 
tor, a series of agricultural essays, by John Taylor, of Virginia ; 
4. A Treatise on Agriculture, by Gen. Armstrong : 5. The Far¬ 
mer’s Assistant, by John Nicholson ; 6. Lorrain’s Husbandry ; 7. 
Essay on Calcareous Manures, by E. Ruffin; and 8. The Com¬ 
plete Farmer, by T. G. Fessenden. These are all worthy a place 
in a Fanner’s Library, as well as the memoirs first named. Of 
Nos. 1 and 7, new revised editions have lately been published at 
Boston and Richmond. Of the others, copies are scarce, and the 
memoirs, we believe, cannot be purchased. No. 4 is a work of 
merit, comprising a great mass of interesting matter, detailed 
with great conciseness and perspicuity. No. 6 was written by an 
excellent practical farmer, who blended a great deal of useful 
reading and nice observation with an extensive practice. The 
writer was a self-taught philosopher, who scrutinized narrowly in¬ 
to cause and effect, and we believe was a very successful farmer. 
The essay on calcai-eous manures, is an invaluable treasure to all 
who can avail themselves of lime and marl, as sources of fertility. 
No. 8 is principally a judicious compilation from the agricultural 
papers of our country. A new edition is now in the pi - ess. There 
are several Amei-ican publications which treat of the orchai'd and 
the garden, which it is unnecessary to enumerate, as they may be 
found in all our seed shops. 
Of foreign publications upon husbandry, we should recommend 
the following, in the oi'der we name them :—Low’s Elements of 
Practical Agriculture; Lawrence on Cattle; Davy’s Agricultural 
Chemistry ; Sinclair’s Code of Agriculture; and, (last, only on ac¬ 
count of its expense,) Loudon’s Encyclopedia of Agiiculture. 
The Farmers’ Series, published by the British Society for diffusing 
useful knowledge, affords an excellent compendium oi British 
husbandly, though but partially adapted to our country. 
But neither foreign nor American books ought to supersede the 
