1854. 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
173 
Farming in Tennessee. 
A subscriber in Van Buren Co., Tennessee, gives the 
following account of the state of agriculture in that vi¬ 
cinity. He hardly need to have added that the farmers 
generally were opposed to book farming. The detail he 
gives of their practical operations is sufficient to prove 
that they have no faith in agricultural publications or 
associations. He says ?—“ Farming in this part of the 
State, is in a wretched condition. Not one man in ten 
will allow allow his land to be ruined with a “Jug 
plozo .” I do not know of more than half a dozen two- 
horse plows in the county. And such a thing as a 
plow requiring more than two horses is unheard of. 
The land is all scratched over in March and April for 
the summer crop. The instrument used is here called 
the “ bull-tongue plow.” It is about ten or twelve in¬ 
ches long and four inches wide at the widest part, 
turned forward so as to run under the surface about 
two inches, or probably a new one will reach to the 
depth of three inches. This does not pulverize the soil 
by any means. What is turned up is left in great clods 
until “ melted by rain ” or broken by the same instru¬ 
ment in tillage. Such a thing as a harrow or roller I 
have yet to see for the first time in this county (Van 
Buren.) Corn is almost the only field crop depended 
upon. Oats are sown by some farmers to “rest” the 
land after com has been taken from it for a series of 
years. Some raise enough wheat to allow them “bis¬ 
cuit every Sunday morning.” There are not many 
farms that produce more than thirty bushels of corn 
per acre. You will doubtless be surprised that it can 
do this under such tillage. The land is as productive 
as can be found anywhere or it would not. Cattlp and 
hogs are the principal stock raised. They are all of 
the commonest kind. The cattle are generally very 
small, being fed on the husks of corn in winter and 
pastured on the coarse mountain grass in the summer. 
Hogs are of the land-pike breed, (if you know such an 
one,) and scarcely ever see corn from the time they 
are small pigs until they are two or three years old, 
when they are fattened. They subsist on acorns and 
roots, and are the more highly prized from being 
“ shifty .” It requires from fifteen to twenty bushels of 
corn to make them weigh one hundred and seventy- 
five or two hundred pounds. They are generally fat¬ 
tened by being turned into a lot containing from one 
to two acres, and fed as much raw corn as they can eat 
and waste, for about two months. No animals are put 
under shelter but horses, and many of them are not. 
Some few horses are raised for sale, but the people 
find less profit in this than any other kind of stock. 
They are fed, almost exclusively, on corn, and the 
blades stripped from the stalk in August, and cured. 
Hay is not known. I do not believe that there are 
ten acres in the county, from which hay is cut. I will 
not describe barns, barn-yards, fences, &c., for you 
can imagine these from what I have told you of other 
things. Fruits are almost entirely neglected. I have 
been here for three years, and have been constantly 
endeavoring to try and get the people to quit this 
skimming, impoverishing (both of land and man) sys¬ 
tem, and to adopt a renovating, enriching system. All 
say that I will find my theories all fail in practice, 
that book farming will break a man up, &c. 
I have bought me 250 acres of good sandy land, and 
I am going to try and show these people that all I 
have said was not “wild theory.” 
Reduction of Bones by Ashes. 
L. Tucker, Esq. —I believe that the reduction of 
bones by means of ashes, as spoken of in the Country 
Gentleman of Feb. 9th, would require from two to 
five or six months, depending partly upon the strength 
of the ashes, but more upon their being kept suitably 
moist. If too much water is applied, they will leach, 
and a portion of the potash will be lost; if too little, 
the organic part of the bones will escape in the form 
of ammonia, sulphuretted hydrogen, &c., thereby at 
once diminishing their value as a manure, and render¬ 
ing the premises disagreable and unhealthy. As much 
water should be applied as the ashes will hold, with¬ 
out leaching; and the bones should be kept perfectly 
covered. 
There are some difficulties attending this process ; 
it requires frequent attention—the hogshead, or other 
vessel, in which the ashes and bones are placed, must 
be away from any building, and yet must be in a cool 
place—probably some gaseous matter will escape at 
last; and I did not therefore intend, nor do I now, to 
recommend (he reduction of bones by ashes as a general 
thing, and certainly not where there are large quanta 
ties of bones to be disposed of; for in that case it is 
quite worth the farmer’s while, to procure sulphuric 
acid—from £ to § of their weight—and reduce them to 
a superphosphate—rather to a mixture of phosphate 
and superphosphate—as has been recommended in 
nearly all our agricultural papers. What I wished to 
say, is, that where, as in many families, there are a 
few bones and a few ashes, wanted for no other than 
agricultural purposes, they may be preserved in the 
way I have described, without any very great loss of 
their fertilizing properties. In this way, the bones of 
the preceding year may be reduced to a condition for 
tolerably prompt action—not as prompt as if reduced 
by sulphuric acid—by the time for planting, with the 
exception of a few of the last, which will be found to 
be hard, and may be again treated with ashes and 
kept over till another year. Theoretically the idea of 
reducing bones by ashes does not look well. It would 
be said, that the alkali will drive off the ammonia 
from the organic part of the bones. Such is undoubt¬ 
edly the tendency; and will be the result, to a great 
extent, if the whole process is not well managed, and 
perhaps to some extent, if it is managed in the best way 
possible. It might also be said, that the phosphate of 
lime, of which two thirds of the bone is composed, 
will remain a phosphate still, instead of being changed 
to a superphosphate. This I suppose is true; and as 
the phosphate is less soluble than the superphosphate, 
I have no doubt that bones reduced by ashes act some¬ 
what less promptly than those dissolved in sulphuric 
acid. But. for that very reason they act more perma¬ 
nently, and so may be of nearly equal value in the 
end. Yours truly, J. A. Nash. Amherst, April 20. 
