1852 
THE CULTIVATOR 
395 
cerned, as well as the moral Influences of shunning what¬ 
ever chafes the temper, or strengthens vindictive pas¬ 
sions. There are fifteen million cattle in our country, 
and it becoms an interesting question whether the chil¬ 
dren of farmers, who are to spend a large share of their 
lives among them, are taught to regard them all as like 
wild beasts, the objects of fear, dread, or vengeance; or 
to look upon u the sight of animals enjoying life,” under 
humane treatment, as an important source of rural gra¬ 
tification, to say nothing of the feelings of humanity to- 
wards human beings, which must inevitably be cherished 
and increased by the cultivation of humanity towards 
the brute creation. 
Theory and Practice of Fanning. 
Very much is written and said on the theory and prac¬ 
tice of agriculture at the present day. When this comes 
from a reliable source it is often timely and judicious; 
but on the other hand too much comes from visionary 
theorists, who write to display the graces of style and 
establish a reputation. It may not be difficult to secure 
a literary reputation among the well-read residents of 
our large towns and cities, but farmers do not judge by 
the same standard. 
A short time since I listened to an agricultural ad¬ 
dress, at a plowing match, on which occasion the orator 
went on to say how easy a matter it was to master this 
scientific farming. For instance, it was just as easy to 
raise nine hundred bushels of carrots on an acre, as one 
hundred; the only difference being in the use of special 
manures, and a little extra cultivation. Again, if the 
soil was thoroughly plowed and sub-soiled, no crop 
would ever suffer from drouth. Farther, he stated, that 
six weeks study in the winter, would give any farmer 
knowledge enough of chemistry to analyse his own soil. 
Then, in growing the peach, all that is necessary to have 
the trees live as long as they used to forty or fifty years 
ago, is that they should be pruned close to the ground, 
when first set out, and then shortened in once in two or 
three years. There was nothing said about the different 
diseases which affect the peach—the yellows, blight, and 
curled leaf. More peach trees have, probably, been de¬ 
stroyed by the yellows, than all other diseases, and so 
far as my knowledge extends, no certain remedy has been 
found for its fatal attacks. No cultivation will prevent 
it, nothing but the extermination, root and branch, of 
the diseased trees, will check its spread in the orchard. 
Careful cultivation, pruning in some way, will undoubt¬ 
edly make the trees more healthy, and lengthen the pe¬ 
riod of their life. 
As to learning enough of chemistry in six weeks to an¬ 
alyse a soil, I know it cannot be done, and have the best 
authority for saying so. It is only by practical chemists, 
who are deeply learned in the science, and have facilities 
for analysing soils, that anything can be successfully done. 
Special manures, such as guano, poudrette, bone-dust, 
&c., are good in their place, and should be used by 
farmers more than they are. But after all, the principal 
resource of the farmer lies in his barn-yard, and whoever 
allows his stable manure to run to waste, calculating to 
depend on special manures, makes a great mistake 
Their cost is so great that no farmer can depend on them 
for his principal manure, unless he lives near a large 
market city, where land is dear, and produce propor- 
tionably high. 
The orator also stated that there was no necessity of 
having a grain crop lodge, if it was only properly culti¬ 
vated. That is, if plenty of lime and silicates were added 
to the soil, instead of barn-yard manure, the grain would 
always stand upright. Now, to say the least, this is 
true only in a limited degree. Everybody knows that a 
tall, heavy crop of grain, is more liable to lodge than a 
short, light one. The reason for this may be partially 
the absence of silicates, but more particularly the law of 
gravitation. Spring grains, which grow rapidly, are 
more liable to lodge than winter crops, such as rye and 
wheat, which grow more slowly and derive more silica 
to support the stalk. 
It has always been my purpose, in writing, to tell plain, 
practical truth, and not to indulge in any puffing or gas¬ 
blowing, which is a species of dishonesty. It has become 
quite fashionable of late for men to talk of scientific ag¬ 
riculture, as though it were the most simple, easy thing 
in the world. The agricultural literature of the day, 
has increased tenfold in the past few years, and this speaks 
well for the progress of farming in the future. But after 
all, it is the every-day working farmer, who sustains the 
business, and with their improvement, as a whole, will 
agriculture advance. Some “ agricultural talkers” seem 
to think that it is only five or six years since farming has 
been practiced scientifically. Now, this a mistake. 
There were those, fifty years ago, who studied as severe 
ly, and labored as successfully, as any farmer of the pre¬ 
sent day. Their number was less it is true, but they 
were in advance of the age in which they lived. Not long 
since, an editorial appeared in the New-York Tribune, 
on New Farming. After recounting what science has 
done for manufactures and the mechanic arts, the editor 
says: “ But farming lingers in the back ground. The 
plow that cuts the soil of an American prairie, though 
greatly inproved, is substantially the same instrument as 
that sung by the poet of Syracuse or Mantua,” &c. 
The plow, without doubt, is one of the most ancient of 
agricultural implements, as well as the most useful. In 
the days of Pliny, the philosopher, it is said the plow 
was simply a crooked stick, pointed, and the team that 
drew it was £; a woman and an ass” yoked together. The 
Tribune then goes on to compare agricultural im¬ 
provements with recent inventions, such as the telegraph, 
spinning-jennies, &c., leaving farming, of course, a long 
way in the rear. If the Tribune thinks that the majority 
of farm labor is to be done by machinery, we think he is 
in error. We do not attempt to set bounds to what hu¬ 
man invention may accomplish for the farmer, but who¬ 
ever imagines that machines will supercede back-bone 
labor, is romancing on a subject which will not be likely 
to gain much from his efforts. As a case, illustrating 
this new farming, the editor mentions the improvements 
made on the farm of Mr. Meechi, of England. One of 
the principal features in his management, is the use of a 
large tank into which all refuse matter and liquids are 
collected. The contents of this are carried by large iron 
pipes to every part of his farm, and thrown by a steam 
