1014. 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
BIG CORN STORIES REVIEWED. 
NEVER saw an article that had more good, hard 
horse sense in it than the one in reply to G. B., 
“?140 Per Acre From Corn,” page 1234. Corn 
at 90 cents per bushel, cornstalk silage $2 per ton, 
corn stover .$12 per ton and $20 per ton for cow pea 
hay may be correct for South Carolina. Our prices 
here in the mountains of East Tennessee are corn, 
00 cents per bushel, corn stover $4 per ton, cow pea 
hay $12. We make very little silage from cornstalks 
after the ears have been removed, but $4.50 per ton 
was what we received last Winter for silage from 
corn that none estimated less than 65 bushels per 
acre, the ears went into silo with the stover. Before 
any man can tell how much profit he was making on 
land planted to corn that made 100 bushels per acre 
he must add the cost of plant food removed by the 
corn crop to the cost to cultivate and harvest the 
corn; 100 bushels corn will remove: 
-Pounds in 100 bushels.- 
Nitrogen. I’kos. Acid Potash. 
Grain . 100 17 19 
Corn stover . 48 0 52 
Total. 148 23 71 
The nitrogen at 15 cents per pound would be 
$22.20; phosphoric acid at three cents, 09 cents; pot¬ 
ash at six cents $4.20, or a total of $27.15. Now add 
this amount to $49.25 and you have $70.30; this from 
$140 is $63.70 per acre profit. We all know if the 
corn crop was fed to farm stock and all the manure 
made therefrom returned to the farmer it might be 
possible to return to the soil 662/3, and in some cases 
75 per cent, of the plant food removed by the corn 
crop. And we know also, badly as we dislike to ad¬ 
mit it, that as an average for the whole country, 
north, east and west, as well as south, not over 25 
per cent, of the plant food in farm crops, that are 
fed on the farm, ever sees the field on which it grew, 
or any other field on the farm. 
It may be that some of my R. N.-Y. friends may 
think 15 cents per pound for nitrogen, three cents 
for phosphoric acid, and six cents for potash too 
steep, but nine out of 10 farmers pay more, and 
when they purchase a complete fertilizer so-called, 
they pay away yonder more. It would cost us nearer 
20 cents for nitrogen and five cents each for potash 
and phosphoric acid. Yes, sir, you are right. Just 
such stories as this have led thousands of honest, 
sober, industrious and frugal men and women to sell 
out their homes, leave steady employment at fair 
wages, just to be a back-to-the-landers, with high 
hopes of getting rich quick; the x-esults we are all 
too familiar with. We of Crowell Farm are back-to- 
tlie-landers, but we went with no such high hopes. 
Twelve long, hard-working “skimpy” years of our 
life’s best manhood have gone into our fields; each 
one of them we know by name. We have been fair¬ 
ly successful. Men from a distance have come to see 
our work, some to ask questions, others to criticize, 
while others come to “write us up.” 
I am only a stiff-fingered farmer two score and 
eleven years young. I get down in the midst of all 
farm work and fan the clods and weeds; when able, 
and often when a wee bit of rest would seem to be 
better. But I never made $140 on an acre of corn, 
no, not even on an acre of Alfalfa. But we have 
often made 100 bushels of corn on an average for a 
whole field. We are now to-day harvesting and 
housing the corn on a four-acre field that looks as 
though we are to have 440 bushels of good sound 
corn for the four acres. o. p. r. fox. 
Tennessee. 
CITY PEOPLE ON THE FARM. 
I T is an odd week when we do not receive at least 
a dozen letters from would-be back-to-the-landers. 
There is a new movement away from the city. In 
a way the European War seems to be partly respon¬ 
sible for this, though in a strange way. Some of 
these back-to-the-landers have been told that this 
country must feed Europe, and that every acre of 
soil must help do this. Every egg. every hen and 
every potato will be needed, they say. No use tell¬ 
ing them that fine potatoes are now selling at the 
farm for 30 cents a bushel. What does the back-to- 
the-lander care for that so long as his imagination 
is free? So they come for impossible advice. They 
also want to know what to study. Here we can sat¬ 
isfy them. The first thing to commit to memory is 
Dr. G. F. Warren’s pamphlet on “Some Suggestions 
For City Persons Who Desire To Farm.” This is 
issued by the Cornell Experiment Station at Ithaca, 
N. Y. It is a sound and sensible statement of the 
hard facts which one will find in the country. Here 
is a sample of the straight common sense which fills 
this pamphlet: 
Farming is manual labor. Very few persons make a 
success of farming who are not workers as well as man¬ 
agers, and these few persons nearly always come up 
through the labor experience. If a middle-aged person 
has never learned to do manual labor, such a change is 
still more difficult. If the members of such a family 
are very sure that they desire to go to farming, it is 
safer, if possible, to rent a small place in the country 
and continue with the city occupation. Some chickens 
and a cow can be kept, and a garden raised. The family 
can do most of this work. The small enterprises can 
be increased, and, if successful after a few years, it 
may be safe to leave the city work and go to farming. 
Another safe method of procedure for a man with a 
family and small means is to put his money in a sav¬ 
ings bank and hire out as a farm hand for at least a 
year before any of the money is invested in farming. 
The amount of wages received will not be very large, 
but the danger of losing the entire capital through pre¬ 
mature investment may be avoided. Until an able- 
bodied person is able to earn good farm wages for some 
Elrose Peach. Fig. CIS. See page 1419. 
one else, he is certainly not ready to direct a farm for 
himself—no more so than is a clerk ready to run a 
grocery store before he can earn good wages as a clerk 
in that store. 
We have been accused of throwing cold water on 
the hopes of the back-to-the-landers. What would 
you do if you wanted to put out a fire which you 
knew would destroy your neighbor’s property? The 
writer has gone back to the land twice. We confess 
that the first trip was a dead and dismal failure, but 
it gives one the right to say that Dr. Warren's pam¬ 
phlet is sound. 
LIMESTONE AND SLAKED LIME. 
HERE ought not to be all this argument about 
using different fonxis of lime. The ground 
limestone men are worst in this l'espect. You 
get into trouble right away if you venture to differ 
with them. Many of them live close to lime quarries 
where the limestone can be crushed locally, with a 
short haul to the farm. Some of us must pay high 
freight rates, and we find that it pays to buy slaked 
or “quick” lime because we get more actxial lime in 
a ton, and there is no reason why we should pay 
freight on useless water or carbonic acid! In figur¬ 
ing which form of lime to buy we have reasoned that 
for immediate results one pound of slaked lime is 
eqxial to two pounds of limestone. This statement 
Krummel’s October Peach. Fig. 019. See page 1419. 
has been challenged, but a recent experiment at the 
R. I. Experiment Station shows its truth. Experi¬ 
ments were made in using different forms of lime 
on mangels and carrots. They used limestone 
both unsifted as it came from the crusher and also 
in four different degrees of fineness. Then they 
used slaked lime—figuring to obtain equal amounts 
of actual lime in each case. Mere is the result, 
summed up: 
■ «. 
As a general rule. then, it would probably take 200 
to 300 pounds of limestone, depending upon its fineness, 
to produce the same effect the first season as 100 pounds 
of freshly slaked lime. 
Some of the coarse limes gave poor results, but this 
1411 
genei'al conclusion is in line with the advice we have 
given. It may be said that the ground limestone 
gives more permanent results. The fact is that most 
of us, on high-priced land, and spending money freely 
for chemicals, must have quick results. That is why 
we use soluble plant food. There are no doubt cases 
where the slower-acting limes and chemicals would 
answer, but it is not safe to take results obtained 
through such methods and apply them directly to 
other cases whex*e the conditions are entirely diffex*- 
ent 
WHERE TO USE THE MANURE. 
I AM undecided as to how to use our stable manure 
most advantageously. We have a crop rotation con¬ 
sisting chiefly of corn one year, oats or barley seed¬ 
ing with Timothy and clover, which runs three or 
four yeai’s before it is broken up again. We are trying 
to establish Alfalfa but not with very good results. I 
am buying a car of ground raw phosphate rock to mix 
with stable manure, about a pound per cow per day. 
We also use Soy beans with corn (Learning) for silage. 
We inoculate all legumes. I would like your advice as 
to when to use the manure most advantageously. One 
farm has its meadows in the Mohawk Valley (Montgom¬ 
ery County), and it often overflows, so that Fall plow¬ 
ing and Winter spreading of manure is inadvisable. On 
the other farm we have been keeping the manure and 
spreading it on new seeding after the grain is taken off. 
On this farm I have been inclined to think it might be 
wiser to handle it differently. We have used very little 
commercial fertilizer. Would it pay and what formula 
would you advise our mixing for grass land? H. A. h. 
New York. 
In most rotations the manure is put on the sod and 
plowed under for corn. This ci’op is thought to be 
best for utilizing the large amount of organic matter 
which the sod and the manure contain. Where pota¬ 
toes come in the l’otation, fertilizers, if any are to be 
used, go on this crop. The plan is to make this 
“money crop” as large as possible. Where potatoes 
are not grown and there is much manure used the 
bulk of it goes on sod for corn, and the chemicals on 
the grain and grass. The theory of this practice is 
that corn is the best crop to dispose of the manure 
and sod, and that the nitrogen in the manure being 
mostly in an organic form will become available for 
several years and supply the following crops in the 
rotation with the help of the chemicals. This plan, 
of course, means hauling the manure out daily or 
during the Fall and Winter for spreading on the sod. 
This means also a fairly level farm, so that the sur¬ 
face wash of water will not take too much of the 
manure away. Where the meadows are overflowed 
it would not pay to spx'ead manure during the Fall 
and Winter. In such case we think it would pay 
better to compost or pit at least a part of the manui'e 
and spread it on the meadows in Spring after danger 
of flooding is over. A good chemical mixture for 
such a farm, to use on grain and grass, would be 
three parts of fine ground bone and one part muriate 
of potash. 
A WELL THAT STAYS FULL. 
HAVE a drilled well 185 feet deep, six-inch casing. 
The water rises 123 feet, or within 62 feet of sur¬ 
face. When the well was completed it was tested, 
and could not be lowered. Shortly after being put 
down we had heavy rains. The water was found to be 
within two feet of the surface, no doubt surface water. 
After the windmill was erected and pump started it 
pumped down to the normal height, 123 feet. This was 
eight years ago. But it has done this same thing sev¬ 
eral times. Why does not this water settle down to the 
normal water level, 123 feet? w. H. 
New York. 
Any well that yields water is connected with a wa¬ 
ter-bearing formation from which the water can 
enter the well with more or less fi’eedom. When the 
well is not in use the water rises in it to such a level 
that there is equilibrium between the weight of the 
water column in the well and the pressure of the 
water in the rock formation. When water is with¬ 
drawn the water level is lowered, and the weight of 
the water column in the well is diminished. Hence 
the equilibrium is disturbed and water is forced into 
the well until the original balance is restored. When 
a well is pumped the water level is thei'efore always 
temporarily lowered, the amount of drawdown de¬ 
pending upon the rate of pumping and upon the free¬ 
dom with which the water can enter the well. If 
water is poui*ed into the well the converse process 
takes place—equilibrium being destroyed by the 
weight of the water column in 'the well becoming 
gi-eater than the pressure of the water outside—and 
consequently water is forced out of the well into the 
formation. A well that yields water freely will also 
dispose of water freely. According to W. H.’s de¬ 
scription, his well does not appear to act according 
to this principle, and without more specific data I 
am not able to offer an explanation. 
GEO. OTIS SMITH. 
Director U. S. Geological Survey. 
R. N.-Y.—Has any one an explanation to offer?? 
You will see that the Leghorn “favorite hens” at least 
are doing well. The “Reds” will come along yet. 
