1853 . 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
305 
“ right side up.” The annexed figure shows their form 
—their cost was about $1,50 each, made by J. L. Mott 
of New-York city. Another in a circular form, with 
six divisions or partitions, would accommodate a lar¬ 
ger number of animals. 
The root crops, consisting of carrots and field beets, 
were in fine condition, and showed perfectly clean cul¬ 
ture. An excellent provision was made for saving slops 
and every waste liquid from the house, which was con¬ 
ducted down a subterranean channel into a large tank. 
This tank opened on the lower side into the liquid- 
manure carts,' so that they were filled without difficulty. 
In addition to this, an under-ground pipe conveyed it 
to the kitchen garden, where, by means of a hydrant, 
it was readily appplied to the growing vegetables. 
We found a fine exemplication of the truth we have 
lately endeavored to enforce on the subject of the plen¬ 
tiful supply of water, which may be obtained from the 
roofs of buildings. A large leaden cistern in the upper 
part, furnished pure water at all times, affording the 
same conveniences in every particular that are obtained 
in the city by the use of the Croton water, and which 
might be easily secured by every country resident who 
will only take the pains to avail himself of the advan¬ 
tages within his reach. 
Letters on British Agriculture—I. 
London, August 18, 1853. 
L. Tucker, Esq. — I have no doubt you are thinking 
me dilatory, and I fear you are blaming me for not 
having yet written the first word, in fulfilment of a pro¬ 
mise made three months ago, to give you, from time 
to time, some account of my observations on the agri¬ 
culture of Great Britain. My only apology, and I 
will give it without evasion, arises from the following 
considerations: 
English agriculture is a very different thing from 
American. To raise produce under skies that are al¬ 
ways weeping, in an atmosphere seldom hot and never 
very cold, where plants grow slowly, but have nearly 
the whole year to grow in, is one thing; and to raise 
it where Sol and Boreas divide the year equally, one 
compelling plants to grow fast, and the other killing 
them quickly, if not out of his way, is quite another 
thing. Almost as different are the processes of growing 
and fattening animals in the damp climate of these 
islands, and the dry and clear, but changeful climate 
of the United States. 
Of all this I was measurably aware before, but did 
not realize the extent of the difference. I found, on 
coming here, that.an American agriculturist, in looking 
at British agriculture, has a new subject before him. 
It seemed to me, that in such a case one must learn be¬ 
fore he teaches. So much for not having begun sooner. 
For similar reasons my progress may be as slow as 
my commencement has been tardy. If I should take 
a year to do what I proposed to accomplish in a few 
months, it would not be strange. There are many 
points about which I cannot speedily satisfy myself, and 
I am quite sure you would not wish me to speak till 
satisfied of the truth and importance of what I am 
to say. 
Our English brethren are undoubtedly before us in 
agriculture. They are managing their resources bet¬ 
ter than we are ours. To me, as a citizen of a country 
just beginning its existence, it is. no mortification to ac¬ 
knowledge this. If we are pot up to them twenty-five 
years hence, then will be the time to be ashamed. 
They are not only in advance of us now, but they are 
“ going ahead.'’ This term, I believe, originated with 
Americans ; but in its application it does not belong to 
them exclusively. Our friendly rivals are “ going 
ahead.” We shall not catch them napping. If we 
would not be ashamed of being behind by-and-bye, 
when we ought to be abreast, we have not only to come 
up where the English farmer now is, but we must be¬ 
come as scientific, as skilful, as wise as he will be a 
quarter of a century hence. Free trade has done won¬ 
ders for English farmers. It has led them to say —“ If 
six bushels now bring us no more than five did before, 
then we must grow six bushels as cheaply as we then 
did five, and we shall be as well off as before.” That 
was the problem. They have already worked it out, 
and in working it out they have gained an impetus, 
which is carrying them over the line, and is making 
them better off than before. Driven from their depen¬ 
dence on high prices, they now depend on abundant and 
cheap production. 
Since “ free trade” in food is the order of the times, 
American farmers should aim at the same result; but, 
for reasons already alluded to, the result cannot in all 
cases be reached by the same means. The trade of an 
American farmer is about as different from that of an 
English farmer, as the trade of a blacksmith is from 
that of a carpenter. The carpenter might do well to 
imitate the blacksmith, in his habits of early rising, 
industry and perseverance ; but if he should put his 
board into the fire and blow it, before bringing into 
shape, the result would not be good. Or, if the 
blacksmith should undertake to straighten his piece of 
steel with a jointer, it would not work well. And yet 
these imitations would not be more absurd, nor lead to 
much worse results, than a thousand imitations which 
might be made by American farmers, of what would 
be good usage in Great Britain. 
Much harm has been done in our country, by imi¬ 
tating English practices, without duly considering the 
differences in soil, climate, and the true value of pro¬ 
duce; and I now see clearly, what I did not before 
comprehend, that scientific men, those who are truly 
scientific, have, in some cases at least, misled practical 
farmers, in consequence of having received their in¬ 
structions in foreign countries, and from books written 
in foreign countries. Foreign books on the applications 
of science to' agriculture, may have been useful on the 
