April, 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
150 
Morris Sleight, of Dupage county, Ill., says—“ We 
went into a piece of Black Sea wheat, a part of which 
was nearly flat on the ground, and lying in all directions; 
I had no idea it could he cut by any machine, hut to my 
astonishment. Mr. Hussey’s machine cut it as free and 
easy as if it had been standing up.” 
Rev. C. D. Eltinge, of Kane county, Ill., says 
II Mr. Hussey’s machine worked in wheat very badly 
lodged, where the ground was rough, yet it cut it all 
clean.” 
When farmers have failed to cut their lodged grain 
with my reapers, it has generally been owing to a want 
of practical experience with the right kind of machines. 
I am not satisfied that the merits of my reaper should 
be judged of, and its character established by the opera¬ 
tion of any machine not built at my manufactory in Bal¬ 
timore. Many reapers are passed off for “ Hussey’s,” to 
my great damage in several parts of the country. 
One of my reaping and mowing machines, made in 
Baltimore, is now on board the St. Lawrence, on its 
way to the World’s Fair in London. Obed Hussey. 
Baltimore. Feb. 14, 1851. 
Not Giving Credit. 
Eds. Cultivator —In your February number, you 
charge us with publishing a series of articles under the 
head of “ Village Lectures,” “ as original,” in the 
American Agriculturist, which “ first appeared in the 
English Agricultural Gazette.” 
If you will please to turn to page 840 of our Novem¬ 
ber number, for 1850, where we commenced the publi¬ 
cation of these “ Lectures,” you will find the following 
prefatory remarks: 
“We insert from the London Agricultural Gazette, 
the following and succeeding ” [this last word was not 
originally italicised] “ Lectures on Scientific and Practi¬ 
cal Agriculture, which from the simplicity of the lan¬ 
guage in which they are expressed, and their general 
utility to the farmer, we trust will be acceptable to a 
large portion of our readers.” 
If the above does not give ample credit,—and that of 
a highly flattering kind—to the source from which we 
took these lectures, then we do not know what credit 
is. But you will doubtless add, that this is not enough, 
and that credit should should be attached to each suc¬ 
ceeding number copied. In this we entirely agree; but 
as we do not read the proofs of such things, we did not 
observe this omission till the January number of our 
paper was published. We then directed credit to be 
given to the Agricultural Gazette, in all subsequent 
numbers, at the bottom of the article; and the reason 
it was not done in our February number was, that the 
person who superintends the matter of the Agricultur¬ 
ist, was taken ill, and It was then left to a third party 
who was ignorant of our directions. No one can be 
more scrupulous in giving credit than we are; and al¬ 
though our own publication has been general plunder 
for the agricultural press of the country for the past 
nine years, and the above English or London Agricul¬ 
tural Gazette—in whose favor you here volunteered 
championship—has occasionally been one of the number • 
still we do not believe any periodical in the United 
States, is less open to a charge of not giving credit than 
ours; and whenever this has been omitted, it was with¬ 
out the knowledge, and totally contrary to the wishes 
of the editors. 
Yet the Cultivator itself is not guiltless of the charge 
it prefers against us. If you will turn to volume 5th, 
page 171, you will find a continuation of the article on 
the “ Manufacture of Cheese,” by Mr. Alonzo L. Fish, 
which is taken from the N. Y. State Ag. Soc. Transac¬ 
tions, and appears there in the Cultivator as original, 
and without the slightest intimation whatever of its being 
copied from another work.* We could specify several 
other articles published in the Cultivator, from time to 
time as original, which were copied from other sources, 
but we do not think this worth while, as we have no 
doubt it was inadvertently done, and at the time escaped 
the attention of the editors; who we are happy to say, 
are more exact in giving credit for articles which they 
republish from other sources, than any other conductors 
of the press with which we are acquainted • and we will 
moreover add, that the Cultivator, like the Agricul¬ 
turist, is general plunder throughout the Union, to the 
great disgrace of the conductors of agricultural and other 
periodicals and papers, who habitually pilfer as unscru¬ 
pulously as if the property were all their own. Editors 
of the American Agriculturist. New York , 
Feb. 6, 1851. 
“Wool and Gum.’ 
Eds. Cultivator — I noticed in the January number 
of your journal, an article under this head from a cor¬ 
respondent, suggested by your notice of sheep in Addi¬ 
son county, Vt. 
In the breeding of sheep, I believe it is most advisa¬ 
ble to pursue a medium course, in relation to the oily 
matter so natural to the wool of Merino sheep. I con¬ 
sider an excess or deficiency of this material, equally 
objectionable. There can much be said in favor of sheep 
that produce fleeces well supplied with oil of the right 
sort; but there seems to be no definite term to express 
the different kinds of oil, yolk or gum. I should choose- 
sheep whose fleeces abound in what I should term trans¬ 
parent oil within the fleece, and flowing to the end of the 
staple, and there forming what might be called yolk, or 
gum, which by combining with dust, gives the surface 
of the wool a dark look. There can be no doubt that 
such oil and yolk, preserves the fleece from “ dead ends,” 
and the deleterious effects of stormy weather—that it 
greatly facilitates the growth of the wool, and much in¬ 
creases its strength, softness, and elasticity. And I be¬ 
lieve there can be no doubt that manufacturers would 
prefer a fleece well supplied with the oil and yolk which 
I have described, after it was thoroughly washed, to a 
* On turning to the article here referred to, we find it prefaced as 
follows: “ (Mr. Fish's Essay, concluded from page 154).” On turn¬ 
ing to the first part of the article, we find it introduced by the follow¬ 
ing words. “ At the January meeting of the New-York State Agri¬ 
cultural, Society 1848, Mr. Alonzo L, Fish, of Litchfield, Herki¬ 
mer county, received a premium of fifty dollars for an account of ex¬ 
periments made by him in the manufacture and management of 
cheese. Mr. F.’s valuable essay (as it may be called) is embodied 
in the elaborate report of the committee appointed by the society to 
examine the claims of competitors under this head, and will be found 
in the volume of Transactions for 1847, when published. We think 
the following extracts from Mr. Fish’s remarks will be read with 
advantage,” Ac. Eds, Cult, 
