150 
THE CULTIVATOR 
Dr. Martin's “iSelmonV* a Woburn Pig, 9 months old.—[Fig- 74.] 
Messrs. Gaylord & Tucker —Gentlemen—Accompanying this 
you have a plate of a Woburn pig, Belmont, taken at nine 
months old. This pig appeared to be perfectly round in the 
body, but measured a little more from breast to back than 
through the sides. 
They are of great length, large girth around the body, broad 
and flat on the back, legs of medium length (the hind legs fre¬ 
quently a little longest,) well tapered down to the foot—stand 
well and straight upon the legs and feet. The head is small for 
the size of the hog, with small ears, generally erect, though 
Comments on the July KTo. of the Cultivator. 
Messrs. Gaylord & Tucker —Although perfectly aware that 
you cannot find room in your paper to publish all the communi¬ 
cations which are sent to you, and that you must have much 
difficulty in making selections from such as you partially no¬ 
tice ; yet I am sure there are many of your readers who often 
regret that your extracts from those had not been more extend¬ 
ed. Mr. Colman’s Address, I think, furnishes an example ; 
for supposing your other readers have somewhat similar 
tastes with myself, I must believe that there are hundreds of 
them who would have been much gratified had you given them 
at least his argument to prove that “ Government is bound to 
protect and promote Agriculture as the surest means of pro¬ 
moting and securing the happiness of a Nation,—the great ob¬ 
ject for which all governments are instituted.” You, as well 
as all other true friends of American husbandry, know but too 
well that there are still among our law-makers, both State and 
Federal, very many hardheads most wofully deficient in all the 
various species of knowledge which every legislator should 
possess ; and Mr. Colman’s hammer, perhaps, might have beat 
into these enough at least to aid materially the long neglected 
cause of Agriculture. Forlorn as I acknowledge the hope 
would be, still the effort was worth making. 
In regard fo Mr. A. B. Allen’s trip to Europe, I readily admit 
that his objects are highly laudable; and that there are very 
few, if any of our agriculturists, better calculated to make his 
visit beneficial both to himself and his country. But it furnish¬ 
es occasion for a few remarks, which I am almost afraid to of¬ 
fer, since the act will be something like swimming against an 
almost irresistible wind and tide. Still I will hazard them. 
To import cattle and hogs at enormous prices has grown into a 
most violent passion which now pervades our whole country, 
and resembles nothing that we have ever seen before but the 
Merino-mania which grew at last to such a pitch that to get the 
lest, which should have been the first object of the purchasers, 
became secondary to that of having their name published in all 
our newspapers for having given the most for their whistles. 
Far, very far am I from wishing to discourage the importation 
of fine bred cattle, hogs, or any other improved stock. But I 
must say that there is a limit in price which seems to me to 
have been already passed, by some hundreds of dollars, that 
amount by which the purchasers can reasonably expect to make 
any profit. Although not yet the owner of either imported cat¬ 
tle or hogs, 1 have seen and known enough of both to be perfect¬ 
ly certain, that unless much more care and experience are be¬ 
stowed upon them, than upon the breeds of each which we al¬ 
ready possess, the superiority of the former, even admitting its 
existence, will not remunerate those purchasers who have giv¬ 
en such prices as have been published in our newspapers. 
On the subject of butter, I think we may venture to say that 
the best, mode of preparing and preserving it good, will never 
be ascertained and generally known until those who have large 
dairies will take the trouble to make and publish fair and full 
experiments between all the different methods which are most 
highly recommended. Let them do this, and all butter makers, 
from the greatest to the least, will soon know which process is 
best. But until then, they may go on to the end of time with¬ 
out attaining this very desirable knowledge. 
In regard to inoculation, a single remark, perhaps, may be 
useful in addition to those which you have made. It is, that 
grafting has been ascertained to be best for all fruits which 
have soft seed, such as apples, pears, &c., and inoculation best 
for those which produce hard seed, as cherries, peaches, &c., 
although either mentioned may be applied to all kinds. The 
best season for grafting is in February and March,—for inocu¬ 
lating in July and August. Cuttings for inoculating may be 
kept alive for several weeks during summer, if excluded from 
air during the day, in tin or glass vases, and spread out at night 
either in the dew, or in some wet place. 
Under the head of *• Work for the Month ,” permit me to add 
the following remarks to your own. As a general rule for the 
culture of corn it may be said, that until it begins to tassel and 
shoot, we should work the ground whenever it begins to bake, 
but never when it is wet; and that nothing will guard the plants 
against drouth so well as the free use of the single coulter in 
the early stages of their growth. 
In regard to the “ saving seed and herbs,” I beg to make the 
following inquiry, which I hope some of your correspondents 
will answer. Is there not a material difference between the 
seeds produced by the central and the lateral stems of the pars- 
nep, carrot, celery and parsley, the middle heads being always 
the largest and soonest ripe? If there is that difference, which 
I believe really exists, then none but the seed of the center 
stems should ever be gathered. 
On the subject of corn culture, I regret much to differ in some 
respects, both from yourselves and Mr. J.McMillikin, whose com¬ 
munication to the Hamilton Intelligencer you so highly com¬ 
mend. But agreeing with you as to the great importance of 
this crop, not only to the west, but to every part of our country, 
I hope you will excuse me for stating in what it is that I cannot 
agree. In the first place Mr. McMillikin has laid down his 
some have their ears to droop. The prevailing color is spotted 
with white and black; many of them brown and black. Their 
hair is long and coarse. They come early to maturity, fatten 
easily, attain a large size, are productive in pigs—-are very gen¬ 
tle and docile in disposition, not disposed to be restless or to 
get out of enclosures, i 
As soon as I can get a plate of a grown Woburn, I will for¬ 
ward it on to you. Yours, respectfully, 
SAMUEL D. MARTIN. 
Colbyville, Ky., July, 1841. 
rules as universal, whereas there are very obvious exceptions 
to two or three of them. For instance, in his second rule he 
enjoins that all land 1 ( should be -plowed six inches deep,” where¬ 
as almost every tyro in agriculture knows that the depth to 
which any land should be plowed ought to depend on the depth 
of the soil, and the nature of the sub-stratum, both of which dif¬ 
fer materially, in different parts of our country, and often on the 
same farm. His third rule tells us that “ while small, the corn 
should be harrowed, and the ground should afterwards be kept 
loose and mellow by the repeated use of the cultivator Now I 
venture to assert from at least fifty years experience, that no 
stiff soil can be kept thus 'without the use of the plow or single 
coulter'. Nay, that the finer you pulverize such soil, the soon¬ 
er it will bake hard after a rain in very hot weather. To keep 
it in a friable state, no tillage whatever should be given it when 
wet, and when given it should always be deeper than that which 
very light lands require. In Mr. McMillikin’s sixth rule he says 
that “ the fibres or small roots of corn should never be cut, tyc.” 
To this there is one small objection: it never can be executed, — 
that is, if you give any cultivation at all to corn after it comes 
up. For we all know that a large portion of the roots of this 
plant are horizontally, and so near the surface of the earth 
that no implement ever yet invented can possibly be so used 
in its culture, as to avoid cutting' many of them. Many of us 
know also that very fine crops are often made where only the 
plow and hand-hoe have been used. Two of the best corn 
growers I ever knew relied solely on those implements, and 
none of their neighbors made larger crops in pro*portion to the 
size of their farms. Their plows, too, were always of the size 
for two horses. A still more remarkable case than the two just 
mentioned, to prove that the cutting of corn-roots does not 
sensibly affect tne produce of the plant, (if indeed it be not act¬ 
ually beneficial,) is stated in the Farmer’s Register, for Octo¬ 
ber, 1840, in a letter from Mr. W. W. Stevenson, of Arkansas. 
This gentleman states, that in 1834 he planted a small lot of 
corn in a light, silicious soil, with a red clay subsoil, the hills 
4 feet apart. He cultivated solely with the single coulter, run¬ 
ning it both ways, seven or eight inches deep, the strokes 8 in¬ 
ches apart, and within 4 inches of the plants. The summer, he 
says, was very dry and warm, but his corn “ never twisted at 
any time,” although the coulter was used 4 times ! 1 In con¬ 
firmation of this statement, I will add one of my own. Several 
years ago I had a corn-field, the soil of which was dry, 
and of medium quality between light and stiff. Alongside 
was one belonging to a neighbor. Both were alike in soil, fer¬ 
tility and situation. His was well cultivated solely with the 
single plow and hand-hoe. In addition to this culture my own 
was twice coultered. We had a very severe drouth—the con¬ 
sequence of which was that his corn was nearly destroyed a 
fortnight, at least, before mine began to fire. Soon after the 
weather became seasonable, and I made a much better crop 
than he did. Furthermore, I can truly say, that in the course 
of a long life, I have seen thousands of very fine crops, in the 
culture of which no other implements were used but the plow . 
and hand-hoe. The facts which I have stated of my own know¬ 
ledge are undeniable, and could be confirmed, if necessary, by 
a host of unimpeachable witnesses; and therefore we must 
discredit the evidence of our own senses, before we can believe 
that the cutting of corn-roots will lessen the produce of the 
plants. The contrary opinion you assert to be “ directly at 
variance with every well established principle of vegetable physio¬ 
logy, and is opposed by the experience of multitudes of the most 
successful corn-growers in the country .” In support of this af¬ 
firmation you give us Liebig’s position, which you say “ no one 
can controvert”—“ That the size of a plant is proportioned to 
the surface of the organs which are destined to convey food to it: 
A plant gains a new mouth and stomach with every new fibre of 
root, and every new leaf.” In this position of Mr. Liebig’s 
I perfectly agree ; but I deny that it disproves the opinions of 
those who differ from you and Mr. McMillikin; or that their 
creed is “ directly at variance with every well established prin¬ 
ciple of vegetable physiology,” &c. In the latter clause of the 
sentence of which this is a part, I will agree with you, if you 
will substitute the word opinion, for “ experience since no 
such accurate comparative experiment has ever yet been pub¬ 
lished as alone can determine which party is right. Such an 
experiment would be the following:—Let a few trust-worthy 
farmers, in different parts of our country, take two small lots, 
as nearly alike as possible, in soil, fertility and situation. 
Plant both with corn at the same time, cultivate the one in the 
most approved way which will cut most roots ; the other in the 
most approved way that will cut the fewest; for some will in¬ 
evitably be cut by any mode of culture ever yet tried. Then, if 
either lot produces more corn than the other, it will be proof 
undeniable that the way in which that lot has been cultivated 
is best. Should this be the way in which most roots were cut, 
the effect, I think, may admit of such explanation as fully to 
accord, not only with Mr. Liebig’s position, but with “ every 
well established principle of vegetable physiology,” instead of 
being “ directly at variance with them.” It is this. I, and 
numerous others, believe (and no experiment has yet dis¬ 
proved our opinion,) that when the end of a corn-root is cut off, 
fibres enough will soon sprout out from it at least to compen¬ 
sate, if they do not more than do it, the loss of fibres caused by 
the excision. This we find to be the case above ground, with all 
trees, plants and vines whose extremities it is customary to 
cut off for the purpose of thickening their growth. Now, if the 
same law govern under ground, the fibrous roots of corn must 
be multiplied by cutting their extremities in the early stages of 
Us growth; and thus Mr. Liebig’s position be fully verified. 
. Fhe last sentence in the paragraph on which I am comment¬ 
ing, contains a misrepresentation (but I am far from thinking 
“ * Tr U ] 0ne ’) of our 0 P ini o n - You say ‘‘ corn is always bene- 
fitted by frequently stirring the ground, and as plowing does this, 
the advantages conferred has, by some strange process of ratioci¬ 
nation, been supposed to be the result of cutting the roots.” This 
would be a strange process indeed, had it ever entered into any 
of our noddles, but so far as I know, it never has. We are 
quite as strong advocates for “frequently stirring the ground” 
as you or Mr. McMillikin can possibly be. We deem it indis¬ 
pensable to the proper culture of corn as well as to that of most 
other plants. But the “stirring,” according to our notion, 
must be considerably deeper than the surface, unless where 
turf has been turned under, effectually to benefit corn; say 
from 6 to 8 or 9 inches at first, and gradually shallower until 
the last working, which should be shallowest of all, because 
the roqts have then nearly or quite attained their full growth, 
and will put out no more fibres if cut. The root-cutting we 
consider an unavoidable consequence of that depth of tillage to 
which principally we ascribe the superiority of the corn crops 
thus cultivated to those which are made by shallower culture. 
If any of us have ever spoken or written in such a way as to 
lead to the belief that we supposed the advantage conferred on 
com “ by frequently stirring the ground” was ascribable solely, 
or even chiefly to cutting the roots, I can only say, that we 
have made sad havoc of our mother tongue, and should go to 
school again; but I have not yet met with the man whose mind 
has ever been mystified and obfuscated by “so strange a pro¬ 
cess of ratiocination.” 
I have undesignedly extended my remarks on Mr. McMilli- 
km’s 6th universal rule so far, that I must be brief in what I 
have to say on his 8th and last. His words are,—“ The ground 
in the cultivation of corn should be kept as level as possible,” 
&c. This is true only of high and dry land: for every corn- 
grower knows that if your land be wet, it must be thrown up 
and cultivated in beds from 4 to 5 or 6 feet wide nay more, 
that unless this be done you can scarcely make corn at all on 
any such land. 
A few more words on your last sentence, and I have done 
with the article on the “Culture of Corn.” Thus it runs— 
“Manure highly, plow deep, make your land dry, use none but 
good seed, keep the surf ace frequently stirred, and you may safe¬ 
ly leave it without any inequalities, and permit the roots to dis¬ 
pose of themselves as they think proper.” In the first part of 
your sentence I heartily concur ; but how we can “ plow deep” 
without cutting the roots of the plants; and how those roots, 
when cut, are “to dispose of ihemselves as they think proper,” 
remains to be explained. [*] 
The wish of your correspondent who signs himself “ A Sub¬ 
scriber, Warwick county, Va.” to ascertain the best method of 
cultivating Indian Corn, is certainly a very laudable one ; but 
it can never be attained in the way he proposes. This is, for 
your subscribers in different sections of our country to comma- 
municate their different methods of culture. Now these sec¬ 
tions differ so much in climate, soil, fertility, and situation, 
that it never could be determined with any certainty, whether 
the reported superiority of any particular crop made in one sec¬ 
tion, to a similar crop or crops made in another section, was 
ascribable chiefly to either or all of the above circumstances, or 
to the mode of cultivation. The only way in which the matter 
ever can be settled, would be for a few of these subscribers in 
each section (the more remote the better,) to compare, on their 
own farms, all the most approved modes of culture. For this 
purpose let them choose a small piece of ground of uniform 
soil, fertility and situation; prepare the whole exactly in the 
same way; divide it accurately into as many equal parts as 
there are modes of culture to be compared; plant them all on 
the same day, at the same distances, with one variety of corn 
in each trial, and afterwards bestow the same care and atten¬ 
tion on each division, with as much impartiality as if they were 
trying a jury-cause between man and man, Incurably obsti¬ 
nate would then be the man who would not at once agree that 
the method of culture pursued on the division which produced 
the most corn, was certainly the best. This experiment every 
corn-grower could easily make for himself; and I cannot even 
imagine any other way by which the numerous and apparently 
endless discussions about the best modes of cultivating corn 
can eveT be concluded. 
If there are still any gainsayers [in our whole country, in re¬ 
gard to the value of the sugar-beet for feeding stock, I would 
beg them to read attentively your extracts from the communi¬ 
cation of Mr. Diehl, of New-Orford, Pa. The great import¬ 
ance of root crops is not doubted by any body whose opinion is 
worth a straw; it is, therefore, a matter of deep interest to all 
farmers to ascertain which are the most valuable of all the 
varieties of roots that are now cultivated. 
Your correspondent L. R. Jr., of Knox eo., Illinois, seems to 
require no information in regard to that highly valuable timber 
—the yellow locust. But some others, perhaps, may not be 
aware of one important fact in relation to the seed, which he 
has omitted. If they be soaked in warm water, before planting, 
until they swell, they will come up as readily as peas or beans, 
whereas they will not vegetate for many months if planted 
without soaking. I may add that this process accelerates the 
coming up of all seed of similar hardness. 
Mr. John Johnson, of Ontario co., N. Y., calls all “ simple¬ 
tons” who believe in the convertibility of wheat into cheat. In 
this he is somewhat unjust, for many of them are really men of 
good sense; but they are like the two knights, who, as the 
story goes, once fought a desperate battle about the color of a 
suspended shield before they had examined both sides of it^ 
And they will continue to fight until the end of time, unless, in¬ 
stead of battling with mere assertions, they will condescend to 
take the trouble of making such accurate experiments as can 
alone settle the controversy. I say this for others, not for my¬ 
self, since, although once sceptical on the subject, I have long 
believed that it would be quite as easy for pumpkin seed to 
produce live oaks, as for wheat to produce cheat. Still I admit 
that there is nothing impossible but for a man to bite his own 
nose off, and therefore pledge myself to give up my opinion the 
moment those who differ from me can prove that they are right 
by such an experiment or experiments as all will agree have 
been perfectly accurate. 
If Mr. David Tomlinson be right in requiring that every thing 
new, or rather what may be so called, should be published in 
your paper, then you should certainly change the title, and call 
it an Encyclopedia. For so many new things are constantly 
being discovered in all the arts and sciences, that an agricul¬ 
tural paper such as you designed yours to be, and such, I be¬ 
lieve, as a vast majority of your subscribers wish it to continue, 
could no more contain all these novelties than Noah’s Ark could 
have contained every living thing that was in the world at the 
time of the universal deluge. Commentator. 
[*The “deep plowing,” as well as the manuring and drain¬ 
ing, is to be done before the planting, and consequently before 
the “ roots” are formed.—E ds.] 
