THE CULTIVATOR. 
61 
©riginal Papers front Contributors. 
AGRICULTURE OF VIRGINIA. 
Messrs. Gaylord & Tucker —Inclosed you will re¬ 
ceive a five dollar Virginia bill, for which you will 
please send me six volumes of the Cultivator for the pre¬ 
sent year. Four of these I in end distributing among 
my neighbors gratis, provided they will not pay me for 
them, as I think it will improve the agriculture of the 
neighborhood. It is useless for me to say that you are 
ahead of us in improvement. We cultivate too much 
land, and improve too little. Tobacco is the principal 
staple of Eastern Virginia; consequently, all of our best 
lands are cultivated in that plant. If we were to raise 
less tobacco throughout the United States, we could get 
as much for the quantity raised, and have more time for 
improvement, as a large portion of our labor is devoted 
to that crop from the time of seeding until it is ready for 
market, which is from 14 to 16 months. 
I am of a different opinion to some of your correspond¬ 
ents in regard to the size of farms. I think, where the 
force is sufficient to keep the fencing in repair, that a 
large farm may be improved cheaper than a small one, 
taking size into consideration. Land that has any soil will 
produce clover or grass. Every farm should be divided 
into 4 or 5 shifts (as we Virginians call it.) No. 1 cul¬ 
tivated first year in corn, roots, or tobacco, as the case 
rnay be, and sowed in small grain, clover or grass, the 
ensuing fall and spring. No. 2, second year cultivated 
as number one, and so on, until all have been cultivated. 
If the fields have more land than can be tilled well, the 
balance should remain in clover or grass, and occasion¬ 
ally sowed in wheat, oats or rye. All briars, bushes, 
&c., should be kept under and grazed but little. A 
farm managed in this way will improve yearly; as each 
shift will have a rest of 2 or 3 years, which is equal to 
a light dressing of manure, besides the labor of hauling, 
scattering, &e. Experience teaches me that it is best to 
scatter manure broad-cast, as all the land will receive 
nearly an equal portion; whereas, if it is put in the drill, 
the crop wrll nearly exhaust it; and the crop of small 
grain will be more uneven. If land is once made rich, 
and managed in the 4 or 5 shift system, it will improve 
yearly, provided it is not grazed too close, nor suffered 
to wash away. 
There is one subject which I have never seen men¬ 
tioned in the Cultivator; that is, cutting hill side ditches. 
They not only keep the land from washing away, but 
preserve the fiat land from being too wet, without it is 
a very wet season, if the water is carried off in the 
right place. Every farmer who has broken land should 
have a level, (fig. 33) and trench his hill sides. The 
construction is very simple; it is nearly in the shape of 
a rafter. . Take two pieces of plank about 10 feet long, 3 
inches wide, half an inch thick, and square the ends you 
design for the top, nail them together; also nail a piece 
across 3 or 4 feet below—equal distances from each end 
—fasten a plumb to the centre of the top, place your 
level on a level floor, change it until you get the plunb 
to hit in the center, and you have a level. 
Half an inch fall should be allowed 
for every 10 feet. The cheapest way 
to cut a ditch of this sort, is for one 
hand to take the level and one a hoe; 
lay off the place where you want the 
ditch made, make chops at every 
place where the level stands until 
you get through them with a Dag- 
4 gon plow, following the chops; 
throw the dirt down hill for several 
haus*- 
THE LIVINGSTON COUNTY PLOW—(Fig. 34.) 
To which was awarded the First Premium of the New-York State Agricultural Society in 1841. 
Messrs. Gaylord & Tucker —I find that the plow is 
beginning to claim that attention with the practical farm¬ 
er that its importance demands. In the first place, un¬ 
less the soil is well plowed, no man can expect to raise 
a good crop. Again—plows should be so constructed as 
to do the work well, with the least possible labor to the 
team and holder. Also, the cheapness and durability of 
the article is to be taken into account with the farmer. 
During thirty years’ experience in farming, with all the 
great varieties of plows in our country, I have never 
found one that combined the above qualities so fully as 
the Livingston County plow, (fig. 34) invented by T. 
Wiard. This opinion appeared amply sustained from 
the fact, that at the trial of plows at the agricultural fairs 
in the counties of Ontario and Onondaga, and several 
other places, it received the first premiums in 1840. 
Again, I find that it won the first premiums last fall at 
the same place—also in Tompkins county; and at the 
late state fair held at Syracuse, the first premium of $30 
was awarded to H. Delano for the same plow. Our soil 
in this county is uniformly heavy and hard, requiring a 
good plow and strong team to do the work well. And 
1 find that I can do as much work with the Livingston 
County plow with a third less team than any other plow 
I have ever had on my farm, and with much less labor 
to the holder. I believe the plow can be manufactured 
and afforded to the farmer in any part of the country 
from $6 to $10. The difference of price will be in the 
cost of the material, The whole weight of the plow- 
does not exceed 100 pounds. 
The above are some of my reasons for recommending 
said plow to my agricultural brethren throughout the 
country, believing it to be as near perfect as an article 
of the kind can well be made. Hollis Kkcwlton. 
CHEMICAL MANURES. 
(Fig. 33.) ....-..... 
furrows, then with the hoe scrape out the loose dirt, and 
you have a hill side ditch. If the land is much broken, 
several ditches are required. Pyrant Easley. 
Pittsylvania Court House, Va., Feb. 5, 1842. 
CORRECTION—MANURES. 
Messrs. Gaylord & Tucker —There is an error, ei¬ 
ther of mine or thine, which I deem necessary to be 
corrected. In the rotation crops of my farm, as given in 
your February number. Field No. 3 stands there repre¬ 
sented as rye, when it ought to be oats. This is some¬ 
what material in my opinion, as the principle of two 
crops of one description immediately succeeding one 
another in the same field, I have always considered bad. 
I therefore trouble you with this communication, and 
beg to add my experience of preserving manure through 
last summer; kept inside of barn (a frame barn very 
open,) under a temporary shed, and in the open air. 
Having only had sufficient time to get out about one-half 
of the winter manure of 1840-41, in the spring, contrary 
to my wish, in consequence of continued unfavorable 
weather during the early part of last season, I took the 
part from the south end, or the most exposed, and cover¬ 
ed the remainder in yard and shed with a thick coat of 
straw left after the winter was over; having during the 
winter kept sufficient straw in yard, &c. to absorb urine. 
In the fall, when removing same to field for wheat, I 
was most agreeably disappointed in finding the exposed 
manure with its coating of straw in perfectly good or¬ 
der, having not undergone the least appearance of fer¬ 
mentation; that in the shed, partially so; and that in the 
barn, altogether deprived of its best properties, although 
there was no floor of plank, but lay on ground; and that 
in the north end of barn which had no underpinning. 
P. Falconer. 
Co-neivango, Warren Co., Pa., Feb. 1842. 
Messrs. Editors —If it would not savor too much of 
presumption in one who, but a few weeks ago, was anx¬ 
iously seeking direction from you and others, as to the 
best method of making chemical manures, I would un¬ 
dertake to correct some of your statements to “ Farmer 
Hodge” upon the manufacture of urate; and as I deem 
correct information upon this subject of immense impor¬ 
tance to agriculture, with your permission, I will make 
the effort. You remark in answer to some inquiries 
Dorn “Farmer Hodge”—“when ammonia comes in 
contact with plaster it is absorbed by the plaster, and 
the plaster rendered more fertilizing than before.” * 
This is a mistake. Hear what Prof. Liebig says, 
“carbonate of ammonia, and sulphate of lime, (gypsum) 
cannot be brought together at common temperatures with¬ 
out mutual decomposition. The ammonia enters into 
combmation with the sulphuric acid, and the carbonic 
acid with, the lime, forming compounds which are not 
volatile, and consequently destitute of all smell.” 
From this extract you will readily detect your error. 
As far as decomposition takes place, there is only a 
change of acids; but if the urine is evaporated upon the 
plaster, and the mass pulverized, it will be rendered a 
powerful fertilizer, because the sulphate of ammonia and 
other valuable salts would be mixed with the plaster, but 
not “absorbed by it.” This is a very important distinc¬ 
tion to make. If the plaster “ absorbed the ammonia 
and combined the other salts of the urine,” the manufac¬ 
turer would be ready to throw off the liquid excrements 
as worthless, and dry the plaster for sowing. After the 
chemical action takes place, nearly all, if not all, the va¬ 
luable salts are still held in solution with the urine, and 
must be evaporated upon the plaster, or distributed to 
the soil in the liquid state. I had well nigh sustained 
considerable loss from falling into this error myself, and 
was saved from it only by consulting a practical chemist. 
The well intended effort of your correspondent “Wm. 
Partridge,” in the November number of the Cultivator; 
upon a more careful examination, I am sure he will cor¬ 
rect some errors into which he has fallen, especially 
where he recommends the use of caustic lime in the ma¬ 
nufacture of sulphate of ammonia. * Lime has no affinity 
for ammonia; and when the sulphate of ammonia has 
been actually formed, the moment it is brought into 
contact with lime, will be liberated and driven off. 
Any one feeling an interest in this subject may make 
the following chemical experiment, and they will be 
convinced. Take a small quantity of carbonate of am¬ 
monia, procured from the shops, dissolve it in a glass of 
water, add sulphuric acid slowly, until effervescence 
ceases. By this process all the carbonate of ammonia 
will be converted into the sulphate of ammonia, which 
has no volatility, and is completely deprived of smell. 
* Note by Editors — The remark, here alluded to by our re¬ 
spectable correspondent, was made on the authority of the fol¬ 
lowing extracts from Liebig: 
“If a field be strewed with gypsum, and then with putrified 
urine or the drainings of dunghills, all the carbonate ot ammo¬ 
nia will be converted into the sulphate, which will remain in 
the soil. “ If we strew the floors of our stables from time to 
time with common gypsum, they will lose all their offensive 
smell, and none of the ammonia which forms can be lost, but 
will be retained in a condition serviceable as manure ” 
We should have said “combined," instead of “absorbed:” 
as the former expresses the operation that takes place, con¬ 
verting the carbonate into a sulphate, which mere absorption 
would not do. 
The subject of the chemical preparation of manures is one 
ot such vast importance to the country, and there is so little 
practical knowledge of the matter a’ road, that we are pleased 
to have an error, whether committed by ourselves or others, 
promptly corrected. _ We are glad to learn that our correspond¬ 
ent has succeeded in his experiments in preparing chemical 
manures, and we hope he will not forget to give the promised 
account of what he is doing. 
Add to this a small lump of unslacked lime, and when it 
slacks, ammonia will be given off, which will be readily 
detected by its pungent smell. The whole of his two 
last paragraphs are both inexplicable and erroneous. I 
will close this number by giving the following quota¬ 
tion from Pro. Liebig. [The extract, want of room 
compels us to omit_ Editors.] 
I have been engaged for about six months in the ma¬ 
nufacture of manure from human excrements; and as I 
believe I am now making them in the most approved 
manner, I propose in another number (if it should be 
deemed of sufficient importance,) to give you a short 
account of what I am doing. 
Richmond, Va., Jan. 21, 1842. Geo. Woodfin. 
PLAN OF A CHEAP HOtTSE— (Fig. 35.) 
House, 23 by 30 feet—A, parlor, 15 by 15—B, kitch¬ 
en, 15 by 16—C, pantry, 6 by 7—D, sink-room, 6 by 7 
—E, bed-room, 8 by 9—F, closet, 2 by 8—G, entry, 4 
by 8—H. stairway—S, stoves. 
Messrs. Gaylord & Tucker—As plans oflow priced 
houses have not been very numerous in the Cultivator I 
mclose one, which you may make use of if you should 
think it worthy of a place in its columns. 
It will be perceived there are two chamber doors- 
one opening out of the parlor, the other out of the sink- 
room ; they are to swing, especially the one in the par¬ 
lor, down to the floor, and not in the usual awkward 
way, on the first step of the stairs. The back kitchen 
door is calculated to open into the wood-house, where 
there might be a summer kitchen if circumstances 
should permit. The other outside door should be pro¬ 
tected by a small portico outside; or it may be omitted 
and a window placed in its room if desirable. 
This is calculated for a story and a half house- but as 
I know of no particular use in giving side views and end 
views, I have omitted them altogether. In making (he 
drawing, I have supposed the location to front the south. 
If it should front the east or north, I would reverse the 
order of the house; that is, place the rooms on the op¬ 
posite sides. Cyrus Ingalls. 
New-Hartford, Jan., 1842. 
