The maximum produce was 20 hectolitres per hec- 
tare. 
The minimum produce was 4°62 hectolitres per 
hectare. 
The above, reduced into English weights and 
measures, glves— 
The mean produce 13 1-5 bushels per acre. 
The maximum 22 bushels per acre. 
The minimum 5 1-10 bushels per acre. 
He states the produce in Germany to be 40, 
hectolitres per hectare, which is 44 bushels 
per acre; and probably refers (though not so 
stated by him) to the maximum produce. Some 
portion, or even a considerable one of the com- 
parative smallness of the actual produce, it is 
true, must be ascribed, not to a destruction of 
seeds, but to such thick sowing as crowds the 
plants, prevents the growth of tiller-stems, and 
half strangles the process of fructification ; but 
_ this cause is very far from being general, and can 
never exist, except in an exceedingly small de- 
gree, in any of the farms or districts in which a 
normal quantity of seed for producing a full crop 
has been ascertained by experiment, and estab- 
lished by long practice. The actual destruction 
or non-germination of an enormous proportion of 
the seeds, is clearly a fact of general prevalence, 
and strongly challenges the most interesting in- 
vestigation. 
One portion of the loss of sown corn-seeds is 
easily traceable to birds; and whatever amount 
of this is occasioned by the overharrowing of light 
soils, might be prevented. Another portion of 
the loss is traceable to the bursting and rotting 
effect of too much moisture; and whatever 
amount of this is occasioned by the stagnation 
of rain-water in furrows and hollows, ought to 
be ascribed to bad tillage or insufficient drainage. 
A third portion of the loss is traceable to the 
trampling of the horses, pressing the seeds be- 
yond the action of the air, or making holes over 
them for stagnant water; but this, in the pre- 
sent state of husbandry, cannot be avoided. A 
fourth portion of the loss is traceable to the ex- 
clusion of air by adhesive clays, or undue exposure 
to frost or heat by sandy soils; and this, as well 
as the greater evil of comparative infertility, 
might be cured by a little georgical improvement. 
A fifth portion of the loss is very probably caused 
by the depredations of the numerous insects 
which inhabit the soil; yet, as the seed is not 
eaten by them, but damaged or destroyed in con- 
sequence of their peculiar habits of existence, 
this source of loss is a proper subject of investi- 
gation for entomologists. A sixth portion of the 
loss is, in some instances, very probably caused 
by noxious metallic salts existing in combination 
with the soil; and this evil, as well as other evils 
of greater magnitude, forms a decided reason for 
a careful, chemical analysis of soils. A seventh 
portion of loss is possibly, though not certainly, 
traceable to high electric influence ; and this 
consideration, in spite of being merely theoretic, 
AGRICULTURAL SEEDS. 
87 
is strong enough to concur with reasons of greater 
weight for urging upon scientific agriculturists 
the study of electricity and of electric agency 
on soils and vegetation: An eighth portion of 
the loss is, in many instances, manifestly occa- 
sioned by the over-ripeness, the bad preservation, 
or the otherwise damaged vitality of the seeds ; 
and this—often a very abundant portion of loss 
—may easily be prevented by using only seed- 
corn, all the grains of which, when tested in the 
sample of one or two handfuls, will sink readily 
in water. A ninth portion of the loss—and this 
both a general and a large portion—is caused by 
damage to the seed, or absolute destruction to 
its vitality, from the blows of the scutchers or | 
the flail in thrashing ; and this ought to be pre- 
vented by a slow, cautious, and quite partial 
thrashing of the selected sheaves for seed-corn, 
leaving the remainder of them to be afterwards 
thrashed in the usual manner for edible grain. 
A tenth portion of the loss, and the last we 
shall mention, is indiscriminate sowing, or the 
want of adaptation in the quantity of the seed 
to the powers of the soil. To give the same 
quantity or even variety of seed to all sorts of | 
land, good, bad, and indifferent, is an error as 
discreditable as it is common. “ Experiments 
instituted and conducted with care for a series 
of years, on the quantity of corn which is required 
to sow various kinds of land in different situa- 
tions, would doubtless present most important 
results. But to render these experiments as 
conclusive as they should be, the land ought pre- 
viously to be thoroughly drained, in good heart, 
and under judicious treatment. With these 
means and appliances to the land, and a few 
authenticated experiments of the quantity of 
seed requisite for sowing the various qualities of 
land, we have no doubt it would be proved that 
much less seed would be sufficient to produce 
even better crops than we reap; and though na- 
tural causes will always exist to check our hopes 
of enjoying a prolific crop every year, a consider- 
able saving would annually accrue in seed-corn.” 
Were due care used to avoid all the occasions 
which we have pointed of damaging or destroy- 
ing seed-corn both before and after sowing, or 
rather were care used to avoid such of them as 
are perfectly under our control, probably about 
one-half of the quantities of seed-corn at present 
sown would be found quite sufficient, and the 
crops from them would be very observably im- 
proved. 
Adaptation of the variety of seed to soil and 
climate, is not only a general preventive of partial 
loss of seed-corn, but sometimes a requisite to the 
growth, the health, or the fructification of a 
whole crop. The change of most good varieties 
from one soil to another—provided the soils are 
not widely different in character—often stimu- 
lates the seed, and prevents it from degenerating ; 
but any change from one set of influences to an- 
other set of considerably different power—espe- 
