Part 17

Massachusetts, a few years ago, was not a wheat-growing State. Cautious farmers had given up the crop, because neither soil nor climate was supposed to favor it. How then have both soil and climate been persuaded to relent, and permit from twenty to forty bushels to grow to the acre? It was no accident, and no series of blind but lucky blunders, that effected the change. It was _thinking_ that did it. _It was a change wrought by science._ Elliot (in Connecticut), Deane (both clergymen), Dexter, Lowell, Fessenden, and many others, all men of science, were pioneers. Agricultural surveys, geological surveys, and skillful chemical analyses of the soil and its products have been made for, now, a series of years. A Hitchcock, a Dana, a Jackson have applied science to agriculture. Pamphlets, books, and widely circulated newspapers have diffused this knowledge. Agricultural societies, state and county; farmers’ meetings for discussion, such as are held every winter in Boston, have awakened the _mind_ of farmers, and by learning to treat their soils skillfully, good wheat is raised in large quantities on soils naturally very averse to wheat.

The average crop of wheat in great Britain is _twenty-six_ bushels to the acre, but forty and fifty are common to good farmers; sixty, seventy, and even eighty have been raised by great care.

In the whole United States it will not average much more than fifteen. A comparison of the two countries will show a corresponding inferiority on our part in the application of _science_ to agriculture. Scotland, formerly, hardly raised wheat. Since the formation of the Highland Agricultural Society in Scotland, wheat has _averaged_ fifty-one bushels to the acre!—_Ellsworth’s Report for 1844_, p. 16.

Lord Hardwicke stated, in a speech before the Royal Agricultural Society of England, that fine Suffolk wheat had produced _seventy-six_ bushels per acre; and another and improved variety had yielded _eighty-two_ bushels per acre! This was the result of “book farming” in a country where anti-book farmers raise _twenty-six_ bushels to the acre.

Those very operations which farmers call _practical_, and upon which they rely in decrying “book farming” were first made known by science, and through the writings of scientific men.

These views have an immediate and practical bearing on the cultivation of wheat in the Western States.

Hitherto the want of enough cleared land has led farmers to put in wheat among the corn, and _half_ put it in at that. Others have plowed their fallows, or their grass lands, so early in the season, that rains and settling have made it hard again by seed-time. Then, without stirring it, the grain has been thrown (away) upon it, and half harrowed in and left to its fate. Equally bad has been the system of late single plowing. Others have given their grain no soil to bed their roots in; a scratched surface receives the grain; its roots, like the steward, cannot dig, and so get no hold; and are either winter killed, or subsist upon the scanty food of the three or four inches of top soil. With some single exceptions, wheat cannot be said to have been _cultivated_ yet. The two great operations in rendering soil productive of wheat, are either the _development of the materials already in the soil; or, the addition to the soil of properties which are wanting_.

Much land yielding only twelve or fifteen bushels, by a better preparation would, just as easily, yield thirty. Let us suppose that a common plowing of four or five inches, precedes sowing. Out of this superficial soil the wheat is to draw its food. Constant cropping has, perhaps, already diminished its abundance. Then wheat is rank in stem, short in the head, and light in the kernel. But below there is a bed of materials untouched. The subsoil, if brought up, exposed to the ameliorating influence of the elements, will furnish in great abundance the elements required. The simple operation of deep and thorough plowing will, often, be enough to increase the crop one-half. Deep plowing gives a place for the roots, which will not be apt to heave out in winter; it saves the wheat from drought, it gives the nourishment of twice the quantity of soil to the crop.

Five acres may become ten by enlarging the soil _downward_. These remarks are desultory; and, while we intend to continue writing on the subject, we say to such as may be getting ready for the wheat-sowing, _plow deeply and thoroughly_; unlike corn, wheat can only be plowed once, and that at the beginning. It should be thoroughly done, then, once for all.

WHEAT LANDS ought to be so farmed as to grow better from year to year; certainly, they ought to hold their own. Lands may be kept in heart by the adoption of a rotation suited to each particular soil; or, if frequent wheat crops are raised, by fallows or manuring. It is a fact that in this neighborhood farms in the hands of careful men are yielding better crops of wheat every year; while multitudes of farmers think themselves fortunate in twelve or fifteen bushels to the acre, there is another class who expect twenty-five or thirty bushels, and in good seasons get it. This is encouraging. As our lands get older we may look for yet better things. Some farmers put in from 100 to 800, and even 1,000 acres of wheat. The native qualities of the soil are relied upon for the crop. To manure or clover such a body of land is impossible with any capital at the command of its owners. But with us, each owner of a quarter section puts in from ten to twenty acres, and it lies within his means to dress this quantity of land to a high degree.

SOILS FIT FOR WHEAT.—A vegetable mold cannot yield wheat, because it does not contain, and therefore cannot afford to the crop, silicate of potash, or phosphate of magnesia; the first of which gives strength to the stem, and the second of which is necessary to the grain. On such soil wheat may grow as a grass, but not as a grain.

A mere sand will not yield wheat; because wheat requires, and such soils do not contain, soda, magnesia, and especially silicate of potash.

All clays contain potash, which is indispensable to wheat, but they may be deficient in soda, in magnesia, and in other alkalies.

A calcareous clay-loam may be regarded as the best soil for wheat. And when it does not exist in a natural state, all the additions in the form of manure should be with reference to the formation of such a soil. If the land be light and sandy, clay, and marl, and wood ashes should be added, together with barnyard manure; if the soil is a tenacious clay, it should be warmed and mellowed by sand and manure; if it is deficient in lime, lime in substance, or in marl must be given; vegetable molds, if heavily dressed with wood-ashes and lime, may be brought to produce wheat.

TO PREPARE THE GROUND.—This operation depends upon the condition of the soil. But, in all cases, the deepest plowing is the best. The roots of wheat, if unchecked, will extend more than _five feet_. Stiff, tough, soils, unbroken for years, and especially if much trampled by cattle, will require strong teams. Oxen are better than horses to break up with. It has been said, that a yoke of cattle draw a plow deeper, naturally, than a span of horses. They are certainly better fitted for dull, dead, heavy pulling. And if oxen have been well trained they will do as much plowing in a season as horses, and come out of the work in better condition.

Fallow lands should be broken up early in summer, as soon as corn planting is over; about midsummer plow again; and the last time early in September to prepare for seed.

A grass or clover lay[4] may be plowed under deeply at midsummer, and not disturbed till sowing-time; and the fall plowing should not disturb the inverted sod.

When wheat is to be sown on wheat again, as large a part of the straw should be left in the harvest-field as possible. This is to be plowed under; but, if it can be done without endangering the fences, it would be better to _burn it over_; the ashes will contain all the valuable salts. On this point we extract the following note appended by the editor of _Liebig’s Agricultural Chemistry_.

“In some parts of the grand-duchy of Hesse, where wood is scarce and dear, it is customary for the common people to club together and build baking-ovens, which are heated with straw instead of wood. The ashes of this straw are carefully collected and sold every year at very high prices. The farmers there have found by experience that the ashes of straw form the very best manure for wheat; although it exerts no influence on the growth of fallow-crops (potatoes or the leguminosæ, for example). The stem of wheat grown in this way possesses an uncommon strength. The cause of the favorable action of these ashes will be apparent, when it is considered that all corn-plants require silicate of potash; and that the ashes of straw consist almost entirely of this compound.”

But this procedure does not depend upon theoretical reasonings; it has been abundantly substantiated by the practice of English cultivators. We find on page 333 of the “British Husbandry,” an admirable work published under the superintendence of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, the following statement:

“The _ashes of burnt straw_ have also been found beneficial by many intelligent practical farmers, from some of whose experiments we select the following instances. Advantage was taken of a fine day to fire the stubble of an oat-field soon after harvest, the precaution having been previously taken of sweeping round the boundary to prevent injury to the hedges. The operation was easily performed, by simply applying a light to windward, and it completely destroyed every weed that grew, leaving the surface completely covered with ashes; and the following crop, which was wheat, produced full five quarters per acre. This excited further experiment, the result of which was, that in the following season, the stubble having been partly plowed in according to the common practice, and partly burned, and the land sown with wheat, the crop produced eight bushels per acre more on that portion which had been burned, than on that which had been plowed in. The same experiment was repeated, on different occasions, with similar results; and a following crop of oats having been laid down with seeds, the clover was found perfectly healthy, while that portion on which the burning of the stubble had been omitted, was choked with weeds. It must, however, be recollected, that if intended to have a decided effect, the stubble must be left of a considerable length, which will occasion a material deficiency of farmyard manure; though the advantages will be gained of saving the cost of moving the stubs, the seeds of weeds and insects will be considerably destroyed, and the land will be left unimpeded for the operation of the plow.

“On the wolds of Lincolnshire, the practice of not only burning the stubble, but even the straw of threshed grain, has been carried, in many cases, to the extent of four to six loads per acre; and, as it is described in the report of the county, has been attended, in all those instances, with very decidedly good effect. It is even said to have been found superior, in some comparative trials, to yard-dung, in the respective rate of five tons of straw to ten of manure!”

We frequently ride past immense piles of wheat straw, encumbering the yard or field where it was threshed; and never without thinking upon the unthriftiness of a farmer who ignorantly takes everything off his wheat land, returns nothing to it, and is content with annually diminishing crops.

SELECTION OF SEEDS.—The varieties of wheat, already very numerous, are constantly increasing. No farmer should be satisfied with anything short of the _best_ kind of wheat. Suppose an expense of many dollars to have been incurred in procuring a new kind, if it yield only two bushels more to the acre than an old sort, it will more than pay for itself in the first harvest field. It should be observed that different soils require different varieties; and every farmer should select, after trial, the kind which agrees best with his land.

A standard wheat should be hardy, strong in the straw; not easy to shell and waste, prolific, thin in the bran, white in flour, and the flour rich in starch and gluten. The earliness or lateness of a variety affects its liability to disease.

Much may be done by every farmer to secure a variety suited to his soil from his own fields. Let a watchful eye observe every remarkable head of wheat—a very early one, a very long head, any which have an unusual sized grain, or is distinguished for any excellent property. By gathering, planting separately, and then culling again, each farmer may improve his own wheat ten fold. Indeed it has been in this way that several improved varieties have been procured.

Of spring wheat, the most valuable kinds are, _Italian Spring Wheat_; bearded, red berry, white chaff, head long, bran thick, flour of fair quality. _Tea_ or _Siberian Bald_; bright straw, not long; berry white, bald; flour good; extensively cultivated in New England and northern part of New York. Valuable variety.

BLACK SEA WHEAT.—White chaff, bearded, berry red, long and heavy, bran thick, flour inferior. Ripens very early, and seldom rusts or mildews.

The following are also the spring varieties. _Egyptian Wild Goose or California._—Large and branching head, bearded, berry small, bran thick, flour coarse and yellow, ripens late, and subject to rust. Although branching, it is not productive. There is a winter variety also. _Rock Wheat_, from Spain.—Chaff white, bearded, berry red and long, bran thick, flour of fair quality, hardy, shows small, well adapted for new lands and late sowing. _Black Bearded._—Long cultivated in New York—stem large, heavy head, berry large and red, beard very long and stiff, produces flour well. _Red Bearded_, English.—Chaff red, bearded, beards standing out, berry white, weighs from sixty to sixty-two pounds. _Scotch Wheat._—A large white wheat, berry and straw large.

Spring wheat does well on soils which heave and throw out winter wheat. It is deemed a good policy to sow some spring wheat every year, that, if the winter wheat fails, a crop may still be on hand.

An account of the best varieties of winter wheat, we extract from the _Western Farmer and Gardener_:

“WHITE FLINT.—A winter wheat, very white chaff, withstood Hessian fly well, has yielded fifty-four bushels to the acre, weighing from sixty-three to sixty-seven pounds per bushel. _Improved White Flint._—This from early selection from the first. _White Provence, from France._—A white wheat—shows small heads, well filled and large. _Old Red Chaff._—White wheat, old—subject to fly. _Kentucky, White Bearded._— White wheat, sometimes called Canadian Flint—early, good for clay soils. _Indiana Wheat._—White wheat—berry white and large, ripens early, not so flinty as the White Flint, good flour, valuable for clayey soils. _Velvet Beard, or Crate Wheat._—White wheat—English variety, chaff reddish, berry large and red, straw large and long, heads long and well filled, beard very stiff, flour yellowish. _Soule’s Wheat._—A mixed variety, heads large, berry white, not very hardy. _Beaver Dam._—Old variety, berry red, flour yellowish, ripens late. _Eclipse._—English, not hardy. _Virginia White May_, from Virginia.—Winter, good flour, chaff white. _Wheatland Wheat_, from Virginia.—Chaff red, heads well filled, berry red, hardy. _Tuscan Bald_, from Italy in 1837.—Berry large and white, not hardy, flour good. _Tuscan Bearded._—Head large, still less hardy. _Yorkshire_, from England, ten years ago.—Mixed variety of white and red chaff, bald, berry white, good flour, liable to injury from insects, subject to ergot. _Bellevere Tallavera._—White variety from England, head large, tillers well, not hardy, insects like it much. _Pegglesham_, English.—Head large, berry white, and medium sized, tender for our winters—(all this is calculated for New York State.) _Golden Drop_, English.—Berry red, flour not first rate. _Skinner Wheat._—Produced from crosses, berry red, chaff white, hardy, yield good, sixty-four pounds to the bushel. _Mediterranean._—Chaff light, red bearded, berry red and long, very flinty, flour inferior. _Hume’s White Wheat_ from crosses.—A beautiful white wheat, berry large, bran thin, hardy and a valuable variety. _Blue Stem._—Cultivated for thirty-three years, berry white, sixty-four pounds to the bushel, flour superior, bran thin, and very productive. _Valparaiso Wheat_, from South America.—Chaff white, bald, berry white, bran thin, a good variety.”

PREPARING SEED FOR SOWING.—Seed wheat should be subjected to a process which shall separate all chess, cockle, etc., from it, together with the shrunken kernels of the wheat itself. This may be, in part, done by screening; but the light grain will float and may thus be detected in the process of brining. Two tubs, or half barrels, may be conveniently used. A strong brine of salt and water is preferred, and the wheat, in convenient parcels, is poured in, the light wheat skimmed from the top, the brine poured off into the second tub, and the heavy wheat at the bottom put into some suitable receptacle to drain for an hour. When in successive parcels the whole quantity to be used has been brined, let it be emptied upon a smooth floor, and limed at the rate of about a bushel of lime to ten of wheat. By this process the chaffy grain is rejected, the smut, to which wheat is so liable, is entirely prevented; and the grain caused to germinate more rapidly and strongly. The lime should be what is termed _quicklime_, or that just slaked. The reason may be explained. No seed can germinate until it has rid itself of a large part of that carbon, which, being essential to its _preservation_, must be withdrawn in order that it may grow. The addition of oxygen from air and water converts the carbon to carbonic acid, which is emitted from the pores, and escapes. Newly slaked lime has a powerful affinity for carbonic acid; and by withdrawing it from the seed, puts it in a condition favorable to immediate germination. Lime that has been air-slaked or lain exposed to the air after being slaked by water, combines with the carbonic acid in the atmosphere, and when applied to wheat, being already a carbonate, it does not liberate the carbonic acid contained in the seed.

* * * * *

PLEASURES OF HORTICULTURE.—There is no writing so detestable as so-called _fine writing_. It is painted emptiness. We especially detest fine writing about rural affairs—all the senseless gabble about dew, and zephyrs, and stars, and sunrises—about flowers, and green trees, golden grain and lowing herds, etc. We always suspect a design upon our admiration, and take care not to admire. In short, _geoponical cant, and pastoral cant, and rural cant_ in their length and breadth, are like the whole long catalogue of cants (not excepting the German Kant), intolerable. Now and then, however, somebody writes as though he knew something; and then a free and bold strain of commendation upon rural affairs is relishful.

[4] The word _lay_, or _ley_, is only a different way of spelling _lea_, the old English word for _field_, not used except in poetry or by farmers; and it is one, among many instances, of old Saxon English words being preserved among the agricultural population long after they have ceased to be generally used.

PRACTICAL USE OF LEAVES.

There are two facts in the functions of the leaf, which are worth consideration on account of their practical bearings. The food of plants is, for the most part, taken in solution, through its roots. Various minerals—silex, lime, alumen, magnesia, potassa—are passed into the tree in a dissolved state. The sap passes to the leaf, the superfluous water is given off, _but not the substances which it held in solution_. These, in part, are distributed through the plant, and, in part, remain as a _deposit in the cells of the leaf_. Gradually the leaf chokes up, its functions are impeded, and finally entirely stopped. When the leaf drops, it contains a large _per cent._ of mineral matter. An autumnal or old leaf yields, upon analysis, a very much larger proportion of earthy matter than a vernal leaf, which, being yet young, has not received within its cells any considerable deposit. It will be found also, that the leaves contain a very much higher _per cent._ of mineral matter, than _the wood of the trunk_. The dried leaves of the elm contain more than eleven _per cent._ of ashes (earthy matter), while the wood contains less than two _per cent._; those of the willow, more than eight _per cent._, while the wood has only 0.45; those of beech 6.69, the wood only 0.36; those of the (European) oak 4.05, the wood only 0.21; those of the pitch-pine 3.15, the wood only 0.25 _per cent._[5]

It is very plain, from these facts, that, in forests, the mineral ingredients of the soil perform a sort of _circulation_; entering the root, they are deposited in the leaf; then, with it, fall to the earth, and by its decay, they are restored to the soil, again to travel their circuit. Forest soils, therefore, instead of being impoverished by the growth of trees, receive back annually the greatest proportion of those mineral elements necessary to the tree, and besides, much organized matter received into the plant from the atmosphere; soils therefore are gaining instead of losing. If owners of parks or groves, for neatness’ sake, or to obtain leaves for other purposes, gather the annual harvest of leaves, they will, in time, take away great quantities of mineral matter, by which the soil, ultimately, will be impoverished, unless it is restored by manures.

Leaf-manure has always been held in high esteem by gardeners. But many regard it as a purely _vegetable substance_; whereas, it is the best mineral manure that can be applied to the soil. What are called vegetable loams (not peat soils, made up principally of decomposed _roots_), contain large quantities of earthy matter, being mineral-vegetable, rather than vegetable soils.

Every gardener should know, that the best manure for any plant is the decomposed leaves and substance of its own species. This fact will suggest the proper course with reference to the leaves, tops, vines, haulm, and other vegetable refuse of the garden.

The other fact connected with the leaf, is its function of _Exhalation_. The greatest proportion of crude sap which ascends the trunk, upon reaching the leaf, is given forth again to the atmosphere, by means of a particularly beautiful economy. The _quantity_ of moisture produced by a plant is hardly dreamed of by those who have not specially informed themselves. The experiments of Hales have been often quoted. A sun-flower, three and a half feet high, presenting a surface of 5.616 square inches exposed to the sun, was found to perspire at the rate of twenty to thirty ounces avoirdupois every twelve hours, or seventeen times more than a man. A vine with twelve square feet exhaled at the rate of five or six ounces a day. A seedling apple-tree, with twelve square feet of foliage, lost nine ounces a day.[6]