Scalded Meal. The nutriment afforded to animals by seeds and roots, depends upon the rupture of all the globules which constitute their meal and flour. These globules vary in different roots, tubers and seeds. Those of potato starch, for instance, are usually from fifteen ten-thousandths to the four thousandth part of an inch; those of wheat rarely exceed the two-thousandth part of an inch, and so on. From experiments made on these globules by M. Raspail, the author of "Organic Chemistry," and M. Biot, of the French Academy of Sciences, the following conclusions have been drawn: 1. That the globules constituting meal, flour, and starch, whether contained in grain or roots, are incapable of affording any nourishment as animal food, until they are broken. 2. That no mechanical method of breaking or grinding is more than partly efficient. 3. That the most efficient means of breaking the globules is by heat, by fermentation, or by the chemical agency of acids or alkalies. 4. That the dextrine, which is the kernel as it were, of each globule, is alone soluble, and therefore alone nutritive 5. That the shells of the globules, when reduced to fragments by mechanism or heat, are therefore not nutritive. 6. That though the fragments of these shells are not nutritive, they are indispensable to digestion, either from their distending the stomach, or from some other cause not understood; it having been found by experiment that concentrated nourishment, such as sugar or essence of beef, cannot long sustain life without some mixture of coarser or less nutritive food. 7. That the economical preparation of all food containing globules or fecula, consists in perfectly breaking the shells, and rendering the dextrine contained in them soluble and digestible; while the fragments of the shells are at the same time rendered more bulky, so as the more readily to fill the stomach.-Co. Gent. what was going on upon each, how this or that process was conducted, what machines were successful, which were failures, what was the most profitable fruit crop, and how best to produce it, who had the most successful garden, and how it was managed, with the long catalogue of items on kindred topics-would be a mere repetition of the English obligation to become perfect in the farmer's calling. There are times throughout the year when most men can indulge in this useful recreation, and there are those who systematically devote to it a portion of every season. I have indulged in it myself, and have rarely gone any where without learning something that was new to me, and many times useful. On these brief perambulations I have uniformly found the latch-string of the door within sight and reach. Going in unheralded, and even anonymously, I have never been received discourteously. The house-dog may have been snappish, but the proprietor has been all suavity. -Author of Ten Acres Enough," in Horticulturist. Care of Cows. In the discussions at the Annual Fair of the N. York State Agricultural Society, Geo. A. Moore gives his method of caring for his cows as follows: My best cows do not go dry over six to eight weeks. The best cow I have, was milked at night and had a calf by her side the next morning. Cows must be sheltered, groomed, well fed and cared for. A cow should go in the barn when the first cold weather comes on in the autumn and stay there till it is over in the spring. Of course the stables should be well ventilated. I have found that cows kept in the barn through the winter, do just as well as those which are let out. Air, light, good water and good food are essential. With these provisions, cows are kept in good health, there are no miscarriages, and the general effect upon the health and usefulness of the animal is good. Cows "come in " with us when 24 months old, and we breed and milk them right along. Three years ago I picked the poorest and oldest cows from my herd, kept them housed from Christmas till March, loosed them from the ties and turned them out, and they played like calves. They gave more milk and did better the following season than they did the year before. I have kept cows in stanchions from November to May, caring for and grooming them well, and they bred better, there were fewer losses, and they were healthier, and did better the succeeding season, than if they had been left out, or allowed to run out in the workman. usual way. I prefer to tie cows for winter feedTravelling from one farm to another, to learning, but use stanchions in my milking stables. Visiting Farmers. In ancient times the English law required a young man, on completion of his apprenticeship, to travel over the country a certain number of years, working at his trade, before he could be licensed to make a permanent beginning for himself. The object was to compel him to become familiar with the different modes in which other craftsmen conduct the business he had learned, so that by knowing all, he might become a perfect Surface Manuring. We give below an excellent "summary of the principal facts and reasons in favor of Surface Manuring," by a correspondent of the Country Gentleman. The writer seems to have examined with care the leading agricultural papers, of the more Northern states at least, during a number of years past, in order to put the subject in its true aspect. In giving his history of the progress of opinion on the subject, he says that Mr. John Johnston was the first to come out, and openly advocate in print, the practice of surface manuring.' While we recognize fully, Mr. Johnston's claims, as one of the most independent and intelligent of agricultural writers, he is not entitled, we think, to the credit of having first openly advocated in print this method of manuring. Long before Mr. J. wrote at all on the subject of Agriculture, we presume, Mr. Botts, then editor of the Southern Planter, Mr. Garnett, of Virginia, one of the leading writers of his time, and, we believe, Mr. Edmund Ruffin, commended this method of manuring. during the following summer Prof. Volcker made, at Cirencester, the famous experiments which have changed the current of opinion on the chemical question involved. We do not claim that we were the first to bring the subject into notice, but that the Farmer pressed it so pointedly and urgently, as to fix the attention of intelligent observers, and writers for the Agricultural press, and that within the ten years past it has, on this account, gained more upon the good opinion of the Agricultural community than in half a century preceding. It is proper to bear in mind in this connection, that it was in the face of false, or rather, perhaps, misapplied teachings of science, that intelligent observation furnished facts which could not be gainsaid. The experience of practical men was appealed to, to uphold the practice of manuring on the surface, while the teacher of science still maintained the inevitable loss of the volatile am monia. Finally, however. it was ascertained that the loss of ammonia was not to be estimated by the quantity of wasting odors the manure evolved. Ammonia never failed, it is true, to other gases, of no value to the crops, magnified the appearance of the waste. It now appeared, that only in so far as the mannre had rotted, was ammonia found at all. The nitrogen of the unrotted manure was not liable to waste from evaporation. Thrown upon the surface, there was no wasteful exhalation, even under the hottest sun, except of a very small amount of ammonia. The summary given below is an interesting one, and we commend it to the notice of our readers: SURFACE MANURING. A summary of the Principal Facts and Reasons in Nevertheless, the general opinion had not ad-give a sensible indication of its presence, but vanced. No set of men, say what they will, are more under the influence of theories than practical farmers, and especially of a theory that appeals so directly to the senses, as does this one of manures. It was claimed, for a long time, by chemists, that the waste of strength was plainly indicated by the odors arising on any exposure of the manure, and that the loss was proportioned to the length of time it might remain uncovered on the surface. There were certainly very few writers we do not think there, was one agricultural editor-who controverted this teaching, when, in 1856, we distinctly and pointedly took ground against it, in a leading editorial of the American Farmer. In this article we said, "we know that men of science will shake their heads at the wanton waste of ammonia, but practical men should stand by their facts." Mr. Mapes, of the Working Farmer, said at that time, "Those who imagine they find good results from spreading manure on the surface, and leaving it for days, weeks, or months, before it is ploughed under, mistake the action of the litter, or longer portions of the manure, as a mulch, for the action of the manure on the soil." In reply we said, "We so far differ from this, and kindred opinions on the subject, that we think manuring on the surface, for ninety-nine farmers in a hundred, the best general method of application." Our editorial was copied into the London Farmers' Magazine, and it is a coincidence, that Speaking of his examination of the history of the matter, the writer in the Country Gentleman says: I find that Mr. John Johnston "was the first to come out and openly advocate, in print, the practice of surface manuring; that Mr. J. and many others have practiced this course from twenty to thirty years; that it was adopted after repeated trials and experiments in manuring, in the different ways usually practiced; that Mr. J. and others found that one load spread on a grass or clover sod, early in the fall, and plowed under in the spring for corn, did more good, and gave a better profit, than two loads supplied in any other way; that the course usually taken is to pile the manure in the spring, let it ferment and rot, and in the fall draw and spread it on a grass or clover sod, to be plowed under the next spring for corn, though on many grass farms it is applied in the fall to meadows, while it is sometimes put on land prepared for winter wheat, and said to be harrowed in, though probably only partly covered, just before sowing; that it is usually found to do best when applied rather early in the fall, so the grass and clover can grow up and cover and protect it; this also gives time for the soluble portions, which constitute the principal value of rotted manure, to be carried into the soil by the rains. It also makes a great deal better sod, and growth of grass and clover, to plow under in the spring, which is a great benefit to the succeeding crop of corn. Surface manuring appears to answer much the same purpose as liquid manuring. Nearly all of the valuable portions of fermented and rotted manure, being soluble, are washed out, taken into, and completely diffused through the surface soil by the fall rains, so as to be in the best possible condition to be used by the growing plant. At the same time. there can be but very little, if any loss, by the strength of the manure washing away, or being carried too deep into the soil," for, as Dr. Cameron says, "by a beautiful provision of nature-the absorptive power of soils they will be retained until required to nourish the plants." Liebeg also states that if "water holding in solution ammonia, potash, phosphoric and silicic acids, be brought in contact with the soil, these substances disappear almost immediately from the solution, the soil withdrawing them from the water." It also appears that there is no other way in which the fertilizing properties of manure can be so well worked into and diffused through the surface soil, just in the position and condition in which they are needed by the growing plant, as by liquid manuring, or applying the manure to the surface so that the rains can dissolve and carry them into the soil. It also appears that when manure is plowed into the soil, there is comparatively little chance for it to be thus prepared and brought to the plant, but that the roots have to find and use it as they best can. Hence it will be seen that, when the manure is plowed under, the roots of plants cannot as soon nor as thoroughly receive the benefit of it, as when diffused through the surface soil by the rains; while, being covered with several inches-often six to eight-of soil, there is comparatively little chance for rains to dissolve, bring it to, and diffuse it through the surface soil, where it is mostly needed. But this is but one of the great benefits that may be realized by surface manuring. Another great advantage is, that by piling, fermenting, and rotting manure, it is brought into a much more available condition for the immediate benefit of growing plants. Now it is well known that the principal value of barn-yard manure consists in the amount of available ammonia and soluble mineral substances it contains, while it is shown by Dr. Voelcker's investigations that "perfectly fresh barn-yard manure contains but a small proportion of free ammonia, and but a small proportion of soluble matters, whether organic or mineral-that, comparatively speaking, but little nitrogen, and of course but little ammonia, exists in fresh dung in a state in which it can be assimilated by the growing plants"that "most of the nitrogen is gradually liberated as the fermentation of the dung progresses-it being found that there is a regular increase of soluble organic matters, including nitrogen, which keeps pace with the progress of fermentation." It also appears that "in fresh manures (with abundant litter,) the larger part of the insoluble organic matter consists of straw in an almost entirely undecomposed state. In rotting manure, the straw is converted into humus(humic and ulmic acids, humine and ulmine)— the compounds of which, with potash, soda and ammonia, are soluble, and of a dark brown color. The humus mostly fixes-(forms nonvolatile compounds with)—the ammonia that results from the decay of nitrogenous matters." It also appears that the most useful mineral matters contained in manures are also brought into a more soluble and available condition for the use of growing plants. True, it has been objected that in rotting barnyard manure there may be a considerable loss of ammonia which is set free by the fermentation in the heap; but it is shown that this is not the case. Dr. Voelcker shows that "in the interior and heated portions of manure, ammonia is given off, but on passing into the external and cold layers, the free ammonia is absorbed and retained. During the fermentation of dung, ulmic, hùmic, and other organic acids are formed, which fix the ammonia generated in the decom. position of the nitrogenized constituents." It is also stated by Dr. Cameron that "it is an error to suppose that the manure heap loses a sensible proportion of its important constituents by exposure to the air; on the contrary, if it be in a compost state, the only ingredients which evaporate from it, are water, and an inconsiderable quantity of carbonic acid; hardly a trace of ammonia escapes. During the fermentation of manure, its nitrogen, (for there is no ammonia in fresh natural manure,) is converted slowly into ammonia; at the same time other constituents of the dung-carbon, hydrogen, &c., are converted into certain acids which combine with and fix large growth and coat of manure is a protection the ammonia." Should the plain practical farmer want any further proof that there is no loss by fermentation of any of the valuable constituents-what be considers the strength of the manure-the vastly greater effect of, and benefits received from rotted manure, ought to be more than enough for his satisfaction. But it is true, that while there is very little loss from evaporation or exhalation of ammonia, or other valuable volatile substances from the manure heap, there may be some loss from washing by heavy rains; and there seems to be the more reason for this objection, as it is shown that fermentation renders the most valuable constituents of manure soluble, and hence liable to be washed away. But it is shown in practice that this may be mostly prevented by making the piles large and high, the sides square or perpendicular, the top dishing, so they will hold and take up all the water that passes on to them, and making them in places where no running water can reach the sides or bottom, thus giving very little chance for the rains to wash them away. It is also found that when manure is well spread that all fermentation is at an end; so there is no setting free of ammonia or other valuable matters, the most of the foul odors arising from the manure when spread, as well as in the pile, being due to the escape of carbonic acid, carburetted hydrogen, and other foul gases, that are not of much value in manure-while in well fermented and rotted manure, the most important and valuable ingredients, instead of being in a condition to be dried up and carried off by the sun and ait, are in precisely the best possible condition to be dissolved and carried into the soil by the fall rains. So that if manure is finely spread early in the fall, these ingredients will be washed into and well diffused through the soil before winter, where, according to Liebig, Voelcker and Cameron, they will be retained until wanted by the growing plants. It is also claimed that manure applied to the surface is valuable as a mulch—that when spread early in the fall so as to give the clover and grass a good start, and they are not fed down too close, it is found that the coat of manure and growth of grass is a considerable benefit as a mulch and protection of the land, and roots of the grass. It is also found that when manure is applied to wheat, whether put on before sowing and worked into the surface, or finely spread afterwards, that it answers the same purpose, giving the plant a better and stronger growth and making it less liable to freeze out, while the This to the soil and roots of the wheat-while in regard to grass that has not been fed down in the fall, it is found to start earlier, so as to give quite a growth if not fed off, as it never should be, in the spring, to turn under for corn. new growth, by making the sod green and succulent, and starting it to rotting immediately, is a great help to the corn, so that in reality surface manuring in the fall has the threefold effect of enriching the land, mulching and protecting the soil and wheat and clover and grass roots, and producing something of a crop for green manuring. There is another important point in the consideration of this subject, that it is very probable the great mass of American farmers, like the writer, have never given much attention, which has been somewhat strongly brought to mind while investigating this subject. This is the very general practice in England of spreading manure on clover stubbles after haying, to be plowed under in the fall for wheat, haying being rather earlier and wheat seeding considerably later there than here. Mr. Luther H. Tucker, in referring to this practice states that "there are many in England who constantly practice this way to advantage, and consider that in no other, can greater benefit be obtained. It helps to some extent to bring forward the 'seeds,' (of clover, &c.,) so that when they are ready to plow a few months later, there is a closer and thicker sward to turn over, which will, of course, yield the greater nourishment it has thus been accumulating, to the coming crop of grain." There is also much other testimony to the same effect, it being shown that English farmers when questioned on this point, state that after trying various other ways of applying manure, it was found that in no other way could they apply it to so good advantage, or with as much benefit to their wheat. Yet, in following this course, the manure has to be exposed, as it is finely spread on the surface, to the sun and air during the warmest season of the year. Thus showing that with well fermented and rotted manure, which is always used, there can be but very little if any loss by the escape of ammonia or drying of the manure. There is another way of surface manuring, extensively practiced in England, which should not be forgotten,-that is, by feeding off turnips, on the land where they are grown, with sheep. This is a favorite practice with English farmers, who claim that it is one of the best ways they have for manuring and enriching their land. The usual course is to put the sheep on to the Flax Culture. We remember a time when Flax growing was common in Maryland. It was before the days of cheap cotton, when it was thought good economy, on large farms, to grow and to manufacture, as far as possible, all that was necessary for home consumption. There was a regular allotment of ground for the small crop of flax; which was broken on the flax break, hackled, spun, and woven at home, for the use of the negroes. Of late turnips in October, and keep them folded on a small piece until it is eaten off, and then move them on to another, generally following this course until it is time to clear the land to be plowed for barley in the spring. To make the sheep gain faster, and the manure richer, but mainly the latter, they are often fed oilcake, and sometimes clover hay, but both fed in the fold on the turnip field; so the manure is left as it is dropped on the land by the sheep, and thus it remains all winter. So that instead of apprehend-years, attention has been directed to its culture ing any loss by the washing away of the manure, it is generally if not universally considered and conceded to be the best way the turnip crop can be fed to sheep, to manure and enrich the land. Clover is also sometimes fed off in this way, oilcake being also fed, mainly to make richer ma nure. - again, owing to the high price of cotton. It has one advantage over that crop--that it needs little of the laborious field culture which it demands; being sown broadcast, and needing no further care till harvest. The following, from a German flax-grower, we take from Country Gentleman : Messrs. Editors: -In No. 683 of the Cult. & Co. Gent., I find an article on flax culture, written by Mr. W. H. White, of South Windsor, Conn., in which the cultivation of flax is highly recommended to the attention of American farmers. Some assertions in said article I would heartily subscribe to, but others I consider erroneous, and, as I have been raised and am living in a country where, for centuries, flax culture has been an important and lucrative branch of agriculture, and am myself engaged in raising this product of the farm, perhaps you will grant to my remarks on this subject a page of your interesting paper. Now the point of most importance to the American farmer, is that in neither of these ways, in which the principal part of the manure made by English farmers is applied to the land-whether exposed to a summer sun or winter washing, is there found to be any serious loss of the fertilizing properties or matters of manure-thus furnishing the best possible proof of the correctness of the conclusions of some of the best agricultural chemists, that when manure is spread on the land, there can be but little, if any, loss by evaporation or escape of volatile substances, as there is no fermentation; nor much loss by washing, as the soil immediately absorbs all important matters held in solution by the water passing over or through it. And this point is the more noteworthy, because large quantities of oilcake and grain are fed with the especial view of making rich manure, such as there would certainly be a loss on, if on any-while not only are Eng-quired by the flax plant. It is one of the greatest lish farmers working hard and looking sharp to find every chance for making and saving manure, but some of the best scientific men are giving their attention to the same subject. There is one other point that has been dwelt on to some extent, and that is, that surface manuring is nature's mode-that by the decay of leaves and the various other vegetable substances deposited on the surface, the soil has been gradually growing richer for an indefinite period. In proof, the prairies are referred to as notable instances. It is also shown that the valleys of rivers are kept very rich, by the deposit of enriching substances by overflowing water. The valley of the Nile, which has been under constant cultivation without any other manure, for thousands of years, is referred to as a prominent instance of this kind. The Ganges and other rivers, are also referred to as examples of this kind of manuring. Orleans Co., N. Y. F. First, let me speak of the proper place of flax in the rotation of crops. Your correspondent, in No. 683, says: "The soil should have been previously made rich by a high manuring." We never manure for flax. The fibre is injured by manuring; fresh manure is neither liked nor re advantages for the farmers that the flax plant will thrive better without manure than with it, and that even the crop following flax on the same field requires less manure than if the same had been sown a year sooner in the place of the flax. For instance: Oats is here always sown at the end of the rotation, and after the oats are removed, the field has to be manured for the next crop. Now, after such oats, we sow flax without manure, and, after the flax, rye or wheat, with but a half allowance of manure, and raise a sure crop, and, after such winter grain, we have an excellent chance for red clover. Clover, indeed, is never better than in the second year after flax, As we raise no Indian corn, our rotation, being confined to small grain, must of course vary from yours. But making this allowance, the following rotation is an excellent one for our regions, on soil adapted to wheat and clover: |