There are two opinions which will prevent any attempt to improve the
cultivation of wheat, or, indeed, of anything else. The first is the
opinion that, what are called _wheat-lands_, yield enough at any rate:
the second is the opinion of those who own a soil not naturally good
for wheat, that there is no use in trying to raise much to the acre.
We suppose that wheat will not _average_ more than twelve bushels to
the acre, as it is now cultivated in some parts. At that rate, and
with too low prices, it is not worth cultivation for commercial
purposes. The cost of seed, of labor in preparing the soil, putting in
the crop, harvesting, threshing, and carrying it to market, is greater
than the value of the crop. At fifty cents a bushel, and twelve
bushels to the acre, the farmer gets six dollars, which certainly does
not cover the worth of his time and the interest on his land.
Is it possible, then, at an expense within the means of ordinary
farmers, to bring a double or treble crop of wheat? If nature has set
limits to the produce of this grain to the acre, and if our farmers
have come up to that limit, there is no use in their trying to do any
better. But if their crop is four fold behind what it ought to be,
they will feel courage to reach out for a better mode of cultivation.
Vegetables collect food from the atmosphere, and from the soil; and
different plants select different articles of food from the soil, just
as different birds, beasts, insects, etc., require different food. One
class of plants draws potash largely from the soil, as turnips,
potatoes, the stalk of corn, etc. Another class requires lime, in
great measure, as tobacco, pea straw, etc. Liebig partially classifies
plants according to the principal food which they require; as silica
plants, lime plants, potash plants, etc.
Every plant being composed of certain chemical elements, requires for
its perfection a soil containing those elements. Thus chemistry has
shown, by exact analysis, that good meadow hay contains the following
elements: Silica (sand), lime (as a phosphate, a sulphate, and a
carbonate, i. e. lime combined with phosphoric, sulphuric, and
carbonic acids), potash (as a chloride, and a sulphate), magnesia,
iron, and soda. Whatever soil is rich in these will be productive of
grass.
The grain of wheat (in distinction from the straw) contains, and of
course requires from the soil, sulphates of potash, soda, lime,
magnesia, iron, etc.
Any vegetable, in its proper latitude, will flourish in a soil which
will yield it an abundance of food; and decline in a soil which is
barren of the proper nutritive ingredients.
A practical, scientific knowledge of these fundamental facts, will
give an intelligent farmer, in grain-growing latitudes, almost
unlimited power over his crops. A good cook knows what things are
required for bread; he selects these materials, compounds them to
definite proportions—adding, if any one is deficient; subtracting, if
any one is in excess. Raising a crop is a species of slow cooking.
Here is a compound of such materials (called wheat) to be made. Nature
agrees to knead them together, and produce the grain, if the farmer
will supply the materials. To do this he _must_ understand what these
materials are. Suppose a cook perceiving that the bread was wretched,
did not know exactly what was the matter; and should add, salt, or
flour, or yeast, or water at hap-hazard? Yet that is exactly what
multitudes of farmers do. They find that their fields yield a small
crop of wheat. They do not know what the matter is. Is the soil
deficient in lime, or sand, or clay? Is magnesia or potash lacking?
Perhaps they do not even know that these things are requisite to this
crop. “The land must be manured.” Now, manure on an impracticable
soil, is _medicine_. Of course if the farmer prescribes, he must tell
_what_ medicine, i. e. what manure. Is it vegetable matter or
phosphates? alumina or silica? Suppose a doctor says: “You are sick
and must take medicine,” without knowing what the disease is, or what
the appropriate remedy; and so should pull out a handful of whatever
there was in his saddle-bags and dose the wretch? That’s the way
farming goes on. “The ten acre lot wants manure.” To the barn yard he
goes, takes the dung heap, plows it under, and gets an enormous crop
of—straw. Nitrogenous manure was not what the soil wanted. He has
added materials which existed in abundance already; but those
elements, from the want of which his crop suffered, have not been
given it. The land is sicker than it was before. It languishes for
want of one element, it suffers from a surfeit of another. We are
prepared to sustain these observations by a reference to authentic
facts.
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.