BY MARTIN DOYLE.

A few months ago I saw in the shop window of a petty seedsman near

Dublin, an advertisement announcing the sale of grass seeds at two

shillings and eightpence per barrel of four bushels. I had the curiosity

to examine those seeds, which, as may be supposed from their price,

were a compound of the germs of weeds, with a small proportion of grass

seeds intermixed. I have no doubt that some poor and uncalculating petty

farmers were silly enough to purchase this trash on the penny-wise and

pound-foolish principle, and I well know that there is no point on which

greater ignorance prevails than on that of a proper selection of grass

seeds, although they should be sown with an accurate regard to the

nature of the soil, the number of years during which the land is to be

left in meadow or in pasturage, each of which conditions also requires a

different description of seeds.

The successful establishment of grass seeds depends materially, besides

the clean and pulverised state of the land, on their adaptation to the

soil; and if that be in a state perfectly fit for their reception, a

much smaller quantity of seed will be sufficient than under the opposite

circumstances; and if the land be in a foul state previously to laying

it down, it is clear that the sowing of weed seeds, with a trifling and

uncertain admixture of true grass seeds, cannot render it cleaner.

In practical result, the farmer who leaves his field to the generosity of

nature is more judicious, because in our humid climate the soil possesses

a tendency to generate the indigenous grasses, of which some are really

good, and which, from their overpowering qualities, soon dispossess those

that may have been sown, and form a close and excellent turf. But to sow

_weeds_ is inexpressibly absurd, and this the man does who buys such a

compound as that to which I have referred, or who sows them because he

happens to have them by some means, and is unwilling to have them lost.

Perhaps they have been collected from his own little rick of hay, which

he knows to have been of the worst quality, or some stable boy has given

him, or stolen for him, the dirty and perhaps fermented sweepings of a

nasty hay loft, in which bad hay had been stored, and he is unwilling to

throw away what he has so unluckily obtained: his _parkeen_ soon bears

testimony to his imprudence: and he admits, though reluctantly, that

the grass seeds which he had sown were not of the best quality, though

they were procured from a _hay loft_, when he perceives that they have

only introduced an artificial increase of bad herbage, which his little

stock of animals would unanimously reject, if hunger did not forbid such

fastidiousness.

But the deluded purchaser very frequently forgets that though he has a

great _bulk_ for his money, he has a bad bargain; he does not consider

that the respectable seedsman, though he charges much more for his seeds,

gives a far better quality in general, and does not sell _dirt_ and

unprolific grass seeds in the compound which he supplies. Petty seedsmen,

no doubt, do so frequently; and how can it be otherwise, when their stock

is a motley contribution from farmers’ wives, hostlers, and labourers,

who collect every variety of good and bad seeds from every description

of meadow and soil? It is better to pay a great deal more for the best

seed, of which a far lesser proportion will suffice. I can conceive but

one case in which a rational farmer could deliberately use such defective

seed as that which I saw in the little huckster’s shop, namely, when he

is about to surrender his farm (being obligated to lay down his land

with grass), and has all that unamiable and inexcusable feeling which so

generally prompts men in such circumstances to act in defiance of their

great Christian principle of doing unto others as we would have them do

unto us.

In this case, a selfish ill-natured tenant wishes to annoy his landlord,

and his own innocent successor, to the utmost of his power; and,

therefore, while adhering to the letter of his agreement--to sow grass

seeds--he breaks it in the spirit, and very effectually, in fact, too, by

substituting weeds under the denomination of grasses.

A prudent man who is not a perfect judge himself of the matter, will

first consider the quality and nature of his land before he sows

grass seeds, and then consult Lawson’s Tables, which furnish precise

information on every particular as to the quality and quantity of seeds

for all soils, and whether for one, two, three years, or for permanent

pasture, and he will endeavour to obtain what he wants accordingly; not

that this is often an easy matter of accomplishment, for few seedsmen

have the varieties sufficiently distinct, although they are generally

polite enough to say that they have them so.

But how can they be always sure of this? We know the great difficulty,

even in botanical gardens, of keeping the kinds separate, and the

rapidity with which grass seeds become commingled. The only certain way

is to raise the desired seeds in detached portions of land, perfectly

clean, and carefully cleared of intruding plants. Can the seedsman, with

the most honourable intentions and greatest caution, be himself secure

from the effects of negligence or wilful imposition?

But to return to the case of the poor man who thinks he has a bargain

when he buys four bushels of bad grass seeds for half-a-crown. Though he

sees the bad effects in the inferiority of his herbage, and at first lays

the blame on the proper source, he actually persuades himself afterwards

(when _He_, who in his bounty doth “clothe the grass of the field”

throughout the whole earth, has covered the surface of his field with

natural herbage) that to the seeds which he had sown two or three years

previously, he is mainly to attribute what the prodigality of Nature, or,

more properly, the munificence of God, has supplied.

The man who sows bad or ill-suited grass seeds, merely because he has

obtained them, and is unwilling to _lose_ the acquisition, reminds me of

an old lady who was for many years of her life in the habit of giving

annually (in the spring of the year) to her grandchildren, a regular

course of sulphur and treacle mixed up together, whether the recipients

required it or not.

On one occasion, a new servant maid, unacquainted with this system,

was sent for the usual quantity of flour of sulphur, but by some

mismanagement she brought home a pound of flour of mustard. Her mistress

sent her back to the grocer from whom it had been bought, but from

previous jealousies or quarrels unnecessary to detail, he refused to take

it back again. The poor maid could not herself be expected to substitute

the required sulphur, and the old lady was determined that the mustard

should not be lost. She accordingly mixed it with the treacle instead of

the other substance, and actually ladled every particle of the compound

down the throats of her grandchildren and the servant maid, who consented

to take her share as a punishment for her inattention, until the whole

mixture was consumed. The old lady was less foolish than the farmer who

sows the seeds of weeds, because she had previously ascertained that the

flour of mustard was harmless; but the husbandman must know that those

seeds which are not genuine grass seeds are noxious to his land, by

rendering it foul, and it is therefore extravagance and not economy on

his part to use bad seeds, merely to save waste.

I am sorry to say that the same indifference prevails among the lower

classes of our farmers as to seed in general. On this subject I shall

again occupy a page of the Journal in an early number.

* * * * *

A LAZY DOG.--Dr Arnaud d’Antilli, one day talking with the Duke de

Laincourt upon the new philosophy of M. Descartes, maintained that beasts

were mere machines; that they had no sort of reason to direct them; and

that when they cried or made a noise, it was only one of the wheels of

the clock or machine that made it. The Duke, who was of a different

opinion, replied, “I have now in my kitchen two turnspits which take

their turns regularly every other day to get into the wheel; one of

them not liking his employment, hid himself on the day he should have

wrought, so that his companion was forced to mount the wheel in his

stead; when released, by crying and wagging his tail, he made a sign for

those in attendance to follow him. He immediately conducted them to a

garret, where he dislodged the idle dog and bit him severely.”--_Dublin

University Magazine._

The Irish Penny Journal, Vol. 1 No. 32, February 6, 1841 · 第 5 / 7 题