Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

OH LIQUID MANURE. BY PROF. AUGUSTUS YOELCKEK, Os the Royal Agricultural College at Cirencester, Eng land. On the characters of soils not benefitted hy liquid \ manure , and on the causes of failure. Soils containing a fair proportion of clay. es pecially stiff clay soils, are diametrically opposed in tlieir chemical and physical characters to those which are porous and sandy. Generally, the more retentive and stiff soils contain not on ly the more common mineral elements which we tind in the ashes of plants, such as lime, mag nesia, soluble silica, sulphuric acid, kc., in suffi eent abundance, but also the more valuable mineral substances, such as phosphoric acid and potash. They moreover possess in a high de gree the power of absorbing ammonia from the atmosphere, and retaining it; and in addition to this ammonia, under good cultivation, the vege table remains, left in such soils in the shape of roots and leaves from former crops, yield plenty of organic food for plants. It is true, that stiff soils are not always very productive; but gene rally speaking they contain within themselves all the elements of fertility, and it is only for want of proper cultivation that their productive powers are not fully developed. Whatever the agriculturist may think of the Lois Weedon system of culture, the Rev. Mr. Smith certainly has the great merit of having shown with indefatigable perseverance and zeal that certain clay soils only require constant working in order to yield remunerative crops of wheat in succession for a number of years. This would be an utter impossibility if they did not contain a practically inexhaustible store of miner al elements of nutrition, and if they did not under his system of cultivation also provide an ample supply of organic food. In illustration of this part of my subject, I may mention the following analysis, which I re cently made of a soil and its subsoil of moder ately retentive and naturally very fertile pro perties. The soil and subsoil contained in one hundred parts: Surface soil. Subsoil. Organic matter ami water of combina tion* 4.8 S 2.69 Alumina 2.15 5.39 Oxides of iron 8.15 7.16 Lime 11 ‘4® Magnesia 16 L 22 Potash.... 49 .88 Soda 46 Phosphoric acid 12 .19 Chlorine trace trace Carbonic acid 81 1-19 Insoluble silicates and sand 88.81 80.24 consisting of Silicic acid 65.11 62.61 Alumina 2.86 14.55 Lime -85 Magnesia 50 .28 Potash. 25 1.77 Soda 09 .21 100.00 100.00 ♦Containing nitmgen 182 09 Equal to ammonia 220 .11 Submitted to a mechanical analysis, these soils furnished: Surface soil. Subsoil. Hand 46-16 56,15 Clay 18.09 41.79 Lime, Megnesia, Ac 1.87- .47 Organic matter 4.88 2.59 100.00 100.00 The surface soil, it will be noticed, contains a considerable proportion of sand, whilst the sub soil contains less sand and more clay. We have here an example of a friable loamy soil resting on a stiffish clay subsoil. It will be observed that the surface soil abounds in all the mineral matters which are required by cultivated plants, and also contains an appreciable quantity of nitrogenized organic matters. If we calculate the total amount of the available fertilizing substances for a depth of soil of only ten inches, we shall find a quantity of mineral and organic fertilizing matters, in comparison with which the amount of manur ing constituents supplied in fifty thousand gal lons of liquid manure appears altogether insig nificant. I believe this to bo the chief reason why little benefit results from the application of liquid manure to clay soils and fertile friable loams. It may be said, if these soils abound in available fertilizing substances, how is it that upon them ordinary farm-yard manure is employ ed with advantage ? To this objection I would reply: Farm-yard manure, in the first place, is a more perfect manure than liquid manure, inas much as it contains a considerable proportion of soluble and insoluble phosphates which are very deficient in liquid manure, and, being a bulky manure, performs important mechanical func tions that cannot be realised by the use of liquid. In the second place, I would observe that the retentive physical characters of clay soils pre clude the young plant from availing itself of the total amount of fertilizing matters dispersed through the whole mass of the soil. In fact, plants growing on stiffish soils feed only upon a very smqll proportion of the bulk of soil; whilst those grown on a porous sandy soil penetrate it to a greater depth and in every direction, and avail themselves of the manuring constituents uniformly distributed amongst a large bulk of soil by the agency of liquid manure. I indeed believe that little benefit would arise from the application of solid manure to clay soils, if it were possible to incorporate it with the soil as uniformly as liquid manure, and to the same depth to which the latter penetrates them. But decided benitit results from a good dressing with ordinary yard manure, because, in fact, only a small proportion of the soil is actually manured, and because by the very bulk of the manure the physical and chemical characters of a portion only of the soil are so altered that in reality the plant feeds upon a new and artificial ly formed soil. However, it is not every clay soil that encloses in its substance abundant stores of plant food; there are poor clays as well as poor sandy soils, and it may be asked. Might not liquid manure produce a good effect upon sterile clay land? Ido not think it would produce a very marked effect, for I conceive that the close tex ture, coldness, and want of porosity which characterize sterile clays, are opposed to the successful application of liquid manure. As just observed, only a small portion of such soils can be penetrated by the tender roots of plants, whilst by far the larger part of the soil enrich ed by the liquid manure would b? lost under these circumstances, and the small quantity left in the portion of soil penetrated by the roots cannot of course produce any very striking result. Moreover, all clay-soils are generally more than sufficiently wet during the early part of the year; the additional quality of water supplied in liquid manure renders them wetter still; and as much heat is absorbed during the evaporation of water, the injury done to the land by the re sulting cold would not, I imagine, be counter balanced by the small proportion of fertilizing matters supplied. Again, clay soils, whether fertile or barren, and all land that is moderately stiff', like the ma TKJB gomncsxi VXS&S Mffl SX&K&XSK. jority of soils in England, must by a heavy dose of liquid manure be rendered closer. Such soils certainly would not be improved in their physi cal character by an excess of water. The use of liquid manure at a time when such land is more than sufficiently wet is therefore objectionable. But it is equally objectionable when stiff soils get too dry. In summer, soils of that descrip tion crack in all directions, and the liquid ma nure then runs through the cracks instead of passing through the soil, or it moistens the soil but very imperfectly. Much of the liquid ma nure, is thus lost, and. moreover, injury is done by the insufficient proportion of manure that is absorbed by a thin layer of the surface soil, for it causes at first a more rapid development of the young plants, which receive a sudden check as soon as the small quantity of moisture is all evaporated. We thus observe that, generally speaking, neither the chemical nor physical character of clay soils, and others, partaking more or less of the same nature, are favorable to the introduc tion of the system of liquid manuring. And since by far the greater part of the cultivated land in this country (England,) is more or less retentive, I feel assured that liquid manure will never be extensively employed by British agri culturists, but that its use wid be confined to land of a light porous character. The experience of those who profess to have used liquid manure with much benefit on clay land may be regarded as contradictory to my views on the subject But I would observe that, as far as I could learn, the application of liquid manure on heavy land, where it is said to have produced astonishing results, was always pre ceded by thorough draining, subsoil, plowing, deep cultivation, day-burning, and liming, each of which processes is well known to effect radi cal changes in the constitution of heavy land. Bearing in mind the experience of Mr. Smith, of Lois Weedon, and others, who have practically tested the utility of deep cultivation; and on the other hand the failures of those who have ap plied liquid manure upon land not previously improved by other process than thorough drain age. it appears to me, to say the least of it, doubtful, whether the improvements in such soils are due to the processes of subsoiling, lim ing and burning. Any one of these processes effects a radical improvement in heavy land, and much more conspicuous will the improvement be if all three are resorted to in succession, which was the case in one instance that came under my notice. In conclusion, I offer some remarks on the modes of disposing of liquid manure. With respect to the disposal of the liquid ma nure produced on a farm, I have come to the conclusion that on porou#, sandy, naturally un productive soils, the liquid excrements of ani mals are best disposed of, together with the solid excrements, by mixing both with much water and irrigating the land with liquid ma nure. Where plenty of water can be obtained at a moderate expense, and wheretfacilities exist for irrigation by gravitation, so that no expenses have to be incurred for the erection of steam pumping engines and underground pipes, I believe that tins will be found incomparably the most effective and economic mode of manuring land. But instances are comparatively rare in this country (England) where the liquid and solid ex crements can be disposed of together with ad vantage. The question therefore arises, how should liquid manure be disposed of on clay soils, and on land such as we frequently find it, that is neither so stiff as clay nor so loose in texture as sand ? This question involves the consideration of se veral purely practical matters. Thus, for in stance, the quantity of liquid manure produced on a farm must necessarily influence a farmer in his proceedings; if there are only a few thousand gallons of liquid manure produced, it will of course not pay to construct an expensive tank and lay down pipes, whilst on another farm it may be good policy to collect the liquid in a water-tight tank. Again, a proper answer to this question cannot Ire given, unless it is stated whether fattening stock or young cattle are chiefly kept on a farm, or whether the farm consists chiefly of arable or pasture land, or whether most of the fields are light or heavy, whether much or little straw is produced, and in what way the straw is disposed of with most benefit. Such and similar considerations must necessarily influence the arrangements for col lecting and disposing of the excrementitious matters produced on a farm. Nothing, there fore, can be more absurd than to lay down a fixed rule for tli9 management of liquid manure. On one of my agricultural excursions I remem ber having visited a farm where I found the li quid manure tank brim-full. On inquiry what was done with the tank liquid, I was told “nothing.” This appeared tome a strange an swer, and I was half inclined to consider my host behind the times. However, knowing him to be a remarkably intelligent and thoroughly practi cal man, I did not jump at once to such a hasty conclusion, but endeavored to learn from him all the particulars which led him at first to erect a tank, and afterwards to allow the liquid manure to run over and find its way into the soil as best it could. The result of a morning's ramble over the whole of the farm, and an animated discus sion afterwards between us, was, that I thought with my friend that the most practical mode of disposing of the liquid manure in this case, was to let it run away “as fast as it would.” I trust I may not be understood as advocating this no vel, and I believe by no means uncommon, me thod of dealing with the contents of liquid ma nure tanks on heavy clay farms. We cannot avoid recognising in this practice a waste which, no doubt, may be avoided, but which, under pe culiar circumstances, is an evil that is more eco nomically endured than cured. Disclaiming, therefore, the intention of laying down fixed rules for the management of liquid manure, and avoiding the consideration of many practical matters, I propose to point out, byway of example, one circumstance which I believe more than any other must affect the arrange ments on a farm for disposing of the liquid ex crements of animals. There are three modes of disposing of the li quid excrements of animals on soils on which ir rigation with liquid manure cannot be carried out with advantage: 1. Where the urine of animals is completely absorbed by litter m feeding-boxes. 1. Where the urine and drainings of stables, cow-houses, and pig-Sties are collected in a small tank in close proximity to a covered ma nure-pit. 3. When the liquid excrements of domestic animals, the sewage of dwelling houses, drain age-water, and every kind of animal refuse mat ter, are col’octed together in a water-tight tank of larger capacity, situated as in No. 2, close to the man.ure-pit. I assume that the manure-tank in Nos. 2 and 3 is provided with a forcing-pump, by means of which the tank liquid can be spread over the so lid manure, as occasion requires. In no instance would I recommend that the li quid collected in the tank should be applied by itself. Manure, I l)elieve, ought either all to be j used in a liquid form or all in in a solid state, j I consider it decidedly a bad practice to employ separately the solid and the liquid excrements of animals. The adoption of one or the other of these three modes of dealing with liquid manure must de pend chiefly on the supply of strata. On farms where no young stock is kept, and just enough straw is produced to provide fatten ing cattle and horses with the requisite quantity of chaff and a sufficient amount of bedding ma terials, I believe the best mode of disposing of the liquid and solid excrement is to make the manure in boxes. In well-managed box-feeding there is no waste by drainage of the most valuable portion of manure, nor waste by evaporation of ammo nia ; the manure ferments regularly and slowly, and liquid and solid excrementitious matters, which are neitherof them perfect manures when applied separately, are preserved together in the most admirable manner. But on many farms the whole of the manure cannot be made in boxes, for on some there is too little straw pro duced, and only some of the cattle can be kept in boxes. In other places, the farmer has so much straw that he finds it difficult to dispose of; he can neither sell the excess to advantage, nor make it all into manure in fattening-boxes ; In the former case—that is, when straw is de ficient—l would suggest that the urine of cattle should be conducted through iron pipes into a perfectly water-tight tank, placed in the middle of the dung-steading, or close to one side of it. Let the manure-pit be covered by a roof, sup ported by several upright poles. Such a roof might perhaps be cheaply made of asphalted felt—a material that is both water-proof and light. A roof made of this material would not, I imagine, take very stout posts for supports, and could be erected at quite a cheap rate. — The four sides of this erection would be of course left open, so that the wind could sweep over the manure in the pit in every direction. Care should be taken to prevent the water from the roofs of farm-buildings and cattle-sheds from finding its way into the liquid-manure tank. Unless the tank is perfectly water-tight, and the urine of the stables and cow-houses conducted through iron or stoneware pipes, it is hardly possible to exclude drainage-water. By adopting this course, only the urine of cattle, saturated more dr less with solid excrements, will find its way into the tank, and a compara tively small quantity of liquid will collect in it. The liquid, being concentrated, will rapidly en ter into fermentation, and will lose ammonia by evaporation. It is, therefore, desirable that some oil of vitrol be poured into the tank from time to time, or whenever a pungent smell is discernible. According to the size of the tank, five to ten pounds of oil of vitrol may be poured into it perhaps every two or three months. By this inexpensive and most effectual mode of preventing loss in ammonia, the manure may be wonderfully improved. The solid manure in the pit, being sheltered against rain, rapidly gets drier, for during the fermentation of dung heat is developed, which is spent in the conver sion of a considerable portion of the manure in to vapor. As it is of much consequence to ferment ma nure with regularity, and fermentation is almost altogether stopped when excrementitious matters and straw are completely immersed in water, it is advisable to give the dung pit a somewhat in clined position, and to lay down an iron pipe close to the bottom of the pit, and to cam- by this means any excess of liquid back into the tank. If this arrangement be adopted, the liquid in the tank may frequently be pumped over the manure in the pit without doing any harm, which it would be sure to do if no provision were made for the excess of liquid to drain back into the tank. This is of particular importance on farms where cattle, for want of straw, are insufficient ly littered, and the manure consequently is very wet. The bulk of the solid manure, as well as the quantity of absorbing materials, might be considerably increased if coal ashes, dry saw dust, and dry refuse matters of every descrip tion, and even dry earth, were thrown upon the manure heap; and I feel convinced that, with a little care and management, the whole of the liquid excrements might gradually be absorbed and incorporated with the solid manure and litter. The third plan of disposing of liquid manure is most beneficially adopted on farms upon which much more straw is produced than can be sold or consumed in feeding-boxes. On many farms in the neighborhood of Cirencester it is impossi ble to convert in boxes the excess of straw into manure. There is not sufficient moisture to rot the straw. On our own farm we have so much straw in the manure that it would not ferment properly if it were not exposed in the manure-pit to the rain that falls, and if it were not besides moist ened with the sewage that flows from the Col lege into the liquid-manure tank. Where there is an excess of straw, no difficulty exists ot dis posing of liquid manure, since the straw is ca pable of taking up more liquid than is supplied in the urine of animals. For this reason, it is of no use to erect a roof over the manure-pit on farms where a large excess of straw is employ ed in the making of manure. On such farms I think no sensible man would contemplate for a moment the introduction of the system of liquid manuring. — THE PRINCIPLES OF STOCK-BREEDING. . It is a common, but silly question, “Which breed of animals is the best for the farmer ?” Some advocate short-horns, others advocate the long-horns, others the medium-horns, and others will have no horns at all. A particular kind is sometimes advocated under all circumstances to the exclusion of all others. Such persons re mind me of the disputants about the true color of the chamelion ; all are right, and all are wrong, depending upon the point from which the object is examined. That breed of animals is the most profitable which is better adapted to that particular locality. One class do better on upland, others on lowland; some do better grass ing, some do better housed. It also depends upon the demand of the neighboring markets. In some parts cheese-making pays best; in other parts milk; in other parts meat, kc. In some districts it pays better to breed draught | horses, in others hackneys and hunters, in I others race horses, in others ponies, kc. What i I wish to impress deeply on your minds is this : Every breed has its own peculiar conformation, and that conformation you will find, upon close investigation, to be peculiarly well adapted for a particular purpose ; and when you adopt and cultivate a certain breed, you must always keep that purpose and that conformation steadily in view. If you lose the conformation, you will soon lose the purpose. For instance, we may divide.cattle into two primary classes: 1. For fattening and arriving at early maturity ; 2. For dairy purposes. For illustration, take two cows, one from each class, and you will find that just in proportion as the animals represent the shape or class one, so they are disposed to fatten; and in the proportion they represent class two are they fit for dairy purposes.— These classes may again each be divided into dif ferent divisions ; Ais better adapted for high land ; Bis better adapted for low land; Cis better adapted for out-door living : D is better adapted for living in-doors, and so on. Each di vision has its own distinct' peculiarity of exter nal conformation. That enables us to say at once which will do there. It is all important that the breeder should be thoroughly acquaint ed with these “points,” or proper shape of his stock. ***** I now merely draw your attention to the fact, that there is a peculiar shape adapted to perform any particular work, and it is essential that the young man should make himself thoroughly ac quainted with these, before he can expect to become a successful breeder. Starting, then, upon the great law of nature, that like produces like, and being prepared against variations by breeding from animals of the same soft, Ac., breeding good stock becomes a simple matter of course. First, ascertain what animals your land is best adapted for. Secondly, what have the readiest sale in your markets. Thirdly, having decided upon the purpose of your animal, study the shape and conformation calculated to attain your object in the most perfect manner ; if you wish to breed fat stock, study the shape most disposed to lay on fat with the least food, and to arrive at early maturity ; if you wish to breed milch cows, study the proper shapes to perform their various duties. Fourthly, don’t breed them from an animal, whether male or fe male, whose shape is not well adapted to per form the work it is intended for; let them be of the most perfect shape you can get of their kind. Fifthly, being acquainted with the laws of atta vism, or breeding back, you will not l>e satisfied unless their ancestors were also of the same sort, and equally good ; in fact, {thoroughbred, and free from hereditary evils. Remem!>er, Ido not confine the term thoroughbred to the race horse. It may be equally well applied to the cart horse, or hunter, or pony, or carriage horse, Ac. It means those whose pedigree for a con siderable time back were of the same class, and adapted for the same purpose as themselves.— Unless you commence to establish a new breed, you should never breed from a half-bred animal. There is too much risk connected with it; it is based upon a wrong principle ; you should car ry the right principle out thoroughly. Though you may not have good distinct breeds of coach horses, hackneys, Ac., now, you may soon have, b/ following the directions I laydown. Unless breeders will reform, that useful animal the hack ney (or roadster,) will soon become extinct. The present system of breeding hunters and coach horses is a bad one ; because by putting a race horse to a half-bred mare you may get a good hunter, and you often fail; voh may get a hack, you may get a useless one. By putting a hunt ing horse to a Cleveland made, you may get a carriage horse, or you may get a good-for-nothing. You have no law to depend upon. By breeding exclusively from animals of the same shape, and, therefore, adapted for the same purpose, with careful attention to pedigree, you may easily establish a breed for any purpose whatever. At first, when originating the breed of hunters and carriage horses, of course we can not avoid using crossed or hall-bred animals, and such was the origin of the race horse. They will soon bear the name thorough ; and when, in after generations, a progeny will show' the origi nal cross, by breeding back, it must not on any account be used for breeding purposes. I should recommend you to breed from your own stock exclusively, only as long as you cannot find a better male than your own, and your stock im proves. I do not object to a cautious admixture of blood, but you must not cross the breed. I do not object to crossing two families, but those families must I*} of the same breed. The word “breed” is very comprehensive, and has many different meanings. By those of the same breed I wish to be understood those of the same shape and adapted to the same work, with good pedi gree. They may or may not be related. For example,you must not breed between a thorough bred draft-horse, and a thoroughbred hunter or racer. You would get a good-for-nothing mon grel, too weak for draught, too ugly for harness, and not the shape for the saddle; yet our fairs are over-stocked with such animals, which proves that the present system of breeding is n wrong one. I can countenance no crossing of the breeds. Keep them distinct. Have thor ough-bred draft-horses, thorough-bred hackneys, thorough-bred hunters, as well as thorough-bred racers. Each has its own peculiar shape, suita ble for its particular purpose. Why should they be mixed ?— London Mark Lane Express. ■■ - -♦*♦• THE SCIENCE OT BAD BUTTEB. We once took occasion to give our opinion of the butter which was largely brought to our mar ket. The article was deemed severe; but if they who think so had eaten of the butter, they would have tegarded that as the more pungent of the two. We have waited a year, and are now prepared more fully to testify agaiust that utter abomination, slanderously called butter, so unrighteously exchanged in our market for good money. For the most part, the cream is utterly depraved at the start, and churning, working and packing are only the successive steps of an evil education, by wdiich bad inclinations are devel oped into overt wickedness. We determined to keep an eye on the matter, and now r give, from life, the natural history of the butter sold. Before doing this, we will express an opinion of what is good butter. -Good butter, is made of sweet cream, with per fect neatness ; is of high color.‘perfectly sweet, free from buttermilk, and possesses a fine grass flavor. Tolerable butter differs from this in not hav ing a fine flavor. It is devoid of all unpleasant taste, but has not a high relish. Whatever is less than this, is bad butter ; the catalogue is long, and the descending scale is I marked with more variations than one may im agine. Variety 1. Buttermilk Butter. —This has not : been well worked, and has the taste of fresh buttermilk. It is not very disagreeable to such as love fresh buttermilk : but as it is a flavor not ! expected in good butter, it is usually disagreea ! ble. Variety 2. Strong Butter. —This is one step farther along, and the buttermilk is changing and beginning to predominate over the buttera ■ ceous flavor; yet it may be eaten with some pleasure if done rapidly, accompanied with very good bread. Variety 3. Frotoy or Frowsy Butter. —This is a second degree of strength attained by the but termilk. It has become pungent, and too disa- I greeable for any but absent-minded eaters. Variety 4. Rancid Butter. —This is the pu | trescent stage. No description will convey to those who have not tasted it an idea of its un earthly flavor; while those who have will hardly j thank us for stirring up such aw’fuf remem ; brances by any description. Variety 5. Bitter Buffer. —Bitterness is for i the most part incident to winter butter. When 1 one has but little cream, and is lon g in collecting enough for the chum, he will be very apt to have bitter butter. Variety 6. Musty Butter— In summer, espe cially in damp unventilated cellars, cream will gather mould; whenever this appears, the pigs should be set to chum it. But instead, if but just touched, it is quickly churned, or if much moulded, it is slightly skimmed, as if the flavor of mould which lias struck through the mass, could lie removed by taking off the colored por tion ! The peculiar taste arising from this af fection of the milk, blessed be the man that needs to be told of it! Variety 7. Sour Milk Butter. —This is made from milk which has been allowed to sour, the milk and cream being churned up together, the flavor is that of greasy, sour milk. Variety 8. Vinegar Butter. —There are some who imagine that all milk should be soured be fore it is fit to chum. When in cool weather it delays to change, they expedite the matter by some acid, usually vinegar. The butter strongly retains the flavor thereof. Variety 9. Cheesy Butkr. —Cream comes quicker by being heated. If sour cream is heated, it is very apt to separate and deposit a whey ; if this is strained into the chum with the cream, the butter will have a strong cheesy flavor. Variety 10. Granulated Butter. When, in winter, sweet cream is overheated preparatory to churning, it produces butter full of grains as if there were meal in it. Variety 11.—In this we will comprise the two kinds —too salt and unsalted butter. We have seen butter, exposed to sale, with such • masses of salt in it, that one is tempted to be lieve that it was put in as a make-weight. When salt is coarse, the operation of eating this butter affords those who have good teeth a pleasing variety of grinding. Variety 12. Ixird Butter. —When lard is cheap and abundant, and butter rather dear, it is thought profitable to combine the two. Variety 13. Mixed Butter. —When the shrewd housekeeper has several separate churn ings of butter on hand, some of which would hardly be able to go alone, she puts them to gether, and those who buy find out that “ union is strength." Such butter is pleasingly marbled: p ieces of white, of yellow’ and of dingy butter melting into each other until the w'hole is ring streaked and speckled. Variety 14. Compound Butter. —By compound butter, we mean that which has received con tributions from things animate and inanimate; feathers, hairs, rags of cloth, threads, sjiecks, , chips, straws, seeds ; in short, everything is, at one time or another, to be found in it, giving to produce the three successive degrees of dirty, filthy, nasty. Variety 15. Tough Butter. —When butter is worked too long after the expulsion of butter milk, it assumes a gluey, putty-like consistence, and is tough when eaten. But, oh! blessed fault! We would go ten miles to pay our ad miring respects to that much-to-be-praised dairy maid, whose zeal leads her to work her butter too much ! Wo doubt, however, if a pound of such butter was ever seen in this place. Besides all these, whose history we have cor rectly traced ; besides butter tasting of turpen tine from being made in pine churns ; butter bent upon traveling in hot weather ; butter dot ted, like cloves on a boiled ham, with flies, which Solomon assures us causetli the ointment to stink ; besides butter in rusty tin pans and in dirty swaddling clothes ; l esides butter made of milk drawn from a dirty cow, by a dirty hand, into a yet dirtier pail, and churned in a churn the dirtiest of all. besides all these, sub-varieties there are several others with which we have formed an acquaintance, but found -ourselves battled at analysis. We could not even guess cause of their peculiarities. Oh, Dr. Lie big ! how we have longed for your skill in ana lytical chemistry’. What consternation would we speedily send among the slatternly butter makers, revealing the mysteries of their dirty doing with more than mesmeric facility. And now, what on earth is the reason that good butter is so great a variety ? Is it a he- . reditary curse in some families, or is it a punish ment sent upon us for our own ill deserts? A few good butter makers in every neighborhood are a standing proof that it is nothing but bad housewifery, mere sheer carelessness, which turns the luxury of the chum into an utterly nauseating abomination. Select cows for quality’, and not for quantity of milk; give them sweet and sufficient pasturage; keep clean yourself; milk into a clean pail; strain into clean pans (pans scalded, scoured, and sunned, and if tin, with every particle of milk rubbed out of the seams.) While it is yet sweet,* churn it, if it delays to come, add a lit tle saleratus ; work it thoroughly, three times, salting it at the second working ; put it in a cool place and, then, with a conscience, as clean and sweet, as your butter, you have despatched your tempting rolls to market, sit down and thank God that you are an honest woman ! ♦Orange County or Goshen Batter is made with sour milk or cream always, (Editor.) CLOVER FIELDS FOR WHEAT. Oakland, May 18th, 1859. To the Editors of the American Farmer—Gen tlemen : I have been quite interested by several letters in your recent number of the Farmer, upon the subject of the preparation of clover fields for wheat. This is a very important sub ject to the farmer, for I consider the judicious use of clover and plaster one of the most relia ble and cheapest of all modes for the improve ment of land, as well as affording an excellent opportunity for a preparation for a crop of wheat. In the preparation of a clover fallow for wheat, two leading questions present themselves: First, the permanent and progressive improvement of , the land while raising a good crop. Secondly, the raising an extraordinary crop, regardless of the improvement of the soil while doing so. In regard to the first proposition,j,l would say, turn under as much clover as a three horse plough will cover, in July, if possible. Let the land remain in that condition until a short time pre vious to seeding, when the clover, I think, will be to a considerable extent decomposed.— Thorough harrowing and rolling will then give a good preparation Sor the seed. I will observe, that in adhering to the above plan as near as I could, previous to the introduction of guano. - and seeding Mediterranean wheat early in Sep tember, I. for a succession of crops, succeeded far better than I have since done with the use of guano and later seeding of what I will term fancy varieties of wheat generally upon an oat stubble. In regard to the second question, I am not prepared to say that upon highly improved land, if my only object was the obtaining what may be termed a brag crop of wheat, regardless of its effect upon the soil, I would not take a clean clover fallow. This, however, as a system, would evidently be a bad one, as it must have a strong tendency to lessen the future production of the field. Very respectfully, yours, Samuel Comeoys. 63