Cooper's Clarksburg register. [volume] (Clarksburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1851-1861, 1857-11-13
gQyitrNurul nm Rumeatit.
s''' F'rom the American Farmer.
ygy SURFACE MANUR!NG, &c.

1.-The signature OF IA Virginia Farmer" Is
certainty lar more creditAbIe to yourself
than It's sentiments are 10 the author
{ us Virginia farm r1hopeto see no such
Particle bearing that tito again. II y dill
tioult to understand how any one could;
super-induce upon himself such degree
Of mental stasna,iOn~ dc is, eYinced by the
writer of the aiticlr in question. He. it
seems, thinks With Dr. baldwin that led
.sucatiOn, learning, OF seience,""- do not en-.
Ter into the elements Of success in the vo.
cation of the Farmer: aud without ra
gservG. avows his disbelief id any ''phrtic.
kuIAr benefit resulting from! "grlcul tural
chemistry. the, agricultural che mist. or
agricultural science whatever" Are not
such views, Mr.. Editor. almost sufficient
to.nauseste'the soul of an i"qulsltor gen.
ersI &ta ,F ~
But this devotce Of "shade alone"
pursucs further lis outrageous course o.
remark, aud cuo!ly informs US that 'some |
of the best minds have labUred IN ratn,
the constant silenclng oi their theories
ayeevinced.'' In regard TO the dis |
couraseing results of he labor OF "some |
Of the best mids." viii take the hbrry
ofcalIing his attention to Prof. LIebis' 8
review of MIR. Lawes' work designed 'ol
rafute the vie rvs set forth in the works II
L@ibis ON agricultural chemistry. Mr..
Lawes i'll this work presents series OF
experiments (tnnde in England) which
he vaiuI y i,nas rned thoroughly sub'erted
Lelbig's mineral theory - but much to
his modification, no doubt, Lebig. in his
review, shows conciu>ively. that this Sc
ries o experiments served only 10 estab
llsh She tru.h nj his views impregnably.
y tI,,1Nt III O1NtSS
ent,Gc ''emahe alone" advocates do moi
inform themselves little better what
eEiencs does teach in relation TO the sub
iect OF agriculture. before they attempt
TO lay down limits TO us application
They have also been disposed to scott thr
'minerel theory of Liebig when they do
not so much as krow what it really is.
So long MS the mineral Kingdom is the ba
sis OF the vegetable kingdom. just so ,ns
will LiebiE's mineral theory endure and
defy the tests Of any ordeal his galnsayrr
may invent. When his obleclorz can show
that wheat can DO produced on land
which docs nut contain the mineral con-
stitnents Of the blood Of animals which
are IdentcAlly those Of its own consiItu-
ton then they will have the credit OF
producing the first and only shock that
theory has ever yet received and it will
then devolve upon the endorser OF that
theory to clear up the difficulty. or aban'
don tue theory. 40 uusound and untenaole.
As respects the "practical benefits accru-
ing from g,icultur"l chemistry, the a9rl~
cultural che mist or agricultural science"
to the farmer, let tho certificates OF the
manufacturers Of fertilizers determine.
It is, conceive. OF some practical use to
know the different results We may expect
from an application OF bones treated with
dilute sulphurc acid and bones not SO
treated. l. is Of some use 10 the wheat
grower or farmer. we think too. to know
why Colombian GuHpo would be pretera
BILE to ground bones. and to be made &C.
quainted with the difference OF their
chemical constituents. II would be OF
use to know why some lands produce far
more, when a certain fertilizer IL applet:
than when smother, differing in it's ele-
ments of fertilization is used. For exam
pie, why lands which have been cultiva
ted with tobacco, would show heavier re
suits from an application Of Colombian
Gusno than from al az ptlcation Of Peru
Wan Guano. Ailthese secrets the farm.
er may arrive at through the instrumen-
tally of the "agricul ural chemist, agri
cultural cemistry or agricultural science
astaught, not only by the ''shade alUue'
advocates las they eSchew all science
but as taught by that great master in sci
entifc agriculture. Lleb'g. One wore
now in regard To DR.. Baldwin's theory o
"shade alone" lis advocates state tha
we have,only to place boards or straw
upon land and the shade thus produced
will have all tha effect that stable manure
would. Why not then. | ask, do moi
those spots exhibit such results where
shocks OF corn fodder have been permit
ed TO remain and go to decay. Thos.
spots show from the rank growth Of weeds
that an effect has been prVductd d. but this
effect is merely OF a transitory nature d
year or two after Especially ii the land
has been in the mean time cultivated.
you will not be able to point out where
those spots are, or If they can be seen.
the improvement Is nothing like what
would lave resulted from an application
othorse stable mAnure-so too with the
spot covered with boards. the improve.
naeut is altogether Of temporary char
acter. since there is rot in this case, any
elect resulting from the decomposition OF
vegetable matter. therefore. these spots
after being exposed tu the heat and light
Of the sun and the moisture, &c, are
driven eff. We find that there has been
no real permanent Improvement at all.
say after the lapse of year. The earth
was not made out Of nothing as some
books teach: neither is poor land made
rich out Of " shade alone" AS to Dr.
Baldwin's claiming the credit OF the dis
covery of enrichIng land by the applica>
ton OF straw end manures 10 the surface