Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1873-11-26
agricultural.
Two Crops at Once.

Strange as the statement may appear, we
have ~ eminent" agricultural authorities
who advise the growing OF two dissImilar
crops at once on the same ground. This
has often been attempted through Ignorance,
stupidity, or carelessness. but it was never
defended from the standpoint of IS big % farm =
ing" until within recent years. Certain
fruits-the black raspberry in particular
will do well in the shade OF trees when both
are cultivated, but until the recent theory OF
planting fruit trees in grass was promul gated
it was probably never claimed that one crop
benefited the other.
The soil of the pralrles may in some in
stances be too rich-tOo much like manure
heap-to grow healthy fruit trees. In such
a case, grass, or even grain, or anything
which will realize or absorb the excess of de-
composing vegetable matter, may be OF ben
eft. but it forms no rule for the treatment OF
orchards in the older states.
We always have volunteer crOp-weeds
but nobody has yet claimed that they are an
aid to tree culture. And yet why not as
well as grass? Their roots will penetrate
the soil quite deeply as grass, and will
pump up fertility from below just as well, il
there is any there; and If not, it don't make
much difference.
A young orchard in open ground, fire.
uuentlV stirred by the cultIvator or horse
hoe, Will suffer but litte-there is but one
set of roots to absorb the surface moisture
while the great stores OF it down below are
rendered up freely as long as no baked sur
face cuts the connection between the air
above and the moisture below. The farmer
who allows that to occur can reasonably ex-
pect disaster, and deserves it when be inten-
oh RI h.
wants to make the ruin little more certain
and complete, he can seed down his orchard.
With millions on millions of thirsty rootlets
draining the sol and the air of moisture at
such time, nothing more is needed to H.
sure it's certain though lingering death. An
old orchard-one already well established
and well lertiIized-may escape without APP
probable harm, but l would as soon burn
my stock when it comes from the nursery, a.
to plant young orchard in grass.
The case was well stated by successful
Pennsylvania borticulturist whom | met at
the American Pomolrgical Society in Phila-
delphla, in 1869. He had a splendid show
of pears, which | found by questioning were
grown in cul waited ground. To draw him
out on this topic of grass 10 orchards, | in
timated that he was disregarding high au-
thority in not seeding down, and inquired il
he did not think well of the plan. HIS an.
swer was in substance: No, indeed ht
wanted no grass in his orchard. And hi,
dislike of the grass theory was SO earnest
that he refused positively to subscribe foI
the paper edited by the father Of this theory
because that would be to encourage it, tC
some extent. Good fruit-growers had long
been trying to cure American farmers c the
slovenly habit of attempting to grow fruit
trees in grass, and were making some pro
gress; and yet here was man who, by hi
position, was accepted as more of al author
ity, and whose teaching tended directly tC
undo all their work. And that is the re
suit. Why should man be at the trOubl,
of practising eternal vigilance to fight off thu
vegetable robbers OF his orchard if grass is
benefit? Does the grass bring them moist
ure or fertility? OF course not; on the con
trary it absor5s both.
The great, pressing, absorbing need o
farming is higher culture, greater thorough
ness, more thought. This grass and two
crop theory is an advance backward, not for
ward. High farming is what We want
system which appeals to energy and all tn
farmers best faculties. This grass theor
is little more than a return to an old, waste
tul, slOvenly system-a reproach TO farming
instead OF a credit.-Liue S ock Journal.