Connecticut western news., 1882-02-22
FARM AND GARDEN
FLOWS AND FLOWING.

At a recent meeting of the Essex (Mass.) Agricultural Society, Ansel w. Putnam introduced the subject of "Plows and Flowing" for discussion in an address on this important topic. The first question presented, according to the report of the Massachusetts PtoaDn1an, was: "Shall blowing be done with horses or with oxen?" Except on very large farms, MT. Putnam was of the opinion that the cattle are an extra expense which can be avoided. Other members believed that where oxen are fed judiciously they are less expensive than are horses and that farmers generally are making mistake ln banishing oxen from the farms.
 The second question, "Shall the farmer ride or walk?" elicited opinions concerning the merits of the sulky l blow. MT. Putnam took the ground that the sulky blow is more complicated, consumes some time, and offers harder work to the team than the common well-constructed chilled blow. Mem- bers who advocated the sulky blow claimed that it does good work on stony as well as clear ground, throwing out the stones; also that it is not possible for a man to hold blow so fast or firmly as the sulky blow.
 Whether the best blowing is done by using the swivel or the landslide blow for level land and on the hill side, con- stituted question number three. Mir. Putnam condemned the swivel plow as more complicated than the other, con- suming a larger time to do stated amount of work, with harder pulling for the team. He had no theory about the swivel blow on level land except to let it alone: The expressions that fol- lowed were generally in favor of the landslide blow.
 Whether to use short-handled blows with long beam or long handled blows with short beam was the next query that claimed attention. Mir. Putnam assumed that with the landslide long. handled plow point is gained in the advantage of leverage. The short beam leaves but little land unplowed, but it goes right down to its work. An ad- vantage is gained in turning, perhaps, with long-beam blow, but it is con- trary to the rules of correct blowing to ever lift the blow from the ground. The team itself should be turned. For his own use, he preferred the short beam chilled blow. His advice was : Get the team back as close as possible and regulate it by the depth of the blow in the soil. The lines, to give perfect control, should go around the waist of the plowman just above the hips, and not about his neck.
 In concluding his address, MT. Put nam described his method of blowing a field iu sections, in furrows four inches iu depth, turning each down flat, and then in the last furrows blowing to make shallow hollow, and extended with no ditch upon the dead furrow, but working 1t up by blowing at half the depth to a handsome finish. By this method the last furrow is as easily plowed as any in the field. He blows round the piece, finishing in the centre and always lengthwise with it, working to pulverize the soil. There is toe much hurry, as a rule, in jumping the blow into the furrow at the start and then taking it out at the end and turn. ing. This practice MT. Putnam con. demned. The team should be turned and the blow should not leave the ground. He indorsed the Oliver plow as an excellent one for all uses, and considered the Jointer great improve ment over any straight cutter, lessenine the draught of the blow and having g powerful lifting-cut. Cross- blowing was extra work that had better be done away with. The width of the furrow is important in the matter of pulverizing. A twelve-inch furrow, in MT. Putnam's opinion, gives more satisfactory pulver. ization than one of fourteen or fifteen inches in width.