SECTION II.
Reading edition
THE GRAIN CROPS, EDIBLE ROOTS, AND FARINACEOUS PLANTS FORMING THE BREAD STUFFS OF COMMERCE.
The vegetable substances, from which man derives his principal sustenance, such as the nutritious cereal grains, the tuberous rooted plants and the trees yielding farina, are very widely diffused, and necessarily occupy the main attention of the cultivator; their products forming the most important staples of domestic and foreign commerce. The cereal grasses and roots, cultivated in temperate regions, such as wheat, barley, oats, rye, and the potato, are so well known, and have been so fully described by agricultural writers that I shall not go much into details as to their varieties, culture, &c., but confine myself chiefly to their distribution, produce, statistics, and commercial importance. The food plants may be most conveniently arranged under three heads. Firstly—the Grain crops and legumes, which comprises the European cultivated grasses, wheat, barley, oats, &c.; and the tropical ones of rice, maize, millet, Guinea corn, &c. Secondly—Palms and other trees yielding farina, including the sago palms, plantain and banana, and the bread fruit tree. And Thirdly—the edible Root crops and Starch producing plants, which are a somewhat extensive class, the chief of which, however, are the common potato, yams, cocos or eddoes, sweet potatoes, the bitter and sweet cassava or manioc, the arrowroot and other plants yielding starch in more or less purity.
There is a great diversity of food, from the humble oak bark bread of the Norwegian peasant, or the Brahmin, whose appetite is satisfied with vegetables, to the luxurious diet of a Hungarian Magnate at Vienna.
The bread stuffs, as they are popularly termed, particularly wheat and wheat flour, maize, and rice, form very important articles of commerce, and enter largely into cultivation in various countries for home consumption and export. Russia, India, and the United States, carry on a very considerable trade in grain with other countries. Our local production being insufficient for food and manufactures, we import yearly immense quantities of grain and flour. In the four years ending 1852, the annual quantity of corn, of various, kinds, imported into the United Kingdom, exclusive of flour and meal, rice, sago, &c., averaged 8,085,903 quarters.
The flour and meal imported, omitting sago, arrowroot and other starches, averaged in the same period 4,143,603 cwts. annually.
The annual imports of breadstuffs for food, taking the average of the four years ending with 1852, may be thus summed up—
Tons.
Corn and grain, 8,085,903 quarters, at 60 lb. the bushel173,270
Flour and meal207,180
Rice40,817
Potatoes42,440
Sago, arrowroot, &c.5,000
Total 468,707
Some portion of this quantity is doubtless consumed in the arts—as starch for stiffening linens, &c., and for other purposes not coming under the term of food, but I have purposely left out in the calculation about 30,000 to 40,000 quarters of rice in the husk annually imported.
Ireland took, in 1849, of foreign grain 2,115,129 quarters; 1,683,687 quarters in 1850; and 2,504,229 in 1851; as well as 256,837 cwts. of various kinds of meal and flour in 1849; 220,107 cwts. in 1850; and 341,680 cwts. in 1851. England also supplied her with about 500,000 quarters of grain and 350,000 cwts. of meal in each of those years.
The comparative returns of the importations of grain into the United Kingdom for the last four years, are as follows, in quarters:—
1852.1851.1850.1849.
Wheat3,068,8923,812,0093,738,9953,845,378
Barley656,737829,5641,035,9031,381,008
Oats995,4801,198,5291,154,4731,267,106
Rye10,02324,60998,836240,566
Beans371,250318,502443,306457,933
Peas107,01799,399181,419234,366
Maize1,479,8911,807,6361,277,0712,224,459
Other sorts8,0853,4328681,150
Quarters6,667,3758,124,2807,930,8719,651,966
The meal and flour imported in the same years, in cwts., were as follows:—
1852.1851.1850.1849.
Wheat3,889,5835,314,4143,819,4403,349,839
Barley21234108224
Oats5212,5255,99940,230
Rye926,49396418,468
Indian corn7429,56111,334101,683
Other sorts543431631,396
Cwts.3,891,1955,323,3703,838,0083,511,840
Before the famine in Ireland the imports seldom reached 20 millions of bushels of grain and meal of all kinds. In 1848 our imports were about 60 millions; in 1849, 85 millions; in 1850, 68 millions; in 1851, 75½ millions; in 1852, 69 millions, with good wheat harvests; showing the great shock received and the slowness of recovery.
With a rapidly increasing population in all parts of the civilized world, the production of bread is obviously the first object to be sought after, alike by the statesman and the peasant. I scarcely dare give the calculation of the immense amount which would be realised in any great country, by the single saving of a bushel to an acre, in the quantity of seed ordinarily sown. The same result would follow if an additional bushel could be produced in the annual average yield of the wheat crop.
According to Mr. H. Colman, the annual amount of seed for wheat sown in France is estimated at 32,491,978 bushels. If we could suppose a third of this saved, the saving would amount to 10,863,959 bushels per year. Suppose an annual increase of the crops of five bushels per acre, this would give an increase of production of 54,319,795 bushels. Add this, under improved cultivation, to the amount of seed saved, and the result would be 65,183,754 bushels—I believe under an improved agriculture this is quite practicable.
An eminent agricultural writer placed the average yield in England at eighteen bushels per acre; some years since a man of sanguine temperament rated it at over thirty bushels. In France it is stated, in the best districts, to average twenty-two bushels. These evidently are wholly conjectural estimates. In England Mr. Colman states that fifty bushels per acre were reported to him on the best authority, as the yield upon a large farm in a very favorable season. More than eighty bushels have been returned, upon what is deemed ample testimony, to the Royal Agricultural Society of England, as the product of a single acre. In France Mr. Colman had, upon credible authority, reports of forty, forty-four and seventy-two bushels. It would be of immense importance to any government to know the exact produce grown in any county, or district, or in the whole country; and this might be obtained by compelling, on the part of the owner or cultivator, an actual return of his crop; but it is of little use to found such returns on estimates purely conjectural.
From the best statistical accounts that can be obtained, the wheat annually produced in the United Kingdom.
England, Scotland, Ireland is111,681,320 bushels.
In France it is198,660,000 bushels.
United States100,503,899 bushels.
The amount of seed ordinarily sown to the acre in France is from two to three bushels. The return of crop for the seed sown is represented as in the best districts averaging 6.25 for one; in the least productive 5.40 for one. My readers may be curious to know the calculations which have been made in some other countries in regard to this matter.
CENTRAL EUROPE
Countries.Year.Increase for seed sown.
Spain18286 for one
Portugal178610 for one
Tuscany10 for one
Plains of Lucca15 for one
Piedmont—Plains of Marengo4 to five for one
Bologna15 for one
Roman States—Pontine marshes20 for one
Ordinary lands8 for one
Kingdom of Naples—best districts20 for one
Ordinary lands8 for one
Malta—the best lands38 to 64 for one
Ordinary lands22, 25, 30 for one
NORTHERN EUROPE.
Sweden and Norway18384.50 for one
Denmark18276 for one
Russia, a good harvest18195 for one
---- province of Tambof18214.50 for one
---- provinces north of 50 deg. latitude18213 for one
Poland18268 for one
England18309 for one
Scotland18308 for one
Ireland182510 for one
Holland18287.50 for one
Belgium182811 for one
Bavaria18277 to 8 for one
Prussia18176 for one
Austria18127.05 for one
Hungary18124 for one
Switzerland, lands of an inferior quality18253 for one
Of a good quality, 8; of the best quality12 for one
France, inferior lands, 3; best lands6 for one
(Statistique des Cereales de la France par Moreau de Jonnes.)
STATISTICS OF WHEAT CULTURE.
As wheat forms the principal nutritious food of the world, claiming the industrious application of labor over the greater part of Europe, throughout the temperate regions of Asia, along the northern kingdoms of Africa, and extending far into the northern and southern regions of the American continents; as it has been cultivated from time immemorial, and has produced in various climates and soils many varieties; it is surprising that so little is generally known of the distinct varieties best adapted to particular climates—and that in Great Britain and the United States we have yet to learn the variety which will yield the largest and best amount of human food!
At the Industrial Exhibition in 1851, twenty-six premiums only were distributed for specimens of wheat; of these, five were awarded to British farmers, three to France, three to Russia, three to Australia, three to the United States, and one each or severally to other nations. Some beautiful specimens of wheat were exhibited from South Australia, weighing seventy pounds a bushel; which were eagerly sought after for seed wheat by our farmers and the colonists of Canada and the United States. But as is well observed by Professor Lindley, it has no peculiar constitutional characteristics by which it may be distinguished from other wheats. Its superior quality is entirely owing to local conditions; to the peculiar temperature, the brilliant light, the soil, and those other circumstances which characterise the climate of South Australia.
All kinds of wheat contain water in greater or lesser quantities. Its amount is greater in cold countries than in warm. In Alsace from 16 to 20 per cent.; England from 14 to 17 per cent.; United States from 12 to 14 per cent.; Africa and Sicily from 9 to 11 per cent. This accounts for the fact, that the same weight of southern flour yields more bread than northern, English wheat yields 13 lbs. more to the quarter than Scotch. Alabama flour, it is said, yields 20 per cent. more than that of Cincinnati. And in general American flour, according to one of the most extensive London bakers, absorbs 8 or 10 per cent. more of its own weight of water in being made into bread than the English. The English grain is fuller and rounder than the American, being puffed up with moisture.
Every year the total loss in the United States from moisture in wheat and flour is estimated at four to five million dollars. To remedy this great evil, the grain should be well ripened before harvesting, and well dried before being stored in a good dry granary. Afterwards, in grinding and in transporting, it should be carefully protected from wet, and the flour be kept from exposure to the atmosphere. The best precaution is kiln-drying. By this process the wheat and flour are passed over iron plates heated by steam to the boiling point. From each barrel of flour 16 or 17 pounds of water are thus expelled, leaving still four or five per cent. in the flour, an amount too small to do injury. If all the water be expelled, the quality of the flour is deteriorated.
The mode of ascertaining the amount of water in flour is this; take a small sample, say five ounces, and weigh it carefully; put it into a dry vessel, which should be heated by boiling water; after six or seven hours, weigh it; its loss of weight shows the original amount of water.
The next object is to ascertain the amount of gluten. Gluten is an adhesive, pasty mass, and consists of several different principles, though its constitution has not yet been satisfactorily determined. It is chiefly the nutritious portion of the flour. The remaining principles are mostly starch, sugar and gum. On an average their relative amount in 100 parts are about as follows:—
Average.Kobanga wheat, the best.
Water1312
Gluten1216
Starch6760
Sugar and Gum88
10097
Professor Beck examined thirty-three different samples from various parts of the United States and Europe, and he gives the preference to the Kobanga variety from the south of Russia. There would probably be a prejudice against it in this country, from the natural yellowish hue of its flour and bread.
The value of the vegetable food, grain, potatoes, rice and apples exported from the United States within the past few years is thus set down:—
Dollars.
184757,970,356
184825,185,647
184925,642,362
185015,822,273
To this has to be added nine or ten million dollars more for tobacco, 72 million dollars for cotton, and 180,000 dollars for hops and other minor agricultural staples—making the value of the raw vegetable exports about 98 million dollars. There is further the value of the products of the forest, timber, ashes and bark, tar, &c., which are equal to nearly seven millions more, as shown by the following figures:—
Dollars.
18475,248,928
18486,415,297
18495,261,766
18506,590,037
It appears from an official document of the American Treasury Department, that the average value of the breadstuffs and provisions annually exported from the United States from 1821 to 1836 inclusive, was 12,792,000 dolls.; in 1837 and 1838, about 9,600,000 dolls.; from 1839 to 1846, 16,176,000 dolls.; and for the last seven years as follows:—
Dollars.
184627,701,121
184768,701,921
184837,472,751
184938,155,507
185026,051,373
185121,948,651
185225,857,027
Out of the wheat crop in the United States in 1846 of 110 million bushels raised, 10 millions were used for seed, starch, &c.; 72 consumed for food, and 28 million exported. The 460 million bushels of Indian corn raised, were thus disposed of; exported to foreign countries 22 million bushels; sold to and consumed by non-producers, 100 million; consumed on the farms and plantations of the producers for human and animal food, seed, &c., 338 million bushels.
The United States now produce about 120 million bushels of wheat, and nearly 600 million bushels of corn. Their surplus of wheat, for export, may be taken at 20 million bushels, and of Indian corn an almost unlimited quantity. They export about one and a quarter million barrels of flour, and about one million of bushels of wheat to other markets besides those of Great Britain or her North American colonies, viz., to Europe, Asia, Africa, the West Indies and South America, California and Australia, manufactured flour being the article required for these latter markets. Nearly four million bushels of Indian corn, and 300,000 barrels of corn meal, are exported from the United States to the West Indies and other foreign markets.
From the abstracts of statistical returns prepared at the American Census office, it appears that Pennsylvania, in 1850, was the largest wheat producing State of the Union. I have had the curiosity to compare the most prominent States in respect to this crop, and give them below, with the crop of each, as shown by the returns:—
Bushels.
Pennsylvania15,482,191
Ohio14,967,056
Virginia14,516,900
New York13,073,000
Michigan4,918,000
Maryland4,494,680
That the United States could export 6,000,000 bushels of wheat, and its equivalent in flour in 1845; 13,000,000 in 1846, 26,000,000 in 1847, and then fell back to 13,000,000 in 1848, and 6,000,000 in 1849, with their production of wheat constantly increasing throughout this period, shows a wonderful elasticity, and extensive home market. If the price of wheat is higher in proportion than for corn, the Americans export the former and consume the latter; if the demand for corn be also great, they kill their hogs and export corn, for the pork will keep. If there be no great demand for either, they eat their surplus wheat, feed their hogs with the corn, and export pork as having the greatest value in the least bulk.
DESTINATION OF FLOUR SHIPPED FROM THE UNITED STATES.
WHERE TO.1847184918501851
Swedish West Indies7,3667,5738,7575,315
Danish ditto52,15049,56844,80260,102
Dutch East Indies1,1504,6251,6001,873
Dutch West Indies11,38717,22118,35419,217
Holland and Belgium73,8717271,177594
England2,475,076953,815369,7771,004,783
Gibraltar23,9746,2652,543195
British East Indies3,0347911,6461,600
British West Indies320,363303,551250,776294,731
British American Colonies272,299294,891244,072252,380
France612,641———
French West Indies28,9665,5545,4807,902
Hayti40,25710,90331,50443,867
Cuba50,0467,1545,5845,611
Spanish West Indies17,7806,4297,0742,285
Madeira4,8564,3586,3217,006
Cape de Verds1,634501455838
Mexico5,92811,6339,73614,964
Honduras10,6864,1254,7255,912
Central America5504,1807462,573
Columbia39,40332,25141,07247,477
Brazil270,473328,129295,415374,711
Argentine Republic10,6846,5994,90122,612
Chili5,9775,1292,8484,327
South America2,128—40200
West Indies4,9023,9841,7024,079
Africa25,7284,6175,5245,430
North-west Coast7641,1808582,593
Other ports29,86635,01718,94919,158
Total—Barrels4,382,4962,108,0131,385,4482,202,335
Average price5.955.355.004.77
Wheat, where the soil and the climate are adapted to its growth, and the requisite progress has been made in its culture, is decidedly preferred to all other grains, and, next to maize, is the most important crop in the United States, not only on account of its general use for bread, but for its safety and convenience for exportation. It is not known to what country it is indigenous, any more than any other cultivated cereals, all of which, no doubt, have been essentially improved by man. By some, wheat is considered to have been coeval with the creation, as it is known that upwards of a thousand years before our era it was cultivated, and a superior variety had been attained. It has steadily followed the progress of civilisation from the earliest times, in all countries where it would grow. In 1776 there was entailed upon America an enduring calamity, in consequence of the introduction of the Hessian or wheat fly, which was supposed to have been brought from Germany in some straw, employed in the debarkation of Howe's troops on the west end of Long Island. From that point the insect gradually spread in various directions, at the rate of twenty or thirty miles a year, and the wheat of the entire regions east of the Alleghanies is now more or less infested with the larva, as well as in large portions of the States bordering on the Ohio and Mississippi, and on the great Lakes; and so great have been the ravages of these insects that the cultivation of this grain has in many places been abandoned.
The geographical range of the wheat region in the Eastern Continent and Australia, lies principally between the 30th and 60th parallels of north latitude, and the 30th and 40th degrees south, being chiefly confined to France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Sicily, Greece, Turkey, Russia, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Prussia, Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain, Ireland, Northern and Southern Africa, Tartary, India, China, Australia, Van Diemen's Land, and Japan. Along the Atlantic portions of the Western Continent, it embraces the tract lying between the 30th and 50th parallels, and in the country westward of the Rocky Mountains, one or two more degrees further north. Along the west coast of South America, as well as in situations within the torrid zone, sufficiently elevated above the level of the sea, and properly irrigated by natural or artificial means, abundant crops are often produced.
The principal districts of the United States in which this important grain is produced in the greatest abundance, and where it forms a leading article of commerce, embrace the States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Iowa. The chief varieties cultivated in the Northern and Eastern States are the white flint, tea, Siberian, bald, Black Sea, and the Italian spring wheat. In the middle and Western States, the Mediterranean, the Virginia white May, the blue stem, the Indiana, the Kentucky white bearded, the old red chafet, and the Talavera. The yield varies from ten to forty bushels and upwards per acre, weighing, per bushel, from fifty-eight to sixty-seven pounds.
It appears that on the whole crop of the United States there was a gain during the ten years ending 1850, of 15,645,373 bushels. The crop of New England decreased from 2,014,000 to 1,078,000 bushels, exhibiting a decline of 936,000 bushels, and indicating the attention of farmers has been much withdrawn from the culture of wheat. Grouping the States from the Hudson to the Potomac, including the district of Columbia, it appears that they produced, in 1849, 35,085,000 bushels, against 29,936,000 in 1839. In Virginia there was an increase of 1,123,000 bushels. These States embrace the oldest wheat-growing region of the country, and that in which the soil and climate seem to be adapted to promote the permanent culture of the grain. The increase of production in the ten years has been 6,272,000 bushels, equal to 15.6 per cent. The area tilled in these States is 36,000,000 acres, only thirty per cent. of the whole amount returned, while the proportion of wheat produced is forty-six per cent. In North Carolina there has been an increase of 170,000 bushels, but in the Southern States generally there was a considerable decrease. Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin contributed to the general aggregate under the sixth census only 9,800,000 bushels; under the last they are shown to have produced upwards of 25,000,000 bushels, an amount equal to the whole increase in the United States for the period.
When we see the growth of wheat keeping pace with the progress of population in the oldest States of the Union, we need have no apprehension of a decline in the cultivation of this important crop.
The amount of flour exported from New Jersey in 1751, was 6,424 barrels. From Philadelphia in 1752,125,960 barrels, besides 85,500 bushels of wheat; in 1767, 198,816 barrels, besides 367,500 bushels of wheat; in 1771, 252,744 barrels. From Savannah, in 1771, 7,200 lbs. From Virginia, for some years annually preceding the revolution, 800,000 bushels of wheat. The total exports of flour from the United States in 1791 were 619,681 barrels, besides 1,018,339 bushels of wheat; in 1800, 653,052 barrels, besides 26,853 bushels of wheat; in 1810, 798,431 barrels, besides 325,924 bushels of wheat; in 1820-21, 1,056,119 barrels, besides 25,821 bushels of wheat; in 1830-31, 1,806,529 barrels, besides 408,910 bushels of wheat; in 1840-41, 1,515,817 barrels, besides 868,585 bushels of wheat; in 1845-46, 2,289,476 barrels, besides 1,613,795 bushels of wheat; in 1846-47, 4,382,496 barrels, besides 4,399,951 bushels of wheat; in 1850-51, 2,202,335 barrels, besides 1,026,725 bushels of wheat.
In the London Exhibition very little wheat was exhibited equal to that from the United States, especially that from Genessee county, in the State of New York—a soft white variety, to the exhibitor of which a prize medal was awarded by the Royal Commissioners. The red Mediterranean wheat exhibited from the United States attracted much attention. The wheat from South Australia was probably superior to any exhibited, while much from the United States fell but little behind, and was unquestionably next in quality.
From the Second Report on the Breadstuffs of the United States, made to the Commissioner of Patents, by Lewis C. Beck, M.D., I am induced to make some extracts. He states:—
The analyses of several samples, the growth of various foreign countries, have afforded me an opportunity of comparing the American and foreign wheats and flours. With a few exceptions of peculiar varieties, it will be seen from the results that with ordinary care the wheat of this country will compare advantageously with that of any other. Indeed, on reviewing my analyses, I question whether there is any part of the world where this grain is generally of a finer quality than it is in the United States. But all the advantages which we possess in this respect will be of little avail so long as inferior and damaged breadstuffs are shipped from our ports.
In addition to the analyses which I have executed of the various samples of wheat and wheat flour according to the mode heretofore pursued, I have performed a series of experiments for the purpose of settling the important question in regard to the relative value of the fine flour of wheat, and the "whole meal." I have also consulted every work within my reach which could throw any light upon the different points that have presented themselves during the progress of the investigation.
The large number of samples of wheat and wheat flour which have been placed in my hands for examination, have left me no time for the analysis of our other breadstuffs.
It cannot be denied that the amount shipped to foreign ports during 1849 is considerably less than for the two preceding years. In the meantime, however, a new and important market has been opened in our territories on the Pacific. It may also be safely affirmed that the causes for foreign demand, and which must hereafter operate, still remain. These are the cheapness of land in this country, and the peculiar adaptation of our soil and climate to the growth of the two important cereals, wheat and maize.
Another fact, it seems to me, is of sufficient interest in connection with this subject, to be here noticed. The failure of the potato crop in various parts of the world for several years past has engaged the attention of scientific and practical men. Unfortunately, the nature of the blight which has seized upon this tuber has eluded the most careful inquiries; but it has been shown by well-conducted analyses that potatoes at their late prices are the most expensive kind of farinaceous food. This will be evident from the following statement:—
"Potatoes contain from about seventy to seventy-nine per cent. of water, while the proportion in wheat flour is from twelve to fourteen per cent; and while the gluten and albumen in potatoes scarcely rise to one per cent., in wheat flour the range may be set down at from nine to thirteen per cent. Again, the non-nitrogenous principles are as about seventy-five per cent. in wheat flour against fifteen or sixteen in potatoes. In short, whilst potatoes supply only twenty per cent. of heat-forming and nutritious principles, taken together, wheat supplies more than seventy per cent. of the former, and more than tea of the latter. The value of wheat to potatoes, therefore, is at least four to one; or, if wheat sells at fifteen shillings sterling per cwt., potatoes to be equally cheap, ought to sell at between three and four shillings."
The preceding results, for which I am principally indebted to Dr. Daubeny, Professor of Chemistry at Oxford,[25] show that unless a great change occurs in the culture of the potato, there must be an increased demand for other kinds of farinaceous food. And it is worthy of notice that while this blight is one of the causes which bring to our shores the starving population of Europe, the raising of the cereals not only furnishes profitable employment to the emigrant, but enables him to make the best return to those who are still obliged to remain.
Adaptation of the soil and climate of the United States to the culture of the cereals.—That the soil and climate of many portions of the United States are well adapted to the cultivation of the more important cereals, is fully shown by the results of all the researches which have thus far been prosecuted. I have indeed seen it asserted that the climate of England is the best for the cultivation of wheat, and preferable to any in our country; its humidity being the peculiarity to which this superiority is ascribed.[26] But this is undoubtedly the testimony of a too partial witness. A recent statement by an English author is the result of a more correct knowledge of the facts. He acknowledges that there is no ground for the expectation which has been entertained concerning the advantageous growth of maize in England. "Nor is ours," says he, "the most favorable country for wheat, but skill in husbandry has overcome great difficulties."[27] The mistake on this subject may have originated from the occurrence of a larger and plumper grain in the more humid climate; but analysis shows that the small grain raised in the hotter and drier air oftentimes greatly surpasses the former in its nutritious value.
Russia is said to be the great rival of this country in the growth of wheat, but I think it doubtful whether she possesses superior natural advantages; and I am sure she will find it difficult to compete with the industry and skill which here characterize the operations of husbandry, and the manufacture and shipment of breadstuffs.
Export of sophisticated and damaged flour.—It is a matter of deep regret that circumstances have occurred which must have a most injurious influence upon the trade in breadstuffs between this country and Great Britain. I refer to the mixtures of damaged, inferior, and good kinds of flour, which it appears on authentic testimony have been largely exported during the past year. Whether this fraudulent operation, which is said to have been principally confined to New York, is the result of the change in the inspection laws, as some assert, I am unable to say. But it requires no great foresight to predict that, if continued, it will create a distrust of our breadstuffs in foreign ports which it will be very difficult to remove. It cannot but excite the indignation of the many honorable dealers, that the unworthy cupidity of a few individuals should lead to such disastrous consequences.
I have as yet been unable to obtain samples of these sophisticated flours, and the only information which I have in regard to them is the general fact above stated, and concerning the truth of which there can be little doubt. No means should be left untried to devise some mode by which these frauds can be easily and certainly detected.
Injury sustained by breadstuffs during their transport and shipment.—During the past year, I have had abundant means of determining the nature of the injuries which are often sustained by our breadstuffs in their transport from the particular districts in which they are grown and manufactured to our commercial depots, and in their shipment to foreign ports. As this is one of the most important points connected with these researches, I have devoted much time to its investigation. From the results of numerous analyses, I think it may be safely asserted, that of the wheat flour which arrives in England from various ports of the United States, a large proportion is more or less injured during the voyage. The same remark may be made in regard to many of the samples sent from the Western States to the city of New York. Their nutritive value is considerably impaired, and without more care than is usually exercised, they are entirely unfit for export.
In my former report, I adverted to one of the great causes of the deterioration which our breadstuffs often suffer during their transport and shipment. This was the undue proportion of the great disorganizing substance, water, under the influence of what usually occurs, viz., an elevation of temperature above the ordinary standard. My recent investigations have served only to strengthen these views. There is no doubt that these are the conditions which cause the change of the non-nitrogenous principles into acids (the lactic or acetic), while a portion of the gluten is thus also consumed.
I have tried a series of experiments in reference to the action of moisture upon various samples of wheat and wheat flour. The samples were placed for twelve hours in the oven of a bath with a double casing, containing a boiling saturated solution of common salt, the temperature of which was about 220 deg. Fahr. Subjected to this test,
100 grains of Milwaukie wheat lost12.10 grains.
100 grains of Guilderland (Holland) wheat lost9.35 grains.
100 grains of Polish Odessa red wheat lost10.55 grains.
100 grains of Soft Russian wheat lost8.55 grains.
100 grains of Kobanga wheat lost8.15 grains.
After an exposure of the dried samples to the air for two or three days, they increased in weight from one to three grains in the hundred originally employed.
Nineteen different samples of wheat flour, which lost by exposure to the above heat from ten to fourteen grains in the one hundred, when similarly exposed to the air for eighteen hours, again increased in weight from 8.40 to 11.60 in the hundred grains originally employed.
These experiments show, what might indeed have been predicted as to the general result, that wheat in grain, if not less liable to injury than flour, yet if once properly dried, suffers much less from a subsequent exposure to air and moisture.
It is now ascertained that in presence of a considerable proportion of water, wheat flour under the influence of heat undergoes a low degree at least of lactic fermentation, which will account for the souring of the ordinary samples when exposed to warm or humid climates. The same result will inevitably follow from their careless exposure in the holds of vessels. That this is particularly the case with many of the cargoes of wheat flour shipped to Great Britain, there is little reason to doubt. This may be partly owing to the great humidity of the English climate, as the deterioration is observed as well in the flour which is the produce of that country as in that which is received from abroad.
It is stated by Mr. Edlin, quoted in an article on Baking, in the Encyclopædia Britannica, that, "as a general rule, the London flour" is decidedly bad. The gluten generally wants the adhesiveness which characterizes the gluten of good wheat."
I have observed that, in the analyses of some of the samples of damaged flour, the proportions of what is set down under the head of glucose and dextrine are unusually large. This is perhaps due to the change produced in the starch by the action of diastase, and which may under certain circumstances be formed in wheat flour. It would seem, according to M. Guérin, that starch may thus be acted on even at slightly elevated temperatures. In one of his experiments, at a temperature no higher than 68 deg. Fahr., a quantity of starch, at the end of twenty-four hours, was converted into syrup, which yielded seventy-seven per cent. of saccharine matter.[28] It may be thought that I have overrated the importance of this subject, but it is believed that a careful examination of the facts will relieve me from this charge. I am now satisfied that, if the proportion of water in our exported breadstuffs could be reduced to about five or six per cent., one of the great causes of complaint in regard to them would be completely removed.
Kiln-drying of breadstuffs, and exclusion of air.—The injury which our breadstuffs sustain by the large proportion of water can of course be prevented only by careful drying before shipment, and by the employment of barrels rendered as impervious as possible to the influence of atmospheric moisture.
In my first report, I have spoken favorably of the process of drying by steam, according to the plan patented by Mr. J.R. Stafford. I still think this mode possesses great advantages over those previously followed, and which almost always injured the quality of the grain or flour: but from some trials which I have made during the past year, it is inferred that the exposure to the heat is perhaps usually not sufficiently prolonged to answer the purpose intended by the operation. I have often observed that samples of wheat flour, after being exposed to the heat of the salt water-bath oven (220 deg. Fahr.) for two or three hours, lost weight by a further continuance of the heat. An apparatus has been patented by Mr. J.H. Tower, of Clinton, N.Y., consisting of a cylinder of square apartments or tubes, into which the grain or flour is introduced, and subjected to heat while in rapid revolution. I examined samples which had been subjected to this operation, and ascertained that wheat flour, originally containing 14.80 per cent. of water, had the proportion reduced to 10.25 per cent., while in wheat the proportion of water was reduced from 14.75 to 8.55 per cent.
Now it is probable that by either of the above modes, and perhaps by many others, the various kinds of breadstuffs may be brought to that degree of dryness which, with ordinary care, shall protect them from subsequent injury; but in order to secure this advantage, the operation must be carefully performed, and experiments must be made to ascertain how long an exposure to heat is necessary to bring the sample to the proper degree of dryness, and to determine whether in any respect its quality is impaired. It has already been stated that absolute desiccation is not necessary, even were it attainable; but any process in order to be effective should reduce the proportion of water to about six, or at most seven per cent.
I have heretofore adverted to the great care employed in the drying of grain in various foreign countries, and to which the preservation of it for a great number of years is to be ascribed.
The operation is not conducted in the hurried manner which is here thought to be so essential, but is continued long enough to effect the intended object. Thorough ventilation, as well as the proper degree of drying, and which is equally important, is thus secured.
It is said that in Russia the sheaves of wheat, carried into the huts, are suspended upon poles and dried by the heat of the oven. The grain shrinks very much during this process, but it is supposed to be less liable to the attacks of insects, and preserves its nutritive qualities for many years. During the winter, it is sent to market.—("The Czar, his Court and People." By John S. Maxwell, p. 272.)
With all the necessary attention which may be paid to the proper drying of our breadstuffs intended for export, another point is of equal importance, viz., the shipment in vessels rendered as impervious as possible to the influence of atmospheric moisture. For however carefully and thoroughly the drying, especially of wheat flour or maize meal, may have been performed, it will be nearly useless if the shipment is afterwards made in the barrels commonly employed.[29] And it is very certain that the transport and shipment of grain in bulk, as usually conducted, are attended with great loss. This difficulty might be removed at a trifling expense by adopting the plan suggested in the preceding report, and to which I would again respectfully call the attention of those who are engaged in this branch of trade.
I might here adduce a mass of testimony showing the importance of the matters just referred to, but will only advert to the following statements, which although made in allusion principally to maize, are equally applicable to our other breadstuffs. Maize meal, if kept too long, "is liable to become rancid, and it is then more or less unfit for use. In the shipments made to the West Indies, the meal is commonly kiln-dried, to obviate as much as possible this tendency to rancidity." "When ground very fine, maize meal suffers a change by exposure to the air. It is oxygenated. It is upon the same principle that the juice of an apple, after a little exposure to the air, is oxygenated, and changes its character and taste. If the flour could be bolted in vacuo, it would not be changed." "Intelligent writers speak of the necessity of preparing corn for exportation by kiln-drying as indispensable. Without that process, corn is very liable to become heated and musty, so as to be unfit for food for either man or beast. The kiln-dried maize meal from the Brandywine Mills, &c., made from the yellow corn, has almost monopolized the West India trade. This process is indispensable, if we export maize to Europe. James Candy says that from fifty years experience he has learned the necessity of this process with corn intended for exportation." "I have often found the corn from our country when it reached its destination, ruined by heating on the voyage. It had become musty and of little or no value. Kiln-drying is absolutely necessary to preserve it for exportation. We must learn and practice the best mode of kiln-drying it.[30]"
The nutritious value of the "whole meal" of Wheat, as compared with that of the fine flour.—The question whether what is called the whole meal of wheat, or that which is obtained by the mixture of the bran, contains more nutritious matter than the fine flour, is one of great importance. In my former report, I adverted to the statement made in regard to it by Professor J.F.W. Johnston, and which seemed to be almost conclusive in favor of the value of the whole meal. During the past year, however (1849), M. Eug. Peligot, an eminent French chemist, in an elaborate article "On the Composition of Wheat," to which more particular reference will be made hereafter, combats the opinion that the bran is an alimentary substance. He observes that "the difficulty of keeping the bran in flour intended for the manufacture of bread of good quality appears to result much less from the presence of the cellulose (one of the constituents of woody matter) contained in wheat than that of the fatty matter. This is found in the bran in a quantity at least triple of that which remains in the flour, and the bolting separates it from the ground wheat not less usefully than the cellulose itself."[31] M. Millon objects entirely to the views of M. Peligot on this point, and states some facts which are especially worthy of consideration. He asserts that, according to the views of the last named chemist, the separation at most of one part of fatty matter sacrifices fifteen, twenty, and even twenty-five per cent. of substances which are of the highest nutritive value. This abstracts from wheat, for the whole amount raised in France, the enormous sum of about two hundred millions of pounds annually.
It seems that in France the question whether the bolting of flour is advantageous has always been decided in the most arbitrary manner. An ordinance of Louis XIV., issued in 1658, prohibited, under a very heavy penalty, the regrinding of the bran and its mixture with the flour; this, with the mode of grinding then in use, caused a loss of more than forty per cent.—(Comptes Rendus, February 19th, 1849.)
In large cities and elsewhere, there seems for some time to have been a growing prejudice against the use of brown bread; and it is said that now nearly all the peasantry of France bolt their flour. The increase of this practice, according to M. Millon, threatens the nation with an annual loss of from two to three hundred millions of francs. If the bran was entirely valueless, there would be a loss of more than one million a day.
It is quite difficult to determine the precise amount of bran which may have been removed from wheat, for various samples contain such a different proportion of bran that in the one case a removal of ten per cent, leaves more bran in the flour than a bolting of five per cent. in another.
The following is an analysis of bran by M. Millon; the sample being a soft French wheat grown in 1848:—
Starch, dextrine and sugar53.00
Sugar of liquorice1.00
Gluten14.90
Fatty matter3.60
Woody matter9.70
Salts.50
Water13.90
Incrusting matter and aromatic principles (by difference)3.40
100.
The conclusion to be drawn from this analysis is, that bran is an alimentary substance. If it contains six per cent. more of woody matter than the rough, flour, it has also more gluten, double that of fatty matter, besides two aromatic principles which have the perfume of honey, and both of which are wanting in the fine flour. Thus by bolting, wheat is impoverished in its most valuable principles, merely to remove a few hundredths of woody matter.
The economical suggestion which springs from these views is, that the bran and coarse flour should be reground and then mixed with the fine flour. Millon states that he has ascertained, by repeated experiments, that bread thus made is of superior quality, easily worked, and not subject to the inconvenience of bread manufactured from the rough flour, such as is made in some places, and especially in Belgium.
Opinions similar to those above noticed are entertained by Professor Daubeny. "The great importance attached to having bread perfectly white is a prejudice," he says, "which leads to the rejection of a very wholesome part of the food, and one which, although not digestible alone, is sufficiently so in that state of admixture with the flour in which nature has prepared it for our use." After quoting the remarks of Professor Johnston on the same side of the question, he adds, "that according to the experiments of Magendie, animals fed upon fine flour died in a few weeks, whilst they thrived upon the whole meal bread." Brown bread, therefore, should be adopted, not merely on a principle of economy, but also as providing more of those ingredients which are perhaps deficient in the finer parts of the flour.—("Gardeners' Chronicle," January 27th, 1849, p. 53.)
The remarks of Dr. Robertson may also be here introduced. "The advantage," he observes, "of using more or less of the coverings of the grain in the preparation of bread has often been urged on economical principles. There can be no doubt that a very large proportion of nutritive matter is contained in the bran and the pollard; and these are estimated to contain about one-fifth part of the entire weight of the wheat grain. It is, unquestionably, so far wasteful to remove these altogether from the flour; and in the case of the majority of people, this waste may be unnecessary, even on the score of digestibility."[32] This subject can also be rendered apparent to the eye. If we make a cross section of a grain of wheat, or rye, and place it under the microscope, we perceive very distinct layers in it as we examine from without inwards. The outer of them belong to the husk of the fruit and seed, and are separated as bran, in grinding. But the millstone does not separate so exactly as the eye may by means of the microscope, not even as accurately as the knife of the vegetable anatomist, and thus with the bran is removed also the whole outer layer of the cells of the nucleus, and even some of the subjacent layers. Thus the anatomical investigations of one of these corn grains at once explains why bread is so much the less nutritious the more carefully the bran has been separated from the meal.[33] There can therefore be little doubt that the removal of the bran is a serious injury to the flour; and I have presented the above array of evidence on this point in the hope of directing public attention to it here, as has been done in various foreign countries.
After this, it will easily be inferred that I am not disposed to look with much favor upon the plan proposed by Mr. Bentz for taking the outer coating or bran from wheat and other grains previously to grinding.[34] Independently of the considerations which have already been presented, it is far from being proved, as this gentlemen asserts, that the mixture of the bran with the meal which results from the common mode of grinding is the chief cause of the souring of the flour in hot climates. On the contrary, the bran is perhaps as little liable to undergo change as the fine flour, and then the moistening to which, as I am informed, the grain is subjected previously to the removal of the husk, is still further objectionable, and must be followed by a most carefully-conducted process of kiln-drying.
Nutritious properties of various articles of food.—There seems to be some difference of opinion in regard to the nutritious properties of various kinds of food. It is generally, however, agreed that those which contain the largest proportion of nitrogenous matters are the most nutritious. It is on this account that haricots, peas, and beans, form, in some sort, substitutes for animal food. Tubers, roots, and even the seeds of the cereal grasses, are but moderately nutritious. If we see herbivorous animals fattening upon such articles, it is because, from their peculiar organisation, they can consume them in large quantities. It is quite doubtful whether a man doing hard work could exist on bread exclusively. The instances which are given of countries where rice and potatoes form the sole articles of food of the inhabitants, are believed to be incomplete. Boussingault states that in Alsace, for example, the peasantry always associate their potato dish with a large quantity of sour or curdled milk; in Ireland with buttermilk. "The Indians of the Upper Andes do not by any means live on potatoes alone, as some travellers have said they do: at Quito, the daily food of the inhabitants is lorco, a compound of potatoes and a large quantity of cheese. Rice is often cited as one of the most nourishing articles of diet. I am satisfied, however, after having lived in countries where rice is largely consumed, that it is anything but a substantial, or, for its bulk, nutritious article of sustenance."—("Rural Economy," Amer. edition, p. 409.) These statements are further confirmed by the observations of M. Lequerri, who, during a long residence in India, paid particular attention to the manners and customs of the inhabitants of Pondicherry. "Their food," he states, "is almost entirely vegetable, and rice is the staple; the inferior castes only ever eat meat. But all eat kari (curry), an article prepared with meat, fish, or vegetable, which is mixed with the rice, boiled in very little water. It is requisite to have seen the Indians at their meals to have any idea of the enormous quantity of rice which they will put into their stomachs. No European could cram so much at a time; and they very commonly allow that rice alone will not nourish them. They very generally still eat a quantity of bread."[35] In regard to the proportion of nutritious matter contained in grains of various kinds, it may be remarked that the tables which have been constructed as the results of various experiments are liable to an objection, which will be more particularly adverted to under another head. For example, two substances, by the process of ultimate analysis, may exhibit the same proportion of nitrogenous matter, and still differ very materially in their value as articles of food. Much depends on the digestibility of the form in which this matter is presented to the digestive organs. A strong illustration is afforded in the case of hay, the proportion of nutritive matter of which, about 9.71, would certainly not represent its power of affording nourishment to the human system. It is in truth quite impossible to arrive at any other than approximate results from the operations of chemistry, as to the amount of nutriment contained in a given quantity or weight of any article of food.[36] It is perhaps not irrelevant to notice in this place some of the researches which have recently been made upon fermentation, and particularly its effects in the manufacture of bread. It appears that when this process is brought about by the addition of yeast or leaven to the paste or dough, the character of the mass is materially altered. A larger or smaller proportion of the flour is virtually lost. According to Dr. William Gregory the loss amounts to the very large proportion of one-sixteenth part of the whole of the flour. He says, "To avoid this loss, bread is now raised by means of carbonate of soda, or ammonia and a diluted acid, which are added to the dough, and the effect is perfectly satisfactory. Equally good or better bread is obtained, and the quantity of flour which will yield fifteen hundred loaves by fermentation, furnishes sixteen hundred by the new method, the sugar and fibrin (gluten) being saved."—("Outlines of Chemistry," p. 352.)
Another author, Dr. R.D. Thomson, states, as the results of his experiments upon bread produced by the action of hydrochloric acid upon carbonate of soda, "that in a sack of flour there was a difference in favor of the unfermented bread to the amount of thirty pounds thirteen ounces, or in round numbers, a sack of flour would produce one hundred and seven loaves of unfermented bread, and only one hundred loaves of fermented bread of the game weight. Hence it appears that in the sack of flour by the common process of baking, seven loaves, or six-and-a-half per cent, of the flour are driven into the air and lost."—("Experimental Researches on the Food of Animals," &c., p. 183.)
The only objection to the general introduction of this process seems to be the degree of care and accuracy required in properly adjusting the respective qualities and quantities of acid and alkali, and which could seldom be attained even by those who are largely engaged in the manufacture of bread.
I cannot leave this subject without adverting to a practice which has prevailed in England and France, and perhaps also in this country, of steeping wheat before sowing it in solutions of arsenic, sulphate of copper, and other poisonous preparations.
The result has been that injurious effects have often followed, both to those who are employed in sowing such grain, and to those who have used the bread manufactured from it. The great importance of the subject led to the appointment of a commission at Rouen, in France, in December, 1842, having for its object to determine the best process of preventing the smut in wheat, and to ascertain whether other means less dangerous than those above noticed were productive of equally good results. The labors of this commission extended over the years 1843-'44-'45, and the experiments were repeated two years following on the farm of Mr. Fauchet, one of the commission, at Boisquilaume, in the department of the Seine Inferieure.
The results arrived at by this commission are—1st. That it is not best to sow seed without steeping. 2nd. That it is best to make use of the sulphate of soda and lime process, inasmuch as it is more simple and economical, in no way injurious to the health, and yields the soundest and most productive wheat. 3rd. That the use of arsenic, sulphate of copper, verdigris, and other poisonous preparations, should be interdicted by the government.—("Gardeners' Chronicle," January 6th, 1849, pp. 10 and 11.)
Composition of wheat and wheat flour, and the various modes of determining their nutritive value.—In my former report it was stated that the analyses of the various samples of wheat, the results of which were there given, had been chiefly directed to the determining the amount of rough gluten which they contained. My reasons for adopting this plan, and the arguments in favor of its general accuracy, as compared with other modes of analysis, and especially that by which the ultimate composition is ascertained, were also detailed. A more full examination of this subject has served only to strengthen the opinion already expressed, that for the great purpose to be answered by these researches, the process which I have adopted is, to say the least, as free from objection as any other, and if carefully and uniformly carried out, will truly represent the relative values of the several samples of wheat flour. As this is a matter of much consequence in a practical point of view, I trust I shall be excused for introducing some additional facts in regard to it.
The term gluten was originally applied to the gray, viscid, tenacious, and elastic matter, which is obtained by subjecting wheat flour to the continuous action of a current of water. But it appears that this is a mixture of fibrine and caseine, with what is now called glutine, and a peculiar oily or fatty matter. Now these substances may be separated from each other, but the processes employed for this purpose are tedious, and to insure accuracy the various solvents must be entirely pure—a point which, especially in the case of alcohol and ether, is not ordinarily easy to be attained. This will be rendered still more evident by a reference to a French process, which will hereafter be noticed.
But were it much less difficult in every case accurately to separate the constituents of gluten, it would not, in my opinion, be of the least practical utility. It is to the peculiar mechanical property of this gluten that wheat flour owes its superior power of detaining the carbonic acid engendered by fermentation, and thus communicating to it the vesicular spongy structure so characteristic of good bread.[37] It may also be added, that the results of more than one hundred trials have satisfied me that a diminution or loss of elasticity in the gluten is the surest index of the amount of injury which the sample of flour has sustained. Whether, therefore, the sample contains a certain proportion of nitrogen, or whether it contains albumen, fibrine, and caseine in sufficient quantity, it may still want the very condition which is essential to the manufacture of good bread. My objection, therefore, to the mere determination, however accurate, of the proportion of nitrogen contained in wheat flour, or of the various principles which form the gluten, is, that it does not represent the value of the various samples for the only use to which they are applied, viz., the making of bread. The remarks of Mulder, the celebrated Dutch chemist, upon the subject of manures, are so applicable to this point that I cannot refrain from quoting them. "It has," he says, "become almost a regular custom to determine the value of manures by the quantity of nitrogen they yield by ultimate analysis. This method is entirely erroneous; for it is based upon the false principle, that by putrefaction all nitrogeneous substances are immediately converted into ammonia, carbonic acid, and water! But these changes sometimes require a number of years. Morphine, for example, is prepared by allowing opium to putrefy; and the process for preparing leucin, a substance which contains 10.72 of nitrogen, is to bring cheese into putrefaction. Cheese, therefore, does not perhaps in a number of years resolve itself into carbonic acid, ammonia, and water, but produces a crystalline substance, which contains no ammonia. Hence the proportion of nitrogen yielded by manures is not a proper measure of their value, and therefore this mode of estimating that value ought to be discontinued."[38] We infer, therefore, that the proportion of nitrogen furnished by food of various kinds is not the true measure of their nutritious value, and cannot for practical purposes take the place of that process by which the amount of rough gluten is determined.
No better illustration can be given of the uncertainty which attends the inferences drawn from the ultimate composition, than the fact heretofore stated in regard to hay, the nutritive value of which is placed in the tables containing the results of these analyses, at a figure nearly the same as that of ordinary wheat flour.[39] In the paper on the "Composition of Wheat," by M. Peligot—(" Comptes Rendus," February 5th, 1849)—to which I have already referred, the author gives the results of the various analyses which he has made, and details the process he adopted.
Aware of the complex and difficult nature of the examination as conducted by him, he seems to doubt in regard to some of the results given in his tables In the fourteen samples which he analysed, the proportion of water ranges from 13.2 to 15.2, which is a rather higher average than is yielded by our American samples, especially those which have not been shipped across the Atlantic. Of the nitrogenous matter, soluble and insoluble, the proportions range from 9.90 per cent, to 21.50 per cent.; the former being from a sample of very soft and white French wheat; the latter from a very hard wheat with long grains, from Northern Africa, cultivated at Verriéres. Another sample from Egypt yielded 20.60 per cent, of these nitrogenous matters, both of which are very remarkable proportions.
In describing the process for ascertaining the amount of insoluble nitrogenous matters, this author adverts to their estimation either by the quantity of nitrogen gas furnished, or of ammonia formed, the last being preferred for substances, which, like wheat, contain only a few hundredths of nitrogen. The results which he obtained by this method were compared with those yielded by the direct extraction of the gluten by softening the farina under a small stream of water. "These results," says he, "differ but little from each other when we operate upon wheat in good condition, although the gluten which we thus obtain holds some starch and fatty matter, while the starch which is carried away by the water contains also some gluten." The loss and gain, as I have already explained, and as has been proved by these and other comparisons, are nearly balanced, and the amount of rough gluten will therefore afford a fair exhibit of that of the insoluble nitrogenous matters in this grain.
The salts in the samples of wheat analysed by M. Peligot, were either wanting or were in small proportion; while the amount of fatty matter ranged from 1.00 to 1.80 and 1.90 per cent.
These results agree very well with those which I have obtained. But it is probable that the proportion is liable to great variation, inasmuch as it is inferred that the fatty matter originates from starch through its exposure to the general deoxidising influence which prevails in plants.[40] There are also many difficulties attending the accurate determination of this matter, and which are probably the cause of the higher proportion often given. It is properly remarked by M. Peligot that the ether employed in this process should be free from water, and that the flour ought also to be very dry. By neglecting these precautions, we separate not only the fatty matter, but also a certain amount of matters soluble in the water, which is furnished as well by the wheat as by the ether.
It would not, I think, be difficult to point out some incorrect views entertained by this chemist, and more especially those which relate to the fatty matter. Some of his processes for the separation of various substances, if not faulty, require so many conditions for success as to render the results, at least in other hands, exceedingly uncertain.
But the capital error which he has committed is that concerning the bran, already adverted to, which he considers injurious to the flour, chiefly in consequence of the large proportion of fatty matter which it contains.
In regard to the soluble nitrogenous matter usually called albumen, from its resemblance to the animal substance of the same name, I have to remark that in my trials the proportion has been found to be considerably less than that often given in tables of the composition of wheat. In one sample it was found to be as low as 0.15 per cant., in another it did not rise above 0.20 per cent. The amount was usually so inconsiderable, that I did not think it worth while to retard the progress of the work by following out processes which could add little to the utility of these investigations.
Although much time and labor have been expended upon the analyses of the ash of plants, I have but slight confidence in the results heretofore given. The difficulties which attend the obtaining the ash in a proper condition, and the fact that the products of all the organs and parts of the plants have been analysed together, must necessarily impair the accuracy of the experiments, and render the inferences drawn from them of uncertain value. Much, indeed I may say almost everything, still remains to be done in this department of agricultural chemistry.
Weight of wheat as an index to its value.—Much has been said in regard to the relative weights of the bushel of wheat of different varieties or under different modes of culture.
As ordinarily determined, this weight ranges from fifty-six to sixty-five or sixty-six pounds, being in a few cases set down somewhat higher. It is said also that the bushel of wheat weighs less in some years than it does in others, and that the difference often amounts to two, or three, or even four pounds. Though this may seem of comparatively little consequence for a few bushels, yet, for the aggegate of the wheat crop of the United States, or for a State, or even a county, it makes a great difference. Thus, were we to estimate the product of one year in the United States at one hundred and ten million bushels, weighing fifty-six pounds to the bushel, and another year at one hundred and eight million bushels, weighing sixty-two pounds, the difference in favor of the latter, though the least in quantity, would amount to five hundred and thirty-six million pounds in weight, or more than one million and a quarter of barrels of flour.—(Report of the American Commissioner of Patents for 1847, p. 117.)
It may be remarked, however, that it is not after all so easy to determine with accuracy the weight of a bushel of wheat, nor to decide upon the circumstances which have an influence in increasing the density of a grain of wheat. If the microscopical representations of wheat are to be relied on, it is probable that the increase in the density of wheat depends upon the increase in the proportion of gluten. I have found in several cases that, the proportion of water being the same, those samples of wheat which contain the largest proportion of gluten exhibit the highest specific gravity, or, in other words, will yield the greatest number of pounds to the bushel. But the weight of wheat will be influenced by the proportion of water which it contains; the drier the grain, the greater is its density; a fact which may account for the difference which has been observed in the weight of wheat in different seasons. If this is the cause, the calculation above given in reference to the United States is fallacious—but if the amount of gluten is actually, instead of relatively, increased by peculiarities in seasons, it is no doubt correct.
I have devised a series of experiments to test the accuracy of the statements made upon this point, but have not yet had leisure to complete them.
General conditions from the analyses of wheat flour.—The large number of analyses which I have made, and the uniformity of the processes pursued, enable me to draw some general conclusions which it may be useful to present in a connected form.
1. In the samples from the more northern wheat-growing States, there seems to be little difference in the proportion of nutritive matter that can be set down to the influence of climate. Thus, the yield of the wheat from Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, is scarcely inferior to that from New York, Indiana, and Illinois, although the two latter are somewhat farther south. Local causes, and more especially the peculiarities of culture and manufacture, have more influence, within these parallels of latitude, than the difference of mean temperature.
2. The samples from New Jersey, Lower Pennsylvania, the southern part of Ohio, Maryland (probably Delaware), Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia,[41] contain less water and more nutritive matter than those from the States previously enumerated. That the samples from Missouri, which is included within nearly the same parallels of latitude as Virginia, do not exhibit so high an average of nutritive matter as those from the latter State, must be ascribed principally to a want of care in the management of the crop, and perhaps also in the manufacture of the flour. Virginia flour, for obvious reasons, maintains a high reputation for shipment.
3. The difference in the nutritive value of the various samples of wheat depends greatly upon the variety, and mode of culture, independently of climate. The correctness of the former statement is shown by the much larger proportions of gluten yielded by many of the samples of hard wheat from abroad, the Oregon wheat in Virginia, and a variety of Illinois wheat, &c. And in regard to the effect of particular modes of culture, the various analyses of Boussingault may be referred to, and that in my table of a sample from Ulster county, New York.
4. The deterioration of many of the samples of wheat and wheat flour arises in most cases from the presence of a too large per centage of water. This is often the result of a want of proper care in the transport, and is the principal cause of the losses which are sustained by those who are engaged in this branch of business.
5. There seems to be little doubt that a considerable portion of the wheat and wheat flour, as well as of other breadstuffs, shipped from this country to England, is more or less injured before it reaches that market. It is also shown that this is mostly to be ascribed to the want of care above noticed, and to the fraudulent mixture of good and bad kinds. The remedy in the former case is the drying of the grain or flour before shipment, by some of the modes proposed, and the protection of it afterwards as completely as possible from the effect of moisture. The frauds which are occasionally practised should be promptly exposed, and those who are engaged in them held up to merited reproach.
6. It has been fully shown, by the results of many trials, that the flour obtained by the second grinding of wheat, or the whole meal, contains more gluten than the fine flour. Hence the general use of the latter, and the entire rejection of the bran, is wasteful, and ought in every way to be discouraged.
7. It cannot but be gratifying to us that the average nutritive value of the wheat and wheat flour of the United States is shown by these analyses to be fully equal to, if not greater than, that afforded by the samples produced in any other part of the world. And it will, in my opinion, be chiefly owing to a want of proper care and of commercial honesty, if the great advantages which should accrue to this country from the export of these articles are either endangered or entirely lost.
TABLE EXHIBITING THE PER CENTAGE COMPOSITION OF VARIOUS SAMPLES OF AMERICAN AND FOREIGN WHEAT FLOUR, BY LEWIS C. BECK, M.D. (1849).
Kind of Wheat Flour, and from whence obtainedWaterGluten and albumenStarchGlucos dextrine, &c.Bran
Country Mills, New Jersey12.7511.5565.958.10.65
West Jersey Wheat12.8012.3269.485.90.50
White Wheat, New Jersey11.5512.6066.858.50.50
Pennsylvania Wheat11.9013.1666.207.25.75
ditto ditto13.3512.7366.906.50.52
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)13.3514.7271.28.65
Pelham Wheat, Ulster Co., N.Y.10.7913.1767.747.60.70
"Pure Genesee" Wheat13.2011.0575.20.55
Ohio Wheat, "fine"12.8512.2573.901.00
Ohio Wheat, "superfine"13.009.1077.80.10
Winter Wheat, Ohio13.1011.5666.847.90.60
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)13.0512.6973.61.65
Michigan Wheat, "superfine"13.2511.1074.80.85
Michigan Wheat12.2510.0067.708.75.75
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)12.7511.2066.008.501.05
Illinois Wheat12.7314.6165.206.45.80
Magnolia Mill, St. Louis, Mo.13.1310.2769.756.15.35
Mound Mill, St. Louis13.4810.5367.358.15.20
Walsh's Mill, St. Louis12.7010.6369.406.65.40
Washington Mill, St. Louis12.8811.0068.657.27.20
Missouri Mill, St. Louis13.0010.4667.798.35.40
O'Fallan's Mill, St. Louis12.8511.2568.247.00.66
Phœnix Mill, St. Louis13.2210.1068.707.30.15
Nonantum Mill, St. Louis12.1011.0268.607.93.35
Franklin Mill, St. Louis12.2510.2969.857.26.35
Eagle Mill, St. Louis11.0010.1569.508.65.20
Winter Wheat, Missouri14.009.3070.056.30.35
Wisconsin Wheat12.8013.2068.906.50.70
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)12.8013.4672.541.20
Maryland Wheat13.0012.3066.657.10.65
Richmond City Mill11.7013.0067.506.90.50
Haxall and Co., Richmond, Va.11.4012.8068.506.60.35
Virginia Wheat, "superfine"12.0512.9574.50.50
Haxall and Co., "best brand, '49"11.4013.2568.206.25.60
Haxall and Co., "2nd brand, '49"11.0013.2075.60.20
Richmond City Mill, '4911.9010.5070.007.10.50
Oregon White Wheat, Va.12.8014.8071.301.10
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)13.8514.5065.155.90.60
Gallego Mill, Richmond, Va.11.5013.5068.356.00.65
Ship Brandywine, Liverpool13.3810.6267.607.75.65
Ship Fanchon, Liverpool13.8311.3867.456.341.00
Ship New World, Liverpool13.6511.6065.807.70.65
Ship Juniata, Liverpool12.5014.1464.208.36.80
Ship Stephen Lurman, Liverpool11.6513.1864.509.55.68
Ship Leila, Liverpool13.2213.1864.658.00.95
Ship Oxenbridge, Liverpool13.9010.1368.427.30.25
Ship Italy, Liverpool12.94& bran 10.6068.567.90
Ship West Point, Liverpool14.3012.3063.009.45.95
Ship W.H. Harbeck, Liverpool13.5310.1866.958.80.30
Ship Princeton, Liverpool13.4011.5265.607.90.85
Ship Columbus, Liverpool13.5010.4566.458.501.03
Ship Russell Glover, Liverpool13.4510.4766.208.831.05
Ship South Carolina, Liverpool13.809.0070.805.95.38
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)13.309.4576.90.35
Ship Cambridge, Liverpool14.508.5270.605.40.40
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)14.109.1070.555.45.20
Ship Columbus, Liverpool14.858.4776.48.20
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)14.159.0076.60.25
Ship Ashburton, Liverpool13.5511.6869.225.30.25
Wheat grown in Canada West12.807.2374.125.10.75
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)12.608.4578.55.40
Chilian Wheat12.449.4567.808.371.30
Chilian Wheat12.858.6571.606.10.60
Valparaiso Wheat12.50& bran 14.55
French Wheat13.209.8569.007.65.30
Spanish Wheat13.5010.3068.907.00.30
Canivano Wheat11.3316.3563.106.502.30
Canivano Wheat11.1515.4067.255.70.60
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)12.6018.7067.001.70
Hard wheat, grown near Malaga10.8712.1564.3812.60 & lactic acid
ditto ditto (2nd grinding)10.0014.5060.2015.30
There is no crop, the skilful and successful cultivation of which on the same soil, from generation to generation, requires more art than is demanded to produce good wheat. To grow this grain on fresh land, adapted to the peculiar habits and wants of the plant is an easy task. But such fields, except in rare instances, fail sooner or later to produce sound and healthy plants, which are little liable to attacks from the malady called "rust," or which give lengthened ears or "heads," well filled with plump seeds.
Having long resided in the best wheat-growing district in the Union, the writer has devoted years of study and observation to all the influences of soil, climate, and constitutional peculiarities, which affect this bread-bearing plant. It is far more liable to smut, rust, and shrink in some soils than in others. This is true in western New York, and every other section where wheat has long been cultivated. As the alkalies and other fertilizing elements become exhausted in the virgin soils of America, its crops of wheat not only become smaller on an average, but the plants fail in constitutional vigor, and are more liable to diseases and attacks from parasites and destructive insects. Defects in soil and improper nutrition lead to these disastrous results. Soils are defective in the following particulars:
1. They lack soluble silica, or flint in an available form, with which to produce a hard glassy stem that will be little subject to "rust." Soluble flint is never very abundant in cultivated soils; and after they have been tilled some years, the supply is deficient in quantity. It is not very difficult to learn with considerable accuracy the amount of silica which rain-water as it falls on the earth will dissolve out of 1,000 grains of soil in the course of eight or ten days. Hot water will dissolve more than cold; and water charged with carbonic acid more than pure water which has been boiled. The experiments of Prof. Rogers of the University of Virginia, as published in Silliman's Journal, have a direct bearing on this subject. The researches of Prof. Emmons of Albany, in his elaborate and valuable work on "Agriculture," as a part of the Natural History of New York, show that 10,000 parts of soil yield only from one to three parts of soluble silica. The analyses of Dr Jackson, as published in his Geological Survey of New Hampshire, give similar results. Earth taken from an old and badly exhausted field in Georgia, gave the writer only one part of soluble flint in 100,000.
What elements of crops rain water, at summer heat, will dissolve out of ten or twenty pounds of soil, in the course of three months, is a point in agricultural science which should be made the subject of numerous and rigid experiments. In this way, the capabilities of different soils and their adaptation to different crops may be tested, in connection with practical experiments in field culture, on the same kind of earth.
Few wheat-growers are aware how much dissolved flint an acre of good wheat demands to prevent its having coarse, soft, and spongy stems, which are anything but a healthy organization of the plant. In the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England, vol. 7, there is an extended "Report on the Analysis of the Ashes of Plants, by Thomas Way, Professor of Chemistry at the Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester," which gives the result of sixty-two analyses of the ash of wheat, from as many samples of that grain, mostly grown on different soils and under different circumstances.
In this report are given the quantity of wheat per acre, the weight of straw cut close to the ground to the acre, and also that of the chaff. These researches show, that from ninety-three to one hundred and fifty pounds of soluble flint are required to form an acre of wheat; and I will add from my own investigations, that three-fourths of this silica is demanded by nature during the last sixty days preceding the maturing of the crop. This is the period in which the stem acquires its solidity and strength, and most of its incombustible earthy matter. The quantity of this varies from three to fifteen per cent. of the weight of the straw. Prof. Johnston and Sir Humphry Davy give instances in which more than fifteen per cent. of ash was found; and Prof. Way gives cases where less than three per cent. were obtained. The mean of forty samples was four and a half per cent. Dr. Sprengel gives three and a half as the mean of his analyses. M. Boussingault found an average of seven per cent. As flint is truly the bone of all the grass family, imparting to them strength, as in cane, timothy, corn, oats, rye, rice, millet, and the proportion of this mineral varies as much in wheat-straw, as bone does in very lean and very fat hogs or cattle.
A young growing animal, whether a child or a colt, that is kept on food which lacks bone-earth, (phosphate of lime,) will have soft cartilaginous bones. Nature cannot substitute iron or any other mineral in the animal system, out of which to form hard strong bones; nor can any other mineral in the soil perform the peculiar function assigned to silica in the vital economy of cereal plants. To protect the living germs in the seeds of wheat, corn, oats, rye, barley, &c. the cuticle or bran of these seeds contains considerable flint. The same is true of chaff.
The question naturally arises,—How is the farmer to increase the quantity of soluble silica or flint in his soil? This is a question of the highest practical importance. There are three principal ways in which the object named may be attained. First, by keeping fewer acres under the plough. Land in pasture, if well managed, will gain its fertility, and in the process accumulate soluble silica in the surface soil. In this way more wheat and surer crops may be made by cultivating a field in wheat two years than four or six. If the field in the mean time be devoted to wool-growing, butter or cheese-making, or to stock-raising, particular care must be taken to make great crops of grass or clover to grow on the land, and have all the manure, both solid and liquid, applied to its surface.
There are many counties in England that yield an average of thirty-two bushels of wheat per acre for ten crops in succession. There are but few of the old counties in the United States which average the half of that quantity: and yet America has greater agricultural capabilities than that of Great Britain.
Another way to increase soluble silica in the soil, is to grow such crops, in rotation with wheat culture, as will best prevent the loss of dissolved flint, at any time by leaching and washing, through the agency of rain water. This remark is intended to apply more particularly to those large districts devoted to cotton and tobacco culture, plants that take up no considerable amount of silica, and which by the constant stirring of the earth, and the clean tillage which they demand, favor the leaching of the soil. To keep too much of a plantation of these crops, is to lessen its capabilities for producing good crops of corn, wheat, and barley, at a small expense. Corn plants, well managed, will extract more pounds of silica in three or six months from the soil, than any other. As not an ounce of this mineral is needed in the animal economy of man or beast, it can all be composted in cornstalks, blades, and cobs, or in the dung and urine derived from corn, and be finally reorganized in the stems of wheat plants. Corn culture and wheat culture, if skilfully and scientifically conducted, go admirably together. Of the two, more bread, more meat, and more money can be made from the corn than from the wheat plant in this country. But so soon as what is called "high farming" in England, shall be popular in the United States, the crops both of wheat and corn grown here will demonstrate how little we appreciate the vast superiority of our climate for the economical feeding and clothing of the human family, over that of our "mother country." In several counties in England, it takes from twelve to fourteen months to make a crop of wheat, after the seed is put into the ground. At or near the first of December, 1847, Mr. M.B. Moore, of Augusta, Ga., sowed a bushel of seed wheat on an acre and a half of ground, which gave him over thirty bushels by the middle of May following. This ground was then ploughed, and a fine crop of hay made and cut in July. After this, a good crop of peas was raised, and harvested in October, before it was time to seed with wheat again, as was done. While the mean temperature of England is so low, that corn plants will not ripen, in Georgia one can grow a crop of wheat in the winter, and nearly two crops of corn in succession in the summer and autumn, before it is time to sow wheat again. No writer, to my knowledge, has done full justice to the vast agricultural resources of the southern portion of the American confederacy. But there is much of its soil which is not rich in the elements of bread. Nothing but the careful study of these elements, and of the natural laws by which they are governed, can remedy defects in wheat culture anywhere, but especially on very poor land.
All alkaline minerals, such as potash, soda, lime, ammonia, and magnesia, hasten the solution of the several insoluble compounds of silica in the soil. This fact should be remembered by every farmer. To undertake an explanation of the various ways in which alkalies, oxides, and acids act and re-act upon each other in the surface of the earth, when subject to tillage, would be out of place in this outline view of wheat-growing in the United States. I may state the fact, however, as ascertained by many analyses, that a cubic foot of good wheat soil in the valley of the Genesee, contains twenty times more lime than do the poorest soils in South Carolina and Georgia. The quantity of gypsum, bone-earth, and magnesia, available as food for plants, varies in an equal degree. Not only lime, but phosphoric acid, potash, and magnesia are lacking in most soils, if one desires to raise a large crop of wheat, and have the seeds of the grain weigh as much as the straw. In a number of the specimens of wheat analyzed by Prof. Way, when cut close to the roots, the dry wheat outweighed the dry straw.
Having secured the growth of a bright, hard, glassy stem, the next thing is to develop a long, well-filled ear. To this end, available ammonia or nitrogen, phosphorus, potash, and magnesia are indispensable. Ammonia (spirits of hartshorn) is necessary to aid in forming the combustible part of the seed. The other ingredients named are required to assist in making the incombustible part of the grain. In 100 parts of the ash of wheat, there are the following substances, viz.:—
Silica2.28
Phosphoric acid45.73
Sulphuric acid0.32
Lime2.06
Magnesia10.94
Peroxide of iron2.04
Potash32.24
Soda4.06
Chloride of sodium0.27
Total99.94
The quantity of ash in wheat varies from 1¼ to 2½ per cent.; the average is about 1.69. The amount of phosphoric acid in any given quantity of the ash of wheat varies from forty to fifty per cent. of the same.
Seeds that have a thick cuticle or bran, and little gluten, contain a smaller per centage of phosphoric acid, and more silica. About one-third of the ash is potash; in nearly all cases magnesia varies from nine to fourteen per cent.; lime from one and a half to six per cent. Peroxide of iron is seldom as abundant as in the ash above given, and the same is true of soda. Chloride of sodium is common salt, and exists in a small quantity. Salt is beginning to be much used as a fertilizer on wheat lands in western New York. It operates indirectly to increase the crop.
The following may be taken as about the average composition of the ash of wheat-straw. It is "Specimen No. 40," in the tables of Prof. Way, and I copy verbatim all that is said upon the subject: [Soil, sandy; subsoil, stone and clay; geological formation, silurian; drained; eight years in tillage; crop, after carrots, twenty tons per acre; tilled December, 1845; heavy crop; mown, August 12th; carried, August 20th; estimated yield, forty-two bushels per acre; straw long, grain good, weight sixty-two pounds to the bushel.] Length of straw, forty-two inches.
Relation of Grain, Straw and Chaff.
Actual quantities.Per centage.
Grain1633 lbs.45.15
Straw1732 lbs.47.89
Chaff250 lbs.6.96
Total3615 lbs.
Specific gravity of grain1.396
Weight of grain per acre2604 lbs.
Weight of straw per acre2,775 3/10ths.
Weight of chaff per acre401 ⅙th.
Mineral Matter in an Acre.
Wheat44½ lbs.
Straw113
Chaff47⅙th.
Total2047/10ths.
Analysis of the Ash of the Grain.
Per centage.Removed from an acre.
lbs.ozs.
Silica5.6328
Phosphoric acid43.98198
Sulphuric acid.21011/5th.
Lime1.800128/10ths.
Magnesia11.69532/10ths.
Peroxide of iron.2902
Potash34.511556/10ths.
Soda1.870133/10ths.
Total99.98446l/10ths.
Analysis of Straw with its proportion of Chaff.
Per centage.Removed from an acre.
lbs.ozs.
Silica69.3611117/10ths.
Phosphoric acid5.24867/10ths.
Sulphuric acid4.45722/10ths.
Lime6.961122/20ths.
Magnesia1.4525
Peroxide of iron.2912
Potash11.791814
Sodanone.none.
Chloride of sodiumnonenone.
Total99.541601l/10ths.
If we subtract the 111 pounds of silica from 160 pounds of minerals in the straw and chaff, the difference between what are left and those in wheat, is not great. As the stems and leaves of wheat plants grow before their seeds, if all the phosphoric acid, potash, and lime available in the soil is consumed before the organization of the seeds begin, from what source is nature to draw her supply of these ingredients to form a good crop of wheat? If the farmer could reverse the order of nature, and grow a good supply of seeds first, and make straw afterwards, then many a one would harvest more wheat and less straw. But the cultivator must grow the stems, roots, and leaves of wheat, corn, and cotton, before nature will begin to form the seeds of these several plants: and every one should know that the atoms in the soil, which are consumed in organizing the bodies of cultivated plants, are, in the main, identical in kind with those required to make their seeds. The proportions, however, differ very considerably. Thus, while 100 parts of the ash of wheat contain an average of 45 parts of phosphoric acid, 100 of the ash of the wheat straw contain an average of only 5 parts. The difference is as 9 to 1. In magnesia the disparity is only a little less striking.
In what are called the organic elements of wheat (the combustible part) there are seven times more nitrogen in 100 pounds than in a like weight of straw. Hence, if the farmer converts straw into manure or compost, with the view ultimately of transforming it into wheat, it will take 7 pounds of straw to yield nitrogen enough to form one pound of wheat. Few are aware how much labor and money is annually lost by the feeding of plants on food not strictly adapted to the peculiar wants of nature in organizing the same. It is true, that most farmers depend on the natural fertility of the soil to nourish their crops, with perhaps the aid of a little stable and barn-yard manure, given to a part of them. As the natural resources of the land begin to fail, the supply must be drawn from other quarters than an exhausted field, or its cultivator will receive a poor return for the labor bestowed.
In Great Britain, where the necessity for liberal harvests and artificial fertilizing is far greater than in this country, the yield of wheat is said to be governed in a good degree by the amount of ammonia available as food for growing plants. This opinion is founded not at all on theory, but altogether on the teachings of experience. But in England, limeing and manuring are so much matters of constant practice, that few soils are so improverished as many are in the United States, With land as naked and sterile as is much that can be found in the whole thirteen colonies between Maine and Alabama, English farmers could hardly pay their tithes and poor rates, to say nothing of other taxes, rent, and the coat of producing their annual crops.
The first step towards making farming permanently profitable in all the older States, is to accumulate in a cheap and skilful manner the raw material for good harvests in the soil.
Over a territory so extensive as the United States, it is extremely difficult to lay down any rule that will be applicable even to a moiety of the republic. There are, however, many beds of marl, greensand, gypsum, limestone, saline and vegetable deposits available for the improvement of farming lands, in the Union. In addition to these, there are extraneous resources, the ocean with its fish, its shells, its sea-weeds, and its fertilizing salts, which will yield an incalculable amount of bread and meat. In the subsoil and the atmosphere, every agriculturist has resources which are not duly appreciated by one in a thousand.
As a general rule, the soil must be deepened before it can be permanently improved. One acre of soil 12 inches deep is worth more to make money from, by cultivating it, than four acres 6 inches in depth. Thus, admit that a soil 6 inches deep will produce 14 bushels of wheat, and that 12 bushels will pay all expenses and give 2 for profit. Four acres of this land will yield a net income of only 8 bushels. Now double the depth of the soil and the crop: making the latter 28 bushels, instead of 14 per acre, and the former 12 inches deep, in the place of 6. Fifteen bushels instead of twelve, will now pay all annual expenses, and leave a net profit not of two but of thirteen bushels per acre. If small crops will pay expenses, large ones will make a fortune; provided the farmer knows how to enrich his land in the most economical way. It is quite as easy to pay too dear for improving lands, as to lose money at any other business whatever.
The first thing for the operator to do is to acquire all the knowledge within his reach, from the experience of others who have done for their soils what he proposes to accomplish for his. Twenty or fifty dollars, invested in the best agricultural works in the English language, may save him thousands in the end, and double his profits in two years. The Agricultural Journals of the United States abound in information most useful to the practical farmer: and the back volumes, if collected and bound, will form a library of great value.
Rotation of Crops in connexion with Wheat Culture.—A system of tillage and rotation which will pay best in one locality, or on one quality of soil, and in a particular climate, will be found not at all adapted to other localities, different soils and latitudes. Hence, no rule can be laid down that will meet the peculiar exigencies of a farming country so extensive as the thirty States east of the Rocky Mountains. There are soils in Western New York, known to the writer, which have borne good crops of wheat every other year for more than twenty years, and produce better now than at the beginning of their cultivation. The resources of the earth in supplying the elements of wheat and corn are extremely variable. There are friable shaley rocks in Livingstone county, N.Y., which crumble and slake when exposed to the air, that abound in all the earthy minerals necessary to form good wheat. These rocks are hundreds of feet in thickness, and have furnished much of the soil in the valley of the Genesee. The Onondaga Salt Group, and other contiguous strata, which extend into Canada West, form soils of extraordinary capacity for growing wheat. Indeed, the rocks and "drift" of a district give character to its arable surface.
Nothing is more needed at this time than a good geological map of the United States, accompanied by an accurate and popularly arranged work on agricultural geology. The writer had hoped to give such a map in this report; but it is thought best to devote another year to the collection of geological surveys and facts, and to the making of more critical and extended researches before publishing.
In the matter of rotation of crops in connection with wheat culture, clover and corn are generally preferred in all the Northern, and most of the Middle States. In New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Northern Indiana, and Illinois, so far as the writer is acquainted, a crop of wheat is made in rotation, either every third, fourth, or fifth year. Wherever wool growing is united with wheat culture, clover and wheat are the staple crops of the farm. Wool and superfine flour are exported; farmers taking nearly all the bran and shorts of the millers who purchase their wheat.
The offal of wheat makes not a little feed with chaff and cut straw. Many agriculturists grow peas, beans, turnips, beets, and carrots in large quantities, as well as clover, corn, oats, and barley. Peas and beans, both stems and pulse, when well cured, are excellent feed for sheep; and on good land they are easily grown. They prepare the soil well for wheat.
All the manure derived from sheep is husbanded with extreme care by the farmers who are gradually enriching their lands. On a deep, rich, arable soil, quite a number of sheep may be kept per acre, if highly cultivated; and their manure prepares the land for producing generous crops of wheat at a small expense. Of all business men, farmers should be the closest calculators of profit and loss.
Great care should be taken to sow good and clean seed on clean land. Previous to putting the seed in the ground (drilling is preferable to sowing broadcast), wheat should be soaked five or six hours—not longer—in strong brine. After this, add a peck or more of recently slaked lime to each bushel, and shovel it over well, that the lime may cover each seed. It is now ready to commit to the earth. Most good farmers roll the earth after seeding: some before.
In the Southern States, planters are in the habit of permitting their wheat to remain too long in the field after it is cradled, and in small shocks. Good barns are too scarce in all the planting States, and in some others.
Summer fallowing is generally abandoned, except in cases where old pastures and meadows, new prairie, or bushy bad fields are to be subdued. As a general rule, friable soils need not be ploughed long before the intended crop is expected to begin to grow. Among fertilizers, wood ashes, salt, bones, lime, guano, and poudrette have been used in wheat culture with decided advantage. In Great Britain, manure derived from the consumption of turnips and other root crops by sheep and neat cattle, is much used in preparing land for wheat. Sheep, clover and peas, corn and hogs, rotate well to insure the economical production of this staple. Manure is usually applied to the crop preceding wheat.
It may be interesting to some readers to see in this place the mean result of several organic analyses of wheat made by M. Boussingault. Wheat, dried at 230 deg. in vacuo, was found to contain:
Carbon46.1
Oxygen43.4
Hydrogen5.8
Nitrogen2.3
Ash2.4
Total100.0
Charcoal may be regarded as a fair representative of carbon, and water as the representative of both oxygen and hydrogen. It will be seen by the above figures, that over 95 per cent. of wheat is made up of elements which greatly abound in nature in an available condition; and the same is true of all other plants. It is doubtless owing to this circumstance, that a comparatively small quantity of guano and other highly concentrated fertilizers are able to produce crops five, ten, and fifty times greater than their own weight. Azote, or nitrogen, in the form of ammonia, or nitric acid, (aqua fortis), and the incombustible part of plants are the elements which least abound in soils, and should be husbanded with the greatest care.