1804.) On the Smut in Wheat. admitting(as I think A. N. has in his letter) that the cauſe of the ſmut in wheat is impure ſeed, I do not thinft it atall difi- cult to“ account for the greater prevalence of ſmut in one year than in another." Can any man ſuppoſe that an equal quantity of this infected or impure ſeed 15 ſown every year z perhaps in ſome years there is as much more of this impure ſeed as in others; and if there is as much more ſown, why ſhould there not be as much more reaped? AS to chuſing, 1 believe no farmer can tell with any certainty whether the ſeed will produce ſmut or not, but it is the general opinion amongſt farmers, that wheat which has got ſmut balls in it, will pro- duce ſmut again; this I am confident is generally, but not always the cale. I once prepared ſome very good clean wheat entirely free from ſmut-balls, to ſow a[mall field of three acres, and not having enough prepared to finiſh the feld, I fowed five lands on one ſide of the field with wheat, which grew with the other, and was thraſhed and cleaned together, but without any preventative whatever; at harveſt there was many ears of ſmut on the five lands, but none on the other part of the field; this I mention as an exception to what I have ſaid above on chuſing the ſeed; but I might reaſonably aſk, how the blight could be the cauſe? Whether I have ac- counted“ for the greater prevalence of ſmut in one year than in another," your correſpondents and the public will decide] Your correſpondent L. L. has rather doubtinglv, yet with ſome good nature, referred to my proceedings on this lubjedt, and to him I muſt make ſome reply: he ſays,“I will ac- knowledge, moſt willingly, that Mtr, Dowlen ads, zona fide, and really believes himſelf in the verity of that which he in- tends to recommend to the public;" can any man ſay other- wiſe after he has ſeen my advertiſement, where I offer re- ceipts at twenty ſhillings each, and if they are not ſound effec- tual, I return the whole of the money again, any time before the firſt day of Auguſt, 1806: Surely can this be impoſing on public credulity!?* He further ſays,“ it ought to be his buſineſs firſt, and will be that of the farming public, ulti- mately to diſcover whether he radically underſtands what he is about," to part of this I willingly ſay, Amen; and can aſſure L. L. that my proceedings have not been the reſult of theory, but of practice and obſervation; and as a proof that my method is not thought very light of, ſeveral farmers which I ac- quainted with it long 490, have, ſince my advertizing, all (except one) hkonourably ſubſcribed. I could have called in the aid of a farmer who has farmed more than half a century, and in the whole courſe of his buſineſs has alternately made experiments on the ſmut in wheat, and his experiments nearly correſpond with mine, which makes me ſtill more confident in my proceedings.

SSs2