and apparently hopeless barrenness, we must own, that
if Mr. B. had made the assertion while we were riding over this very
tract, that within two years he would reap a remunerating crop of wheat
from the barren waste, and coat the ground with a carpet of luxuriant
grass, we should have told him the day of miracles had passed away. But
we had not then seen as much as we have since of the miraculous power of
Peruvian guano.

We might continue to cite hundreds of similar cases but propose to pass
over into Maryland, and after showing its application there has produced
equally beneficial results, travel northward, calling here and there a
witness as we proceed. Among others, we may call to the stand in
Maryland, will be the editor of the American Farmer, whose testimony we
consider almost invaluable, having devoted much attention to the
subject, and to whom, and his able correspondents, we desire to award
full credit, in this general manner, to save repetition, for much of the
information we shall give the readers of several of the succeeding
pages. The testimony of witnesses of such high standing, cannot be too
highly estimated by those who are anxious to learn how to renovate their
worn out farms, or make the rich ones richer.

EXPERIMENTS IN MARYLAND.

_Effects of guano upon the crop to which it is applied._--Edward
Stabler, in the American Farmer, thus speaks of an experiment he made in
1845, soon after the introduction of guano to any extent into this
country.

"In a field of some 10 acres, one acre was selected near the middle, and
extending through the field, so as to embrace any difference of soil,
should there be any. On this acre 200 lbs. of Peruvian guano, at a cost
of about $5 was sown with the wheat. Adjoining the guano on one side,
was manure from the barn yard, at the rate of 25 cart loads to the acre;
and on the opposite side (separated by an open drain the whole
distance;) ground bones were applied on the balance of the field, at a
cost of $6 to the acre; the field equally limed two years preceding.
There was no material difference in the time or manner of seeding;
except that the manure was lightly cross-ploughed in, and the guano and
bones harrowed in with the wheat.

"The yield on the guanoed acre was 35 bushels; the adjoining acre with
bone, as near as could be estimated by dozens, and compared with the
guano, was about 27 bushels; and the manured, about 24 bushels. The
season was unusually dry;