Horse-hoeing husbandry

by Jethro Tull

In the Preface to his Vol. I. Page 10. of his Husbandry and Gardening, he says, ‘They feed as differently as Horses do from Dogs, or Dogs from Fish.’

But what does he mean by this Instance, Vol. I. p. 39. viz. ‘That Thyme, and other Aromatics, being planted near an Apricot-tree, would destroy that Tree?’ Does it not help to confirm, that every Plant does not draw exactly the same Share of Nourishment?

I believe there is no need for him to give more Instances to disprove his Assertion than this one. His Conclusion, taken by itself, is so far right; viz. ‘That if the Nourishment the Earth afforded to the Thyme and Apricot-tree, had been divided into Two Shares, both could not have had them.’

But this his Instance proves, That those Aromatics robb’d the Apricot-tree of so much of its Share as to starve it; and that they, tho’ of so very different a Nature, did draw from the Earth the same Nourishment which the Apricot-tree should have taken for its Support, had not the Aromatics been too hard for it, in drawing it off for their own Maintenance:

Unless he believes, that all the Juices of the Aromatics were as Poison to the Apricot; and that, according to my Experiment of the Mint, some of their Roots might discharge some kind of Moisture in dry Weather, given them by others, that had it for their Use; and that the Apricot-roots, mingling with them, might imbibe enough of that Liquor, altered sufficiently by their Vessels, to poison and kill the Tree.

But then, where was the Tree’s distinguishing Palate? Why did it not refuse this Juice, which was so disagreeable as to kill it? And as to his Notion of Vegetables having Palates, let us see how it agrees with what he affirms.

‘That ’tis the Vessels of Plants that make, by their Filtrations, Percolations, &c. all the different Tastes and Flavours of the Matter, which is the Aliment of Plants; and that, before it be by them so filtred, &c. it is only a Fund of insipid Substance, capable of being altered by such Vessels, into any Form, Colour, or Flavour.’

And Vol. I. p. 38. ‘The different Strainers, or Vessels of the several Plants, growing upon that Spot of Earth, thus impregnated with Salts, alter those Salts or Juices, according to the several Figures or Dimensions of their Strainers; so that one Plant varies, in Taste and Smell, from others, tho’ all draw their Nourishment from the same Stock lodged in the Earth.’ See Mr. Bradley’s Palates of Plants, and the insipid Substance he allots them to distinguish the Taste of, how they agree.

They must, it seems, within their own Bodies, give the Flavour to this insipid Substance, before their Palates can be of any Use; and, even then, ’tis impossible to be of any Use, but in the manner of the Dog returning to his Vomit.

They would have as much Occasion for the Sense of Smelling, as of Taste; but, after all, of what Use could either of the Two be to Plants, without local Motion of their Roots? which they are so destitute of, that no Mouth of a Root can ever remove itself from the very Point where it was first formed, because a Root has all its longitudinal Increase at the very End; for, should the Spaces betwixt the Branchings increase in Length, those Branches would be broken off, and left behind, or else drawn out of their Cavities; which must destroy the Plant. All the Branches, except the foremost, would be found with their Extremities pointing towards the Stem; the contrary of which Posture they are seen to have: And if they moved backwards, that would have much the same Effect on all the collateral Branchings to destroy them. Smell and Taste then could be of no manner of Use to Vegetables, if they had them; they would have no Remedy or Possibility to mend themselves from the same Mouths, removing to search out other Food, in case they had Power to dislike or refuse what was offered them.