This book made available by the Internet Archive.

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER,

big at Geissen, will be considered good authority in regard to the views of Liebig on this point. In a letter to Prof. Webster, dated Geissen, May 1, 184G, he says:

"You are aware that Boussingault has expressed the opinion, after a variety of experiments, that the value of manure is in near relation to its percentage of ammonia. Mulder has, you know, written much in support of the view that ulmic and humic acids, ulmates, humates, etc., in one form and another, minister largely to vegetation.

* * Liebig differs from them all. * * He takes the position that the sources of carbon and nitrogen are carbonic acid and ammonia in the air. * * *

"It is obvious (from analysis of soils 3,nd rainwater) that the ammonia spread on fields in the ordinary distribution of barn-yard products is of no moment. The quantity with usual falls of rain greaily exceeds, in Hie course of a season, any conceivable supply by human instrumentality. * * *

Careful and numerous analyses of rain water and snow by Boussingault, Lawes, Way, and others prove beyond cavil, that "with usual [or unusual] falls of rain" no such quantity of ammonia is conveyed to the soil, as is here stated. We think that Prof. Ilorsford will now admit that "ten tons of ordinary barn-yard manure contain more ammonia than is carried to an acre of land in twelve months by usual falls of rain." This fact greatly weakens the force of Prof. Horsford's argument; but one object in quoting his remarks is not to attempt to point out where they conflict with more recent investigations, but sinply to show that Mr. Lawes is not the only person who understood Lie-big to teach "the mineral manure theory."

"But if in the manure heap and the liquid accumulations of the barn-yard, transported to the fields the ammonia be not the chief ingredient, or o important one, to what are we to attribute the unquestioned value of stable product? and night soil 1 Prof. Liebig has shown tliat if plants be manured with the ashes of plants of the same species, as the grasses of our western country are when burned over-in the fall, they are supplied with their natural food. * * Let us consider what these ashes are, and what manure is. Horbivirous animals derive their nourishment from the vegetable kingdom exclusively, their food being grass, grain, roots, etc. These, with their organic and inorganic matters are eaten. A portion of them- is assimilated, becoming bone, muscle, tendon, fat. etc. Another portion is voided in the form of ex-crementitious matter. In process of time, the bones and tissue follow the same course. What today forms the eye, with its sulphur, aud its phosphorous, and carbon, etc., will have accomplished its office, and left the organism to mingle with the excrements or escape as carbonic acid and water from the lungs. At length all the inorganic matters will re-appzar in the voided products. * * The animal organism has performed the office of amill. Grain was supplied. Instead of appear-in"' as flour and bran and the intermediate meal, it appears after intervals of greater or less length, in soluble inorganic salts in the liquid excrements, in soluble inorganic saUs in the solid excrements.

and in carbonic acid and water. Now, after burning a plant, what remains 1 It contained when growing carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, aud oxygen, as organic bodies, and water. It contained also, invariable proportions, common salt,potash, soda,-magnesia, lime, iron, phosphorous, sulphur, and silica. The first four were expelled in the combustion. The remaining ingredients, for the most part, remained unchanged. Had the' plant gone into the body of an animal, and in the course of its evolutions through the organism lost its carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen, the remaining ingredients would have been the same as before. In one case the plant would have been burned in the organism; in the other, in a crucible. The ashes and the excrements are substantially the same. * * Night soil and guano are the ashes of animal and vegetable organism burned in animal bodies. They are the ashes of plants—the essential food of plants. H:nce their value as manures."

We might multiply such quotations from our agricultural literature of the past decade ad libitum, but the above are sufficient to show that Lawes and Wolf are not alone in ascribing the "pure mineral theory to Liebig."

His pupils and followers, as well as those who differed with him, evidently understood Liebig as asserting that if the inorganic constituents or ashes of a given species of plants were supplied in sufficient quantity, and in proper condition, we should obtain a maximum yield; that the crops on a field increased or diminished as these mineral elements were supplied or withheld; that the mineral manure patented by Prof. Liebig, was an embodiment of his views ; and that "sooner or later, they (farmers) must see that in this so-called 'mineral theory,' in its development and ultimate perfection, lie the whole future of agriculture."

Liebig, in his recent pamphlet, denies ever having entertained these views, and admits, very reluctantly, however, that Mr. Lawes' experiments prove them to be erroneous. He now says:

" I consider ammonia aud its salts exceedingly useful, and indeed at present even, perfectly indispensable as a means of increasing the produce of our fields beyond a certain limit, without the use of stable manure."

Surely there is some difference between this sentence and the following one, which will be-found in the first edition df Liebig's " Letters on Chemistry," but which has been altered in the subsequent edition, published since the ap-. pearauce of Mr. Lawes' papers :

" It follows consequently, that wo cannot ia-crcase the fertility of our fields by a supply of tii-trogenized manure, or by salts of ammonia; but rather that their produce increases or diminishes, in a direct ratio with the supply of mineral elements capable of assimilation."

It is evident fromr these and other sentences

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

which might be cited, that Liebig has changed his views in regard to the value of ammonia as a manure; but it is still very difficult to determine " what it really is that Liebig means." Perhaps he may accuse us, as he has Mr. Lawes, of having read but one sentence iu his book, so we beg leave to state beforehand that we have read it over carefully several times, and that we are still in doubt as to the real position of the learned author on the subject it is the special object of the work to elucidate. He has made some " agricultural experiments" on a ten acre field, and

ten acrc'field, '-' distinguished from all other land iu the vicinity by its almost pgigfect i&-capacity to support the ordinary cultivated, plants ; T do not believe that in an entire year, so much,grass and fodder grew upon it as would sustain a single sheep." This was, unquestionably, a poor soil ; and the mind reeaSk instances of similar soils having been rendered fertile by the ordinary processes of agriculture. The farms of the late Judge Buel, and D. IS. T. More, of Waterleit, N. Y., and many ia the county of Norfolk, England, were ones blowing sands, but now are as remarkable for

in summing up his conclusions from them, i fertility as they once were for barrenness. says: "My experiments, which occasioned This result has been attained principally me an outlay of 8,000 florins, ($3,200,) or I through growing crops of clover and turnips. $320 per acre, show indeed that to make a i by plowing them in, or consuming them on the

soil fertile, which is barren from want of activ (soluble) ingredients, and not on account of unfavorable physical condition, requires an outlay greater than the purchase of the most fruitful soil; but in this I was in no way disappointed. What I wished to arrive at, was well worth the sacrifice. "What I have arrived at is, [now, surely, he will state his conclusions on the value of mineral mauure; but alas, no ! what he has arrived at is only] /he firm conviction that the time must come when agriculture iciU he carried on as an art, according to scientific principles, and not according to mere recipesP

Liebig brings forward these experiments as practical evidence of the correctness of his opinions, and they are, therefore, worthy of attention. He says:

:: In the years 1815-9,1 instituted a series of experiments on the action of individual mineral manures. * * Former experiments which I had made in my garden, gave no results; do and apply what I iron),'!, I teas, not able, to perceive any effect from a, tingle env: of rxy mixtures*"*

The cause of this is ascribed to the richness of the garden soil. This led to purchase a

'Prof. KcfiSFORD, in one of hi.s letters from Geissen, . {Cultivator, 1S16, page 139,) alludes to these experiments as follows: "In the »prm.g, (UBiffi preceding ray arrival in Geissen, the Professor planted some grape scions under 'ae windows of the laboratory. He fed them, if I may asc such an expression, upon the ashes of Hie grape zins, or upon the proper inorganic food of the grape, as shown by analysis of its ashes. The growth has been enormous, &.C I was shown pots of wheat, in different ijtages of their growth, that had been fed variously—some upon the inoro-anic matter* they needed according to the analysis of their ashes —others had merely shared the tribute of the general soil. The results in numbers I don't yet know. In uppearanee, no one could: be at a loss to judge of what might be expected. * * The [experiments of Prof. L., v. hich I have alluded to, are full of interest not alone as sustaining the views he has expounded, [what views, if not th Se of t^je mineral theory?] but as a!:"o showing that the treasures in (ha shade of inorganic manures, heaped up in F.imo juart/To of the globe, taay be made to equalize the of tabor >?■ other re*ioaaf'

farm, and returning the manure, thus supplying organic matter and especially ammonia-., from the atmosphere. This, however, is simply a deduction from certain theoretical considerations, founded on "Mr. Lawes' experiments : and we have frequently expressed the wits?; that experiments with ammonia salts, organ;;; matter, and mineral substances, might be instituted on similar soils. By applying amass-nia on oue plot, organic matter on another, fee various mineral manures on others, and a mixture of these in different quantities an-i proportions on others, and reserving one pl«& without any manure at all, we might obtak decisive information on this interesting safe-jeet. Let us see what kind of experiment--the great Geissen Professor instituted.

No part of the field teas left u-iiliout ati% manure. A quantity of mineral manure was spread uniformly over the ivholc field, excepting a piece of vineyard of about 2000 vines, each of which received at the time of planting one quarter pound of the same mineral manure. " On separate divisions of the ' fich were cultivated wheat, rye, barley, clover, pot& toes, maize, beets, and Jerusalem artichokes."''' Would it not have been better, instead of having nine different crops and only one kind of mineral manure, to have had niue different manures, anjB ouly one crop ? If the ashes cA plants represent the manure best adapted foe their growth, no one compound of mineral manures could be best suited to both wheat aa<£ clover, maize and beets.

" Some patches received saw-dust, one nothiur-but stable-manure, another a mixture of the mix-era! manure with an equal quantity of sitbie-dtrag. Beside this stable-dung, no other animal substance no arnmoniacal manure wis used on the Whok field. One small plot had added to it several wajr-gon loads of soil from a fo.rost; another "received the same' mixed with the mineral manure."

*M2

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

.In other words, the whole field was dressed

•ssn&b the same mineral manure. Some plots

Issd staple-dung, and some forest soil with and

"•mtiiout an additional quantity of the same

■mineral manure. No purely ammoniaeal

as : fcter was used. The poor impoverished soils

gf Maryland; Virginia, &c, have been made:

fbs yield afi excellent crop by the application

; a small quantity of ammoniaeal guano.

Who knows whether such would not' have

I bh?e ease with ' : .Liebig's Heights?"

'■ rtainlv, in instituting scientific experiments,

I'Svsre could have been no harm in trying.

•"The crops the first year." says Liebig,

';iirned out so moderate, so bad, in fact," that

- i details are given. The yield of turnips, clo-

s . it and potatoes, did not suffice for keeping one

e^t, In every case, however, where organic

EEajrares containing ammonia were used, the

;qjps u were heavier than elsewhere." The

a wfeeaii manured with " stable dung and mine-

■■■x&ls was equal to any in the neighborhood."

Why not have tried a plot with stable dung,

Tjrifihoui any minerals ?

It must be evident to all that the first (year's results of Liebig's experiments are dtediigly in favour of organic or ammoniaeal ■.-as&mirea. ' We are told that in the second, x Hilrd, and fourth years the soil increased in ■productiveness, though no details at all are sgiyeii. In 1849, Liebig's gardener " purchased the whole field, and the industrious saaan. who could not afford to buy manure, „ ^manages with profit the now well-conditioned liitk farm,; assisted, during the summer .snemths, by a little business, in selling re-:£reshments, he is able to support himself and Stmily, keeping two cows, and annually raisin several head of cattle; aad he has ac-smred enough to enable him to enlarge his %>midinps; and all this without ammonia or .-ijamus, and ' only by help of mineral ^Ktannres."

This is eertainly a very gratifying result

jiiier expending on ten acres of land $3,200

§at mineral manures, &c.$ an industrious

'ihitchman, by the aid of a little business, in

ybash probably his wife and children engaged,

was enabled to support himself; and all this

guithout the aid of ammonia ! Was it ever

Sne&rd before that a man could get a living

m ten acres of land, in close proximity, to

;iarse city? But let us see whether this

■ ra.5 accomplished without the aid of ammonia.

fffaj forest muck, saw-dust, and stable-manure

seed the first year, all contained ammonia,

.-.- 3 the crops were much the lest tvhere they

were used. Liebig says:

rince tlio present owner came into possession,

the stable-manure and all the animal excrements produced on the premises, and especially ilvcvrhic, have been collected with the greatest care, and of course have been incorporated with the soil."

In other words, great care has been used to save all the ammonia and incorporate it with the soil, and fair crops, after a period of eight years, have rewarded the care and skifl of the cultivator. Who knows but this same result might have been attained in one year, by an application of ammonia ? If the atmosphere is capable of supplying all the ammonia that plants require, why was it found necessary on this field, which had been so lavishly dressed with ail the mineral elements of plants, to save all the dung and " especially the, urine" and ineorporate theia with the soil J Surely, the gardener evidenced little faith in the teachings of his great master I li these experiments prove anything, it is the verv reverse of what Liebig intended they should prove ; and they are the only experiments brought forward to sustain his position.

After disparaging Mr. Lawes' experiments Liebig says:

" 7"Ae single problem, Kortky of scientific agriculture at the present time, is to establish in place of a change of crops, a change or succession of manures, which shall enable the farmer to grow on his fields that crop, which, under the circumstances, will be most profitable. How simple a form would the labors of a farm assume, could he continuously cultivate the same plant on the same field."

This is certainly a good idea, though ah old one; but how shall we ascertain what manures are best adapted for the same crops ? Liebig himself took out a patent for " a preparation of compounds, based upon analysis of plants ^ which were estimated to provide a given species of plants with a nourishment it would need throughout a series of years." That these compounds utterly failed in Germany, England, and America, is notorious. The idea was a splendid deduction, but, unfortunately for the farmer, so far from ^revolutionizing agriculture, as was predicted, it proved what might have been foreseen, that deduction is not a safe guide in scientific agriculture. We shall probably incur Liebig's displeasure by referring to this unfortunate manure speculation. He has brought forward a number of sentences from his various works to show that he did not teach " the pure mineral theory;" but this patent mineral manure, which is a practical embodiment of the theory, is not so easily disposed of; hence the bitterness manifested on the subject.

Liebig's patent mineral manures have confessedly failed to solve " the single problem worthy of scientific agriculture." We cannot, by their use, " continuously cultivate the

i — -

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER

same plant on the same field." Now, though Mr. Lawes does not think it desirable to cultivate the same crops on the same land, he has succeeded in doing so to an extent which one would suppose from the above sentence, should have secured the approbation of the great German' chemist. There is now growing on Broadback* the tivclfth annual wheat crop, and the crop of last year, (1854,) was the largest yet harvested from it; one plot yielding 55 bushels of wheat per acre. So with the turnips on Barnfield ; the thirteenth annual crop is now growing, and though the soil is rather too heavy to be well adapted for turnip culture, yet good crops are obtained, fully equal, as we know from our own observation, to those grown in the neighborhood, under the ordinary system of rotation. So in Geescroft, twelve crops of beans have been grown in twelve years, and removed from the soil, and yet as good crops are obtained as the farmers could desire. S© of peas and tares. Clover is an exception ; no matter how lavishly and variously it is manured, clover will not flourish continually on the same land. But with other crops, Mr. Lawes has ;; solved the single problem worthy of scientific agriculture."' At the present price of wheat and ammonia, Mr. Lawes or any other intelligent agriculturist, can not only grow wheat continuously on the same land, but can also grow it with a profit. If his land, without manure, will produce 15 bushels of wheat per acre, he can make it produce 30 bushels by an application of from §12 to §15 worth of manure. If wheat sells for 80 cents to §1 per bushel, such a system will not pay; if it is worth from §2 to $3 per bushel, noth-thicg can be more profitable. Liebig says:

' : So to explain the actio:), and recommend the use of ammonia salts in the production of wheat, as Mr. Lawes has done, appears to be mockery of the present state of agriculture; for all the salts now manufactured in Europe, are not enough to auppiy the fields of the kingdom of Saxony with the quantities Used by Mr. Lawes. : '

This appears to us a very lame argument. What if salts of ammonia are not now manufactured in sufficient quantities ? If farmers can obtain what they want at present, shall they not use them ? The ammonia salts used in agriculture or commerce, are made principally from the refuse liquor of the gas works ; and in nearly every city in Europe the greater portion of this liquor runs to waste. In this country, we know of but one establishment

* Tivoodback i? the nance of Mr Lawes' experimental wbeatfield. All the fields in England are named. Barn-JUU/, Cr^ucroft, Uosr-fidd, are the names of the experimental rcirnip, v i r-n. pea, tare. p.nd clover field*.

where ammonia salts arc manufactured feEiK gas liquor for agricultural purposes. Shaft *a condemn the use of ammonia salts, bec£;ia>~ J they are not at present extensively mamrfss-?-jtured, while we have the means of m'efeasi their production to an almost unlimited? extent ?

But Mr. Lawes has not " recommended: .: juse of ammonia salts in the production ;■>' ■ wheat." Mr. Lawes tells us, indeed, that&£&-monia is specially needed for the procluctioK @S wheat; but he has never advised farmers "iffo use ammonia salts at their present price. Ilk-used them in his experiments because tfer enabled him, for a special object, to apply imz-moniafree from the organic and mineral master united with it in barn-yard manure, gua^e/,.. rape cake, &c. These experiments led hisa &* the conviction that ammonia, in ordin'ary agriculture, is greatly needed on all our whestfe soils, but he has never recommended farB&esr--- < to imitate his example, and purchase expeissim ammonia salts. He points to cheaper sour.eesF' of it. What these sources are, we shall' sss^y further on.

Professor Liebig, in somo parts of his. laie work, appears to labor under the iiapresslffu that Mr. Lawes affirms that if ammonia h& present in sufficient quantity in the soil, tLV wheat plant can grow without miner&(s. W© cannot understand how any one could arrive.. at such a conclusion from Mr. Lawes' writing^-:. Certainly he has never written any thing whid.. favors such an idea; while he has repeated*'?: declared that the "growing plant must have within its reach a sufficiency of the miners?, constituents of which it is to be built tnx B He also fully admits that the atmosphere and rain-water are capable of supplying plants wittu ' a considerable quantity of ammonia. On thes*' two main points, Liebig and Lawes are agree<3L. In what, then, do they differ? It is obvi«i> that they do differ very essentially, Jktt 5 what exact particulars, it is hard to say, sna-ply because it is impossible to determine vths£y Liebig at present teaches. From the genera.*' tenor of his works, we conclude that he- "&&, . lieves, or did believe among other things, thsisr the manurial requirements of a plant are represented by its ashes. In other words, thsfc. the proportion in which potash, phosphorfe acid, See, exist in the ashes of a plant, is ihi best proportion for them to exist in ttie ma* nure adapted for their growth. The astk©- . wheat contains 50 per cent, of phosphoric nsi& that of turnips only 10 per cent.; therefore, ; manure for wheat should contain five times 's* much phosphoric acid as a manure for tisrn-Fp*: That Liebig and Ids follower? have taught thv

mi

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

■■feetrinc, cannot be denied. Mr. Lawes' experiments prove tliis idea erroneous.

liicbig, we have shown, taught that if plants ■skt supplied with a sufficient quantity of their ;mh constituents, they will obtain all the am-::;::-usa they need from the atmosphere. Mr. Iiawes' experiments show this partly right, s '. mostly wrong. They show that wheat, TO&seh contains only a comparatively small

sitity of uitrogeu, (ammonia.) requires for t amxiinum crop, very much more ammonia ®aa the atmosphere and rain can supply un-:SiT the most favorable conditions. Ou the

;r hand, they show that beans, peas, tares, ■m& turnips, which contain much more nitro-■mm than wheaj, arc enabled to obtain nearly all aitrogep and ammonia they require, from $&)& atmosphere and rain-water. Mr. Lawes iSsioks it not improbable that the other cereals

amohly cultivated require, like wheat, a [>. larger quantity of ammonia for their ssssiinuni growth than they can obtain from, is£u and air; and that, as these generally oom-sssad a high price, and farmers wish" to raise fcm as frequently as possible, every available aaeaas should be used to increase the supply of SBESonia on the farm. But, as Liebig denies .jfeai these experiments lead to any Buch con-aiasions, let us brienj glance at the principal 3Ktults obtained.

Three fields, with the general character of g >oil and previous treatment as much alike ossible, were set apart for these experi-saents, some 17 years ago. Four crops were ssowa without any manure, and removed from ifa fields before the experiments proper commenced. One or more plots in each field were always left without any manure, and the others received a variety of the various organic and m rganic fertilizing substances. The first year, on the wheat field,

The unmanured plot yielded 16 bushels per acre.

14 Tons farm-yard manure, on a plot adjoining, 22 bushels.

The ashes of 14 tons farm-yard manure, 16 bushels.

Mean of 9 plots, dressed with artificial mineral manures, 164: bushels.

Mean of 3 plots with artificial mineral ma-aures, and 65 lbs each of sulphate of ammo-ma, 21 bushels per acre.

With turnips, the first year, the unmanured riot p-ave 4 1-5 tons of bulbs per acre.

12 Tons farm-yard manure, 9-J tons.

From these few experiment, which we select from a large number giving similar results, it will bs 1 seen that even the first year shows a great difference between the manurial requirements of the wheat and turnips. On wheat, a heavy dressing of superphosphate of lime, phosphates of magnesia and potash, and silicate of potash, gave an increase over the unmanured plot of Only three pecks per acre; . while on turnips, the superphosphate of lime trebled the crop. The 56 lbs. of sulphate of ammonia per acre, which had such a good effect on wheat, had little effect on turnips, giving only about half as large a crop as the superphosphate of lime.'.

The second > ear, the. same unmanured wheat plot gave 23 bushels per acre.

14 tons farm-yard manure, 32 bushels; and 168 lbs. each of sulphate and muriate of ammonia, 33^ bushels.

One plot, which received the previous year superphosphate of lime without benefit, was this year left without any manure, and the yield was 22§ bushels, or half a bushel less than the plot continuously unmanured.

The same unmanured plot the second year, on turnips, produced 2 1-5 tons of bulbs per acre.

5 cwt. superpBobpha'le of lime, 8| tons.

4 cwt. superphosphate of lime, with 56 lbs sulphate of ammonia, 5-]- tons.

It is remarkable that while on. the unmanured wheat plot the second year, the yield was 23 busheb, the crop on the unmanured turnip plot was only 2 1-5 tons of bulbs per acre; and while sulphate of ammonia is again so beneficial on wheat, it has no influence on turnips; on the other hand, superphosphate of lime which is attended with little or no increase on wheat, gives a great increase of turnips—four times as much as the unmanured plot!

The third year the same continuously unmanured plot yielded 1 ff bushels per acre.

On another plot, from which, the previous year, a large crop was taken by the use of ammonia salts, but which was this year left unmanured, the yield was a little over 17J bushels.

This is again nearly identical with the plot continuously unmanured, and shows conclusively that the ammonia is all assimilated' the fust year. Does it not, also, on the other hand, discountenance the popular notion that ammonia is a stimulant, acting on the plant

56 Pounds sulphate of ajnmonia, less than as alcohol on the animal organism ? r tons 224 lbs.' sulphate of ammonia alone, gave

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

is:

The ash of 3 loads of wheat straw gave 19 bushels.

The ash of 3 loads of wheat straw and 224 lbs. sulphate of ammonia, 27 bushels, nearly identical with the yield obtained from the same amount of ammonia alone.

448 lbs. of Liebig's wheat manure gave 2#i- bushels.

443 lbs. of Liebig's wheat manure, and 112 lbs. each of sulphate and muriate of ammonia, gave 29 bushels.

14 tons farm-yard manure gave 27 A bushels, or precisely the same amount as that obtained from 2 cwt. of ammonia salts alone.

The third year, the same unmanured turnip plot produced only 13£ Swt. of bulbs per acre.

6 cwt. of sulphate of ammonia, 31 tons.

534 lbs. superphosphate of lime, nearly 13 tons.

3 cwt. of sulphate of ammonia, in addition to the same amount of superphosphate, gare bo more, but rather less, than the superphosphate alene.

11 cwt. of superphosphate of lime gave 14J, tons.

The same amount of superphosphate, with 3 cwt. of sulphate of ammonia in addition, gave 14 tons and a half.

We may here remark—and we call particular attention to it, as showing that it is the phosphoric, and not the sulphuric acid, to which superphosphate of lime owes its efficacy as a manure for turnips—that 12 cwt. rf sulphate of lime gave less than 5 % tons; and the same amount of sulphate of lime, with 3 cwt. of sulphate of ammonia in addition, gave only 4£ tons, while superphosphate, with and without ammonia, gives 14 £ tons.

We might extract from these -extensive and long continued experiments many more similar results for other years, but surely we have given enough to show that 60 far as applied to wheat, the mineral theory, as taught in the extracts we have given from Liebig and his followers, is at fault; and also that for turnips, while the rain and atmosphere are capable of supplying to a great extent the ammonia they require, and that it is partly true that the crop " increases or diminishes in a direct ratio with the supply of mineral elements capable erf assimilation •" yet it is evident that the proportion in which mineral elements are required, are precisely the opposite of what the analysis of the ashes of the turnip would lead us to expect.*

* 0)r limited space has compelled o»; to Ic«7e out the riyt'.'y rS repeated applications (of potash.) of which the rnmip Bdb contains sortie <!0 prjr cect,) eodn, magnesia, &-c, l.'jt we may renwV that they were a'wnded with fit'.e or r.o bear&.

The experiments in Gcescrnft, on beans, peas, and tares, show that these plants, whk-k contain such a large amount of nitrogen, ar* benefited little if any by an application «f ammonia or nitrogen. The same, to a ccrtek extent may be said of clover. There is w clently great difference in the mammal m-cpiireineuts of wheat, and probably of tbe other cereals, and those of turnips, beans., peas, tares, and clover. The mineral theory of Liebig, indeed, points out a difference, hui it is the terry reverse of what the above experiments and others which might be brough?: forward, show to be the ease.

Liebig claims these experiments as a practical confirmation of his theory; and by suppressing some of the principal facts, mistaking others, and seizing on one or two results thai are manifest exceptions to the general indications of the experiments, and by a series <$. ingenious special pleadings, he endeavors as to twist the results as to make them sanctusj the mineral theory. Let us examine the arguments of the great chemist.

From the facts that the unmanured whesSfc plot yields annually about 18 bushels of wheat per acre; that the addition of a great variety of mineral manures gives little or no increase:: and that the addition of ammonia alone gives a great increase, we had concluded that thk field contained an abundance of all tlie mineral clcme?Us of plants capable of assimilation, and that the reason why it produced IS bushels per acre, instead of 28, as when ammonia was used, was to be attributed to e lack of ammonia. In other words, that whea, on this soil, cultivated after the most ap*pro?©d methods, hand-hoed thrice in the spring, abounding in all the mineral elements of plants, was not able to obtain sufficient ammonia from the atmosphere for a maximum croft. Were this admitted, the dearly cherished mineral theory must be given up; and Liebig, therefore, endeavors to prove that the reason why 18 bushels per acre only were obtained, is attributable to a deficiency of available minerals He assei ts that the cause of the beneficial effect of the sulphate of ammonia is due to its solvent action on the phosphates of the soil; and that it simpry or principally acted by rendering an increased amount of the mineral elements of the soil capable of assimilation.

We would ask, in reply, if maximum wheat crops were not obtained from lack cf soluble phosphates, &c, why it was that an application of soluble phosphates, &c, did not increase the crop ? They were used in various forms and proportions, without stint, yet they

THE

SOUTHERN PLANTER.

sfaare no increase, and Liebig's own patent w&eat manure failed. If, moreover, sulphate <s£ acimonia acts merely as a solvent of phos-lg&aies, &c, how does it happen that the Staijge amount used on some of the turnip plots 5s attended with little or no increase, while jastaMe phosphates artificially applied, give an -aestenishing increase.

IX is impossible to answer these questions, saaS accordingly Liehig endeavors to show £&&£ the increase of turnips, from an applica-■' m of superphosphate of lime, is not due to siJbs soluble phosphate of lime which it con-ftuas, butto the sulphate of" lime necessarily saa^Bciated with it.

Stiglish farmers will be glad to learn that SLjs simply the sulphate of lime the superphos-^jjSaate contains that benefits their turnip crop, ?&&&. that the} r can obtain the same effect very Keseh cheaper from gypsum or plaster. We 'Tkmre no dottbt that half a million dollars ^m&ztli of superphosphate was applied to the fkaralp crop of England last year, the greater ipeariion of which might have been saved by a ikaswlcdge of the fact discovered by Professor 'Eiebig!!

'.Some will ask on what evidence our author lasses this opinion. We answer, on one sol-2&sury result, taken from Mr. Lawes' experi--•jj&eEts—a result in direct contradiction to the ^general indications of the investigation, and in -sjspos'ition to the results of other experiments o& Gurnips, with superphosphate, sulphate of 'lizse and sulphuric acid—a result, in shor which is simply a typographical mistahe.-Jjjiebrg says :

" A like plot, in 1845, which received 12 cwt. of -gypaam, (residue from the preparation of tartaric s-dd,) and 10 cwt. of rape-cake, yielded IS tons, 1

■ tewfc -fii' turnips, six tons 'More than those fields on wfcich-phosphoric acid was employed. * * What strange results do these facts offer,—in what in-

• *«Baprchenslble contradiction do they stand to the •TMwsof ftjr. Lawes."

■On referring to our copy of Mr. Lawes' pa-ipes, we found a marginal note, made years «go, stating that the 18 tons, 1 cwt., should Jke 10 tons, 1 cwt. It is much to be regretted Shat this mistake was not marked in the copy -sent Professor Liebig; or that he did not dis-*»ver the error, as he might have done by re-,'ferring to the tables on the two following pa-Tpages. Few will be surprised, considering .-Hie immense amount of tabulation in Mr. .•Lawes' papers, that a printer, should in one iEstance, pkee an 8 instead of a 10, but it .■will astonish many to find that on this single vnisia/cc, Liebig should adopt a view which is ■aofc only opposed to the general indications of ihe whole series of experiments, but is also at

r

variance with the experience of every farmer who has used superphosphate of lime and sulphate of lime of lime as a manure for turnips.

This error corrected, the opinion based upon it falls to the ground, and with it the idea that the beneficial effect of sulphate of ammonia on wheat is due to its rendering the phosphates of the soil soluble. Soluble phosphates greatly increased the turnip crap, but the same soluble phosphates, on similar soil, did not increase jhe wheat crop ; sulphate of ammonia did not increase the turnip crop, but did greatly increase the wheat crop ; therefore sulphate of ammonia does not act simply in furnishing to the wheat plants soluble phosphates.

Mr. Lawes repeatedly alludes in his papers to the fact that though the increase of wheat over the unmanured plot was in pretty direct ratio to the quantity of ammonia applied to the soil, yet that the increase was never so great as theoretical considerations would lead us to suppose. Thus, estimating a bushel of wheat and its proportion of straw, to contain a pound of nitrogen, it might be supposed that if nitrogen was wanted, a pound.of nitrogen, applied in soluble ammonia salt, would give an extra bushel of wheat; but this is not the case. Without making any pretensions to settle the exact amount, Mr. Lawes estimates, from the immense number of instances in which ammonia has been used, in various ways and proportions, in his experiments, that five times as much nitrogen, in the form of ammonia, is required to produce a bushel of wheat, as it contains when grown. This estimate has stood the test of many trials, and is in accordance with the well-ascertained effects of Peruvian <;uano on wheat. Mr. Lawes founds on this fact some very important practical suggestions, but which we cannot at this time refer to. Lie-big takes no notice of this opinion, and refers* to the loss of ammonia in these experiments, as though it had escaped the attention of Mr. Lawes, and as though he were the first to peint it out. and he proceeds to show that the increase "bears no relation whatever" to the ammonia added to the soil. This is proving far too much, even for Liebig's own theory of the action of ammonia as a solvent; but let that pass. The method Liebig adopts to get at this result, is as follows: 60 lbs. of ammonia, say, give in 1S44. an increase on the unmanured plot of 10 bushels. This increase contains only 15 lbs. of ammonia, and there-lore Liebig estimates that "beyond all doubt," 45 lbs. of ammonia are left in the soil for the next crop. In 1845, 60 lbs. of ammonia a<rain give an increase of 10 bushels; but Liebig ™ l! ' adds to this the 45 ibs. which he assumes re- HJ main in the soil from the previous year, making 105 lbs.; and in this way he proceeds, adding the ammonia he supposes to remain in the soil to that applied each year, and from the. figures obtained proves that the increase bears no pro-

file 391!

■;, <■-■

%

IktK

!i '.-■

jkai

m

kit plol

tj

ii;

ndi hi

lot hi

Hon <

Ktl KM

i\ fitttl inly ence have fe;i Ibesel year—

01

irgtra

rosiaii ile,"

Iiil

case io

in lie; pose oi

ItisiTf

and in way id Cbemis

00'.!' ■

posited

Wi]

certain

PO'JSuS. feat

lh.il omnia s

no; i: .

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

portion to the supply of ammonia ! We be- j would have shown a belter spirit, had h© r&sfc-Iieve this method of estimating the action of i the views of Mr. Lawes and Prof. Way en th:.s ammonia fundamentally erroneous. Certainly < point with some argument, rather than "by f»-we do not know of a single result, in these or'noring them altogether, and reasoning as-Sh« f any other experiments, that shows the ammo- nothing had been said in regard to it. nia of soluble salts to remain in the soil over j -phe whole question appears to us to turn m, , one year, when wheat is grown, and when euf-j (n j s ver y subject, which Liebig has entirety t ficient minerals are present to enable the plants : overlooked in his review of Lawes' exper»-: to take up all the ammonia they require. Let, mer its. If it be true that wheat and the stiver -♦ns suppose a case, and one whieh is clearly de-i cereal grasses need for their production a mwjtf* ducible from the experiments. The continu-j \ nrger quantity of ammonia than they cob tasa j ousiy unmanured plot gives 15 bushels ol j w h en growrj; an j ;i; on the other hand, turnips. ' wheat per acre; a plot adjoining, dressed with; beans, peas, tares and clover do not.'we fcsws 30 lbs: of ammonia, gives 20 bushels per acre;j at once an explanation of those gradually o'i.-another lot, dressed with 60 lbs. of ammonia.; veloped systems of rotation which an enlsghi-gives25 bushels: another, dressed with 90 lbs., ; ene j experience has proved judicious. We see-gives 30 bushels: and another, receiving 1201 a tonce w hy two grain crops should not ibBawr-lb?., 35 bushels per acre. The next year. ai!: eacn other; why closer and peas and beaa* these plots receive no manure, and the produce | are ,h e best crops to precede wheat, and w6y is the same on each, neither more nor less than j t h e turnip, in the Norfolk system of Brttisfe that from the continuously unmanured plot.; agriculture, is such an excellent crop to pre-What deductions should we make from such | ce " c | e barley. Indeed, we do not know of oo® facts? According to Liebig's view, the first ■ solitary well-established fact that is opposed 8» plot would contain, the second year, no ammo-! tn j s view ; and surely, if it be correct, nothing: nia; the second plot would contain 24 lbs. ol' can be more important to a correct under-ammoma ; the third. 4S fbs.; the fourth, 72 lbs.;' standing of rational agriculture. It is trs*„ aid the fifth, 96 lbs. of ammonia per acre.: t hat it points to no revolution in our preset-Now, if this be true, surely the produce would; svs , e ,n of culture, and in this respect will he. Dot be alike on all the plots ! A direct apphca-j ] ess acceptable to all ultra reform era'; but & tion or ammonia has always given a definite explains the rationale of the most approves® increase, and we cannot see why the ammonia! 8ygteras 0 f rotation and general farm rnanssgE-remamingin the soil from the previous year| men() confirms what practical farmers hays. should not also give an increased yield. The, previously but indistinctly perceived, and nj-g«a fact that it does not is clearly established, not; them t0 carry out still further, and by taocer only by these experiments, but by the experi-1 economical methods, a system of improved. ence of hundreds of practical farmers, who ' culture they have already commenced, have used salts of ammonia. Peruvian guano,!

&c.; and we feel warranted in concluding from j In Germany Liebig's pamphlet has prjn-these facts, that ammonia is all used up the first) duced considerable excitement. Dr. W&IS^ year—unless Liebig, or those who agree with i Professor of Chemistry in the celebrated Me* him on this point, can jbring forward betterjhenheim Academy of Agriculture and E

h

argument to the contrary, than the simple, un-sustained assertion that it is "perfectly impossible."

Is it not more consistent with the facts of the

Academy of Agriculture and ForaaC -Culture, and a man who, in the language o£ Mr. S. W. Johnson, of Yale College, unites " eminent scientific ability with praetiea*' knowledge," has written a masterly reply &*

&'

ca«e: to .oppose that the ammonia, being noite| Libi ; D d enters warmly into the defeneeoS

loluble. is all taken up the first year: and that I,, to ' T „ ~,.„ / , . ,.,»

in the growth of wheat there is, for some pur-j Mess, : s - L f wes & Gll J bert > who f Mifitifie ^ ose or other, a great destruction of ammonia? j Potation the great advocate of the minerat is well kBown that plants give off oxygen,; theory" has savagely assailed. This^ ha® and in the absence of light, carbonic acid; j called forth another paper from Prof. LieMg; why may tli^y not also give off ammonia?! and which has been translated by Mr. S. W, Chemists have always had a difficulty in ac-j Johnson, and will be found in the " County punting for the manner in which silica is de-j Geritleman » (0ct u Nov . 8) The ter

posited on tne straw oi tne wheat plant. Prof. .- /•'. i i t v. • °

Way has shown that ammonia and silica, in fP^tionof lt ; has only a remote bearing ^poo, sertata double salts, form slightly soluble com- j the subject under discussion. Prof. Liebigr pounds, and he suggested that in this form the [appears to avoid, as much as possible, th& silica and ammonia is taken up into the plant ;jreal issues of the question. When the resclfi *nd th^t when the silica is deposited, the am-, of any of Mr. Lawes'experiments throw doo.bfc ncnia evaporates into the air. Our object is j on LJ c biV s views, he cries out, "Must not

oV > every farmer see that conclusions founded

we wi.-.h merely to show that Liebig has no •ight (o.assame, as he has done, that it is ^perfectly impossible " for plants to take up more immonia than they contain-when grown, and ound a:l argument op the assumption. He

upon experiments conducted in a manner so rough, so utterly lacking circumspection, are. utter/)/ valueless !" But when any of the results of these same experiments confirm acj-

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER,

A Ltebig's opinions, he tells us, " The facts sjhieh he" (Mr. Lawes) "has aseeiftainedj teach 3© many important doctrines in reference to :'_,.■ cultivation and manuring of the soil, that I hold them to he of very special value to the aseory of agriculture. ' And in another place jfc says of these "utterly valueless?' 1 experi-assentsj "It must he acknowledged, what I said sti first, that of all the investigations that hsve been made, none are so eminently adapt-«*l as his" (Mr. Lawes") "to advance tha r&ineral theory." "Mr. Lawes' experiments Sims demonstrate''' — ''• The trials' of Lawes aonfirm this view"—" Mr. Lawes has proved" —" But the experiments of Mr. Lawes furnish perfectly definite and reliable facts relative to l&is subject"—"The results of Mr. Lawes ilemonstrate precisely"—"From the result of Sr. Lawes it is perfectly certain"—&c. &c.

To us it is " perfectly certain" that the same experiments cannot be " idterh/ value-i&ss" and of " very special value," and we are ■milQ unable to understand how "experiments 'oondnetcd in a manner so rough, so utterly isevoid of circumspection," can "demonstrate," oar "prove," or "disprove," or render "perfectly certain" anything at all; and yet " of all the liwestigations that have been made, none are 30 eminently adapted to advance the mineral i&eor't/.* "Indeed," exclaims Liebig, in an-®'£her'place, "I consider them the firmest sup-fiQtrt of the theory." ' This is proving too araeh. The mineral theory is confessedly a Jedustion, and the inductive experiments ^rhieh are its firmest support are " utterly raloeless."

But to the question. As we have said, Mr. Lawes found a definite increase of wheat from an application of ammonia to a soil atooundiug in all the mineral elements of plants. But under the most favorable cir-Kimstances he. has never obtained as much aitrogen in the increase of grain and straw as was supplied to the soil in manure. He includes from this, that in the growth of wheat there is a great loss of ammonia. Without attempting to determine the exact proportion, he states that his experiments indicate that for one pound of nitrogen (ammonia) organized in the wheat plant, five pounds are evaporated into the atmosphere, and arc lost to the farm. On the other band, his experiments with turnips, clover, oeans, peas, and tares, prove that in the growth of these so-called " fallow crops," no 3uch loss takes place. Liebig, as 'has been stated, took no notice of these views of Mr. Lawes, but Dr. Wolff has forced them upon

his attention; and in his reply to Dr. Wolff Liebig alludes to them as follows:

" In the writings of experienced agriculturists, I find as quite a genera 1 rule, that they do not hold a field rich in ammonia (freshly dunged.) to be especially adapted for the cultivation of wheat, but recommend some other crop (potatoes) to precede wheat on Mich soils.

" But the experiments of Mr. Lawes furnish perfectly definite and reliable facts relative to this subject. lie has found that a field which bad previously received no ammonia nor ammonia salts, can yield a medium harvest of 1125 lbs. wheat and 17.5G cwt. straw for seven years in succession, without any artificial supply of ammonia, and in the last years the yield was greater than at first.

" From this it is perfectly certain that a soil, otherwise good, will yield almost an average crop of wheat without an addition or excess of ammonia ; and that, no matter what quantity of ammonia may have been contained in the soil originally, and given up to the plant, or lost, this loss was without effect on the crops of the succeeding years.

"It is therefore allowable to pronounce the assertions of Dr. Wolff—that wheat requires for perfect development more ammonia than the soil contains in natural form—that the soil suffers a los6 of ammonia by the cultivation of wheat, becoming in consequence less fertile—are wanting all foundation in fact, because the results of Mr. Lawes demonstrate precisely the contrary. * * The erroneous assertion of Dr. 'Wolff rests equally upoa the.erroneous interpretation which Mr. Lawes has given of the fact that ammonia salts increased the yield of his wheat field.

" While BIr. Lawes harvested 17 bushels wheat and 17J cwt. straw from one acre of unmanured field annually for seven years, a plot of equal size and quality, which received in the first year 5 cwt.. of dissolved bones, and 2 cwt. of silicate of potasls, and in the following six years 32G lbs of ammonia salts (the average) annually, yielded 25 bushels, or a yearly increase of 8 bushels of wheat, and a corresponding larger produce of straw.

" Now, since this plot, as a part of the same experimental field, would undoubtedly have grown 17 bushels without any manure, he ascribed the increase to the action of the ammonia salts, without taking any account of what had beea. added the first year.

" Further, since in order to produce one bushel more of wheat than the unmanured plot would have yielded, Mr. Lawes added 41 \ lbs. of ammonia salt; and since one bushel of wheat contains 1.2 lbs. of nitrogen, and 42£ lbs. of ammonia salts .contain 6£ lbs. of nitrogen, he harvested in the grain and straw fire times less ammonia than he added to the soil. This is the fact. The false* conclusion that he deduces is, that the culture of wheat is accompanied by an enormous loss of ammonia, since, at the lowest estimate, 5 lbs. of ammonia must bs added to the soil in order to get one bushel of increase per acre.

" In order to draw a general conclusion from the observed fact, i.e., to be able to speak of it as a matter of settled experience, Mr. Lawfes should have determined, in accordance with the rules of research, the general conditions which determine the production of one bushel of wheat and the corresponding amount of straw in a&

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

109

cases, as well as the special conditions which caused the increase in his experiments.

If no*.r it is true that 6 lbs. of ammonia were necessary to produce one bushel of extra yield, and that of this ammonia 5 lbs. were lost (evaporated through the plant), it must also be true that o lbs. of ammonia were removed from the soil of the unmanured plot, to produce every bushel of ordinary yield, and of this ammonia 5 lbs. also were lost to the soil by volatilization.

" Since now the unmanured plot yielded in seven years 123f bushels of wheat, it follows that the soil must have contained, or received from the air or rains, 618| lbs. of pure ammonia, or 385U lbs. of carbonate of ammonia (salts of hartshorn), and that in seven years this quantity of ammonia was rendered useless for future harvests by the - wheat culture.

" Such a conclusion it is impossible to support "by any fact. What we know with certainty is, that during seven years 21} lbs. of nitrogen were annually removed from the soil of the unmanured plot by the crop grown upon it, or 149 lbs. in total. But how much ammonia was contained in the soil, and was consumed in the production of 171 bushels of wheat, we know nothing about.

'•' Since, now, Mr. Lawes did not know how much ammonia the wheat plant 'requires from the soil in order to give one bushel of yield upon the unmanured plot, how could he know that for every bushel of increased yield (gain by manuring) precisely six pounds of ammonia were necessary ?

l! If it had accidentally occurred to Mr. Lawes

are sorry to add, most unscrupulous of controversialists. He seems to "stick at nothing" that will help him to make out a case. Nevertheless, we are glad that Dr. Wolff has succeeded in forcing him to attack Mr. Lawes' main position. We have given Liebig's whole argument, and wiil now briefly examine it.

It is true, as Liebig states, that Mr. Lawes' soil yielded 17 bushels of wheat per acre annually for seven years, without any manure ; and we may add, indeed, for thirteen years. It is also true that mineral manures—the ashes of the wheat plant—alone, do not enable it to produce any larger crop. It is further true that 17 bushels "is almost an average crop of wheat." On the other hand, it is also true that where this same soil has been annually supplied with ammonia ahn-c, much larger crops have been obtained—on an average of seven years, as Liebig admits, lialf as much again; and, we may add, last year (1354) as much as 34J- bushels per acre were obtained; and this, it must be observed, after ten successive crops had been grown (and removed from the soil) by the aid of ammonia alone. The province of Agricultural Chemistry, Lie-big tells us, is to produce more gram &nd more

. meat, and not simply grain and meat, which to manure his field with four, five, or six cwt. of , \ j \ V° „„. • ..», . .

ammonia salts, instead of with 8;- cwt... and if in **ave been produced lor centuries without aer

those cases the yield was not increased (as we may with certainty assume would happen) then he might with the same justice assert that the loss of ammonia is 6, 8, or 10 lbs. for every bushel of increased yield.

" Or if Mr. Lawes had applied ammonia salts at the rate of 2 or 1 cwt. instead of 3\ cwt. the acre, and then, after previous manuring with dissolved bones and silicate of potash (whose action lie has not taken at all into account), had harvested the same increase of 8 bushels, his conclusion that the soil suffers a loss of ammonia would doubtless have t>eeri' vastly modified. He lias made the loss and not found it. The number 5 for the amount of ammonia, and the quantity 1 bushel for the increased yield, are not expressions for a natural relation between manure and crops. The first does not express the weight of ammonia necessary to produce a maximum of increase equal to 1, and ascertained by a series of observations, but is a mere stroke of fancy. It never seems to have occurred to Mr. Lawes to determine the minimum of ammonia which was effective upon his field in producing maximum crops." v

The pith of the controversy lies here; and Liebig puts forth his whole strength. We have rarely met with a finer specimen of special pleading. It is, however, the only portion of his lengthy paper which is to the point. The case against Mr. Lawes is stated in as strong a light as possible, and no doubt many who read

aid. We fully agree to this; the object of agriculture is not to maintain merely, but to in-crease the productiveness of our fields. How can this be done ? Liebig says truly that the 17 bushels of wheat annually grown on Mr. Lawes' experimental field, by the aid of good-tillage alone, is "almost an average crop." But the object of Agricultural Chemistry, according to Liebig, is to increase the productiveness of our fields. This Mr Lawes hag done. Instead of 15 or 20 bushels of wheat per acre, he has grown 30 and 40 bushels, and in 1854 as high as 55 bushels; and, in a private letter recently received, Mr. Lawes informs us that some of'the plots this year (1855) more than double the unmanured plot, the yield on which Ls still 17 bushe's per acre. On this soil, by good tillage alone, 17 bushels of wheat are annually grown. The objeot is to get a heavier crop. It was supposed that "as the crops on a field diminish or increase in exact proportion to the diminution or increase of the mineral substances conveyed to it in manure," superphosphate of lime, potash, soda, lime, magnesia, sulphuric acid, chlorine, and soluble silica, or the ashes of the wheat plant, would increase the crop; hut they did not. Liebig's patent wheat manure was also tried

only one side,.will be'deceived by the plausi-liu vain. But ammonia, in whatever form used ble sophistries of thin greatest, ablest, and, we \ increased the crop. .Six pounds of ammonia

DO

THE

SOUTHERN PLANTEE

gave an extra bushel of wheat. But this extra increase only contains nitrogen equal to one pound of ammonia, and it is supposed that the remaining five pounds are evaporated through the plant, and that this loss of ammonia is necessary to the growth of the plant, or, at all events, there are at present no other known means of enabling the farmer to increase his wheat crop over 1/ bushels per acre.

Liebig denies that auy loss of ammonia takes place; but he has no evidence, aside from Sir Lawes' experiments, on which he bases his denial. His argument is this :—If the plot without manure produces 17 bushels of wheat per acre, and one with 102 lbs. of ammonia 34 bushels, and if the increase is due to ammonia, it follows that the 1? bushels grown on the unmauured acre must also have required and removed from the soil 102 lbs of ammonia. This we must fully admit. But Liebig says : "Such a conclusion it is impossible to support by any fact." This is his whole argument. It is "impossible" that the soil should contain, or that the rain and air should supply, such a quantity of ammonia. A strange argument this, to be made by the very man who taught that if plants were supplied with a sufficient quantity of mineral elements in an available condition, they would obtain all the ammonia they required from the atmosphere; and that, in the language of Prof. Horsford, "the ammonia spread on fields in the ordinary distribution of barn-yard products, is of no moment. The quantity with usual falls of rain greatly exceeds, in the course of a season, any conceivable supply by human instrumentality'''' Now that it suits Liebig's purpose, we are told that it is impossible that the soil, the atmosphere, and the rain combined, could supply 102 lbs. of ammonia—an amount contained in 600 lbs. of Peruvian guano, or in 5 tons of good, or 10 tons of poor, barn-yard manure! Furthermore, Liebig, in his Clutrnistry in its Application to Agricultwe and Physiology, when speaking of the quantity of ammonia brought to the soil in rain water, says : "If a pound of rain-water contains only one quarter of a grain of ammonia, then a field of 26,910 square feet must receive annually upwards of 88 lbs. of ammonia." An English acre con-tains 43,560 square feet; arid according to this estimate, which we are given to understand is a low one, 142 lbs. of ammonia are brought to an English acre of soil by the rain which falls in twelve months. This estimate was made to 8how that farmers need not bo at any pains to provide ammonia foi their crops, as the atmosphere would supply a rich abundance—and, indeed, 142 lbs. of ammonia would provide

I more nitrogen than the grain and straw of the I heaviest wheat crop contains ! Now, when Mr. ! Lawes contends that the atmosphere and rain-: water cannot supply the wheat plant with suf-i ncient ammonia for a large crop, because it destroys ammonia during its growth, Liebig turns round and oracularly declare* this de-i struction "impossible," because "the soil" [of the unmanured wheat plot] "must have con-I tained or received from the air or rain, in seven \years, 618^ lbs. of pure ammonia." In other words, it is impossible this destruction should take place, because the soil, the air, and the rain combined, cannot furnish in a year 83J lbs of ammonia per acre, while, according to Liebig's own estimate, the rain-water alone furnishes 142 lbs. of ammonia. It is difficult to argue with a writer who resorts to such pitiable subterfuges.

We have brought forward what we deem conclusive evidence, that there is a great loss of ammonia in the growth of wheat. Liebig endeavors to set it aside by saying that the ammonia in Mr Lawes' experiments acted beneficially because it rendered the phosphates of the soil soluble. "We conceive that we have fully answered this objection. Assuming that the action of ammonia is in rendering the phosphates soluble, Liebig says :

"If it had accidentally occurred to Mr. Lawes to manure his field with four, five, or six cwt. of ammonia salts, instead of 3£ cwt., and if in those cases the yield was not increased (as we may viith certainty assume would happen,) then he might with the same justice assert that the loss of ammonia is G, 8, or 10 lbs. for every bushel of increased yield. * * * It seems never to have occurred to Mr. Lawes to determine the minimum of ammonia which was effective upon his field in producing maximum crops-"

We trust Liebig had not Mr. Lawes' papers before him when he penned these sentences, otherwise h o is inexcusable. Ammonia has been applied in these experiments in Imndreds of instances, and in various proportions ; and in all cases it has produced, where unaffected by modifying causes, an increase, within certain limits, in proportion to the quantity of ammonia; and in no single instance has an increase of wheat been obtained except by a great destruction of ammonia. Quantities of ammonia, varying from 14 lb*, up to 180 lbs. per acre, have-been applied; and even in these extreme cases, the increase of wheat is in proportion to the ammonia supplied in manure : the former produced 211 bushels, the latter 50 bushels of dressed wheat, or 55 bushels (of 60 lbs. per bushel) of total" grain, per acre. The amount of ammonia aoplied to this latter plot would be contained in about 815 lbs of commercial

■

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER

ill

sulphate of ammonia. And yet Liebig says we may "with certainty assume 1 ' that it' Mr. Lawes had accidentally manured his field with 4, 5, or 6 cwt. of ammonia salts, he would have obtained no greater increase than from 31 cwt. Now, as we have shown, he did apply—not "accidentally," however— more than 4, 5, or 6 cwt., and obtained a proportional increase. We may "with certainty assume," therefore, that Liebig has made a great mistake on this point.

The objections which Prof. Liebig has made to Mr. Lawes' experiments, are so utterly without foundation in jact, that nothing but his great reputation renders them worthy of notice.

Our remarks are already far too extended, but we have just received the last Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England (Vol. XVI, Part 1,) in which we find a "Report td the Earl of Leicester, on experiments conducted by Mr. Keary, on the Growth of Wheat, at Holkham Park Farm, Norfolk, by J. B. Lawes," which affords much light on the subject under discussion. It is a report of an experiment in growing wheat four years in succession, by the use of the various organic and inorganic elements of plants, somewhat similar to that on the Rothamstead farm, with this important difference : The soil at Rothamstead is a heavy wheat soil; this in Norfolk is "alight, thin, and rather shallow brown sand loam," which, previous to the introduction of turnipculture by the late Win. Coke, on this very farm, was considered incapable of growing wheat. A greater contrast than between it and the Rothamstead soil could scarcely be imagined. And yet tlie results are the same. •

The same manures were applied to the same acre each year, and the whole of the produce removed. We have not space for the details, but the following are the aggregate results of the four years:

The first acre, on which no manure at all was used, produced in four years, 93£ bushels, or an average of a little over 23£ bushels per acre each year.

The second acre, dressed each year with 300 lbs. sulphate of potash, 200 lbs. sulphate of soda, 100 lbs. sulphate of magnesia, and 350 lbs. of superphosphate of lime (200 lbs. calcined bone-dust and 150 lbs. sulphuric acid,) produced, in four years, 92 bushels, or an average of 23 bushels per acre each year.

The third acre, dressed each year with 200 lbs. each of sulphute and muriate of ammonia, applied in the autumn, produced, in four years,

1125 J bushels, or a little over 31 j bushels per acre each year.

On the fourth acre the same quantity of ammonia applied as a top dressing in the

[spring, gave in four years, 124 bushels, or au average of 31 bushels per acre each year.

On the fifth acre, the' same quantity of mina-ral manures (sulphates of potash, soda, and magnesia, and superphosphate of lime,) as applied on the second acre, and 200 lbs. each of sulphate and muriate of ammonia, produced, in four years, 145 bushels, Or an average of 064: bushels per acre each year.

The sixth acre, dressed with a ton of rape-cake (2000 lbs.) each year, produeed, in four

jyears, 147i bushels, or an average of 36£ bushels per acre each year.

The seventh acre, dressed each year with 14 tons of farm-yard dung, produced, in four

1 years, 135^ bushels, or an average of 33£ bushels per acre each year.

Without manure the soil produced 23 bushels of wheat per acre; the addition of mineral manures alone gave no increase f ammonia alone gave an increase of 8 bushels; ammonia, and minerals, an increase of 13 bushels. From this it is evident that the amount of minerals annually available in this naturally poor soil, were considerably in excess of the quantity of ammonia annually available from natural sources; in fact, that there were minerals sufficient for 31 bushels, while there was only enough ammonia for 23 bushels. Rut the quantity of minerals annually rendered available by the disintegration of the soil, &c, although considerably in excess of the natural supply of ammonia, was not sufficient for more than an annual crop of wheat of 31 bushels per acre. To obtain more than this, it was necessary to supply, in addition to ammonia, a greater or less quantity of the mineral elements of plants. When these were supplied, the produce rose to 36 bushels.

The fact that, under these circumstances the mineral manures were taken up by the plants r and gave an increased crop, is conclusive evidence that they were in an available condition, and that their failure, when used alone, ia these and in the Rothamstead experiment!!, is attributable to a lack of ammonia in the sonV and not totfceir being in an unsuitable form or improper proportion. It demonstrates that although a soil abounds in the mineral elements of plants in an available condition, sufficient ammonia or nitrogen can not be obtained from natural sources for a full wheat crop. It is additional proof, if such were needed, that ammonia does not act solely, or

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

in any great degree, by rendering phosphates or other minerals soluble.

The ton of rape-cake was calculated to . afford as much ammonia and minerals as were supplied in the artificial minerals and ammonia salts on plot 5. It also contained, in addition, a large amount of carbonaceous matter. It will be seen that the increase of wheat is nearly identical in the two cases, and it follows that the avrlxmaceous matter had no beneficial effect on the wheat crop. This also is a result exactly in accordance with the Rothamsfcead experiments.

Similar results t<j the above have also been obtained from experiments made on the farm of the Duke of Bedford, at Woburn, on a soil and subsoil naturally of the poorest-possible description.

It will be recollected that Prof Liebig endeavored to set aside the exceedingly important fact that turnips, which contain only a relatively small proportion of phosphoric acid, require in the soil, in an available condition, more of this substance than wheat, the ash of which oontains five times as much as that of turnips. We showed that he founded his objections on a single typographical error, which he might have discovered on the next page We shall not again allude to the results of Mr. Lawes, experiments on this point; they are so conclusive that he must be blind indeed who cannot sec that they explode the idea that we can tell what manure is best adapted to this or that particular crop from an analysis of its ashes. Our object in alluding to the matter, is to mention that, in the last Journal cf the Royal Agricultural Society, Dr. Augustas Voelcker, Professor of Chemistry in the Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, England, gives an account of some experimental trials made on the farm connected with the College, to ascertain "the comparative value «f different artificial manures for raising a crop of Swedes" or ruta bagas, the results of which also accord with those obtained by Mr Lawes., We have not room for the details of the experiments, but will quote a few of the remarks of Dr. Voelcker:

"An extended experience has proved, in the most positive manner, the specific action of phos-phatic manures, and the decided advantages which result from their application to root crops." .

" Numerous comparative lield experiments have established the superior value of superphosphate of lime as a manure for root crops, and have shown likewise that the greatest fertilizing effect of g*ano is realized by applying it to a white crop or to grass land."

" Ammonia does not exhibit the same powerful

effect on other crops which it does on the cereals."

" Ammonia 'does not benefit root Crops in an

equal degree as white crops ; whereas, phosphatic

manures exercise a specific action on roots, which causes them to swell, and thus to increase the crop."

" Phosphoric acid applied in a form in which'it can be readily assimilated by the growing plant, more than any other fertilizing constituent benefits root crops."

" On the whole, we may learn from these experiments, that the value of different artificial manures for a crop of Swedes, and no doubt also for other root crops, principally depends on the amount of phosphoric acid contained- in them in a form in which it can be readily assimilated by the plants."

The experience of practical farmers also agrees with these experiments, in according to available phosphoric acid a high value as a special manure for turnips. One manufacturer alone sold, in Great Britain, last year, 14,000 tons of superphosphate of lime, to be used as a manure for—what? For wheat, which contains so much phosphoric acid ? No; but for turnips, which contain so little.

To conclude, these resultspoint lono "revolution" in agriculture; they simply throw light on the rationale of systems of rotation and general (arm management, already adopted by practical agriculturists. They say "_" underdrain your land, so that the rain water, as it filters through the soil to the drains, may leave its ammonia for the use of plants. Grow more clover, peas, beans, tares, lupines, turnips, and other plants, which will retain all the ammonia brought to them in rain and dews, or obtained from the atmosphere, the soil or manure. In feeding cattle, use that food which, other things being equal, contains most nitrogen, for the excrements will be correspondingly rich in ammonia. In short, in everything you do, lei it be your aim to conserve as much ammonia on the farm as possible. In this you cannot go wrong, for there is no means of getting ammonia in any considerable quantity but what at the same time affords more of the mineral elements of plants, in proportion to the wants of wheat, and probably of Indian corn, barley, oats, and other high priced cereals, than it does of ammonia. To illustrate : good Peruvian guano is the most amtnoniacal manure in the market; and yet it c< mains generally as much phosphoric acid as it does of ammonia ; while, according to Mr. Lawes' experiment, a bushel of wheat removes from the soil five times as much ammonia as it does of phosphoric acid. In nearly all substances used as manure, the proportion of mineral elements relatively to the wants of the wheat plant is greatly in excess of the ammonia which they contain.

We cannot impoverish the soil of minerals, therefore, by growing large crops by the aid of such manures as are now in the market, if the straw and home sources of manure are properly husbanded.

But, the reader will ask, If we obtain large crops of wheat, corn, &c, by accumulating ammonia in the soil by the growth ofturnips, peas, clover, &c,

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER

113

shall we not in this cage impoverish the soil of minerals 1 Yes, it is possible to impoverish the soil in this way, bnt as turnips require for their growth more phosphoric acid than wheat and bean«, and clover more potash, the soil will refuse to grow these crops from lack of minerals much sooner than wheat. -As long as we can grow good crops of turnips, peas, beans, and clover, we may be sure there are sufficient minerals in the soil for the largest wheat crop.

Were the'-mineral theory''correct, man would possess the power of utterly exhausting the soil; but according to the views we have set forth, this power has been wisely withheld from him. Impoverish it he can and does, but lo exhaust it by aBy natural and economic means is beyond his power.

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

RICHMOND, APRIL, 1856.

TERMS.

Ove Dollar and Twenty-five Cents per annum, or One Dollar only, if paid in advance. Six copies for Ptve Dollars ; Thirteen copies for Ten Dollars — to be paid invariably in advance.

No subscription received for a less time than one year' Subscriptions may begin with any Number, but it is desirable that they should be made to the end of a volume. ^^"Subscribers who do not give express Notice to the contrary oo of before the expiration of their yearly Subscription, will be considered as wishing to continue the same ; and the paper will be sent accordingly.

J2P" No paper will be discontinued until all arrearages are paid, except at our option.

£3f Subscribers are requested to remit the amount of their Subscription as scon as the Baiue shall become due.

If Subscribers neglect or refuse to tuke their pnpers from the Office or place to which they are sent, they will b* held responsible until thsy settle their account and give noliee to discontinue.

32F" If Subscribers remove, change their offices, or j«>raiit their papor to be sent to an office that has been discontinued, without directing a change of their paper, and the paper is sent to the former direction, they will be hgld responsible.

All Payments to the Southern Planter will be acknowledged io the first paper issued after the same shall have boem roceived.

£3?" All money remitted to tut will be conpidered at our rink »nlij when the letter containing the same shall be registered.

fj|?* It is indispensably necessary that subscribers rariitting their Subscription should name the Office to which their papers are sent; arid those ordering a change should say from. v. hat to what post office they wish the zllrruliuii made. A strict obstrvar.ct of this rule will

save much time to us and lose none to them, besides insuring attention to their wishes.

Postmasters are requested to netify us in writing, ai the law requires, when papers are not taken from their Offices by Subscribers.

RUFFIN & AUGUST,

Proprietors.

Office: No. 153, Corner Main and Twelfth Streets.

ADVERTISEMENTS. Will be inserted at the following rates : For eaeh square of ten lines, first insertion, One Dollar; each coatinuance Seventy-five Cents.

Advertisements out of the City must be accompanied with the money, to insure their insertion.

Postage on the Southern Planter,

(when paid in advance,) to any part of the United State*

One cent and half per quarter, or six cents per annum.

THE OHIO FARMING AND STOCK BREEDING COMPANY.

It strikes us that one of the most promising en-terprizes we have heard of for some time is the one which is described under the above heading in a late number of the Ohio Farmer.

It seems that a company of farmers, with, we presume, ample means, and of considerable experience, have formed a partnership for ten ycars;-renewable at the end of that time, for carrying on farming and stock breeding. The stock is made up of shares of $1,000, and the company will commence operations with $20,000, cash paid in. They have purchased some 8,000 acres of land in Dutler county, Iowa, near a railroad now' in process of construction. They will immediately commence building and cropping, and in about a, year will send out 50 or 60 brood mares, well selected and stinted to some of the best and most. fashionable horses in Ohio. A like number of shorthorns—cows and heifers—will be sent out at the same time. Then the superintendent, Dr. Sprague, at present corresponding secretary of the Ohio State Board of Agriculture, will take charge of the farm. He—

'■ Will open a set of books, prepared with a vie.w to keeping a systematic account of operations on the farm; charging the farm vvith moneys invested in the land, in improvements, breeding stock, implements, labor, and all other investments and expenditure's; giving credit for all produce sold or consumed, pasturage, moneys obtained from sale of stock, and (at the expiration of ten years, this being the lifetime of the partnership, but which may be renewed* at pleasure,) the worth of the land upon closing up the affairs of the company. An account will also be opened with each breeding animal when purchased, charging for investment and keeping from year to year, giving credit for produce sold or retained for breeding from time to time. No horse stock will be sold, until some fifty young horses have attained sufficient age for service. These will, for six months or more previous to marketing, be-thoroughly trained by a good horseman, gc.ited

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

and matched, and a guarantee for temper and speed furnished, when sold. A like number, or more, will thus he turned off each twelve months, together with a drove of fatted bullocks."

In addition to the .superintendant, who is also secretary, the company have a president and treasurer.

Wo do not recommend any such plan as the best for conducting farming operations for any length of time, or with a view to profit to be derived thereby. There is too much of the socialistic principle for that; too much of the phalanx order. But we call attention to it as being a plan, if properly carried out, admirably adapted to bringing wild lauds into a productive condition in the shortest time, and promising a speculation by subduing rather than by tilling them.

We know of several companies owning large bodies of land in western Virginia, who are expecting to realize their profit on the advanced value of the unimproved lands. But it must be very evident that if in addition to the purchase money of the fee simple, an outlay was made for cleariag these lands at once, building on them, cropping and stocking them, and thereby rendering them attractive to emigration, that a much higher profit would be realized, and in a much less time. It is probable that most of the individuals owning these lands, have no more money to spare in their improvement, and that many of them arc capitalists rather than practical fanners, And ignorant therefore of the means to be cm-ployed in reclaiming the territory. If which be •the fact, they might increase their capital stock, -even at low rates to incomers, in view of the speedy returns of the investment. ;

The organization of such an enterprise it is not our business to discuss, certainly not here. It is merely our duty to suggest a plan which must pay those who will carry it out, and which will advance the settlement of our wild lands by at least a quarter of a century.

•:

The Index for volume 15, Southern Planter, is now ready for delivery. Subscribers who wish them can have them sent, on application at this Ofiice, in person or by letter.

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM A SUBSCRIBER,

{Published by request.)

" Your article upon "Overseers" treats of a very important subject. One point I hope you will not overlook in your continuation of the article— the educsUion, of mersecrs. Not teaching them ''the languages," or even "the sciences," but removing from their rnincls the prejudices against the im-

provements in agriculture. I know of no bett way of doing this, than by supplying them wi well conducted agricultural journals ; and by w; of setting an example to my brother farmers hereby order a copy of the "Planter" to be se |

to my overseer, and request you

charge me with the subscription. If our farme generally would do this, it would be ho very hea -tax upon them, while it would so increase yoiTl subscription list as'to enable you to enlarge til] size and extend the usefulness of the "Planter." »i id

A FAMILY GROUP IN THE VALLEY VIRGINIA.

If we do not in the following pleasing sketch J our friend J., recognise the individuals of the pi ture, we at least recognize the class as peculiar a portion of Virginia in which we have—though Jfl) a different locality—spent some of the happiest well as most instructive days of our lives.

In our cattle forays into the great Valley, \ learned to appreciate and admire a people so diff ent. from our cis-montane fellow-citizens, that th n can hardly be knonn, and certainly not appreciaU | except in their own homes. Simple in tastes a unpretending in manners ; reserved but warm hea ed; prudent but not cunning; cautious but not c d signing; frugal in expenditure and wary in ent' prise; manifesting most usually more of public spi I than of private generosity ; giving freely to t stranger of what they have, and making him 11 rather than hear that he is welcome—this admiralf? population rose in our estimation and swelled our heart at each successive visit we paid the and we deeply regret that distance and differe pursuits will deprive us of future opportunities increasing our knowledge of them.

Not to speak of the living, among whom think we can remember some few friends, we m say in gratitude to the late excellent M;ijor Rob Grattan, of the county of Rockingham, that it vt he who first introduced us to the Valley, and illijljf trated in his own person the virtues we revere his countrymen.

k

Near Brownsburg, Rockbridge, Va. February 20th, '56

Mr Editor: — I have just read Mr Gilme communications in the Planter with pleasure, a I hope not without profit. I agree with him saying that the Planter should be in the hands every farmer in Virginia, and that through Lh> instrumentality, they could make it a source much valuable information.

It is said that as a man rises in social importatn his dinner hour advances. Some men of hum! origin and great luck have eaten their way frc plebeian twelve, all down the hours of the afierno< and ended a glorious career by solemnly dini with royalty at eight o'clock. Splendid rewa this for the labors of a lifetime !

The papers tell us, that the Q.neen of Englai | ! dines at eight o'clock, P. M.; the higher nobility seven; the ordinary country gentlemen at six; t professional people and richer classes of uierchar at four or five; the shopkeeper at two or threes

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

115

■ks at one; and working men at twelve. It is of

latter class, ihe bone and sinew of oar happy d, that I will say something.

recently spent a night with a very worthy man i old friend; and it is of him and his family I i write, as I consider them patterns for the icuitural community. 1 have known this fam-

nearly forty years, and the picture is as near

rect as 1 can draw it.

The custom of this family has been, early to bed

early to rise, and as a consequence, they have ome healthy, wealthy and wise, (as to general d management.) There are a half a score of

dree, nine out of teD are married and well led. The boys, (as the old gentleman calls rn,) all men of fine common sense, strict integ-, and great moral worth. Generally members ihe church.

"his fall, the heads of this family, if spared may ?brate the fiftieth anniversaryof their marriage.

flirty-seven years ago, I was first introduced to a, and from that time to this, have spent many its in their hospitable mansion. It was common hose days for almost every good farm to have a filer}-. There was one here, but the discrim-ting eye of the good father could not ask aven's blessing upon it, and it was abandoned I before the Temperance Reformation com-nced.

25th.—I again resume my pen, to speak of my friend as a farmer. "When he commenced business his means were limited, but from close application, good economy, and strict integrity, he has become possessed of a good estate, and might now retire and live on the interest of his money; but he is still an active man, superintending his farm and workshops, being by nature a mechanic. His horses are always in fine condition, as is his stock of every grade.

His farming ntensils are of the best kind, and always in good order, his lands are well tilled, and in proper season; and as a consequence he rarely ever fails having good crops. His fields are well grassed, and his hay crops abundant and of fine quality. The products of the farm are wheat, corn, oats, grass, cattle, horses, pork, butter and other minor matters. Having always something on hand that would command a fair price, and as every thinghe offers for sale is in good condition, he rarely fails in getting remunerating prices. Everything passes under his personal supervision, and as his wish and prayer is to do what is right, he rarely does wrong; and I am satisfied never does so intentionally.

As before remarked, his family are all married and settled, but the youngest. As they paired off, each one received some substantial aid. and all are

comfortably settled. If not wealthy, they are well

"he custom of the father of this family was lo]to do. and perfectly independent; owing no man

household pverv mr.mincr <ho T-oor anything, but what can be paid when called for.

This good old father informed me some years since, that his intention was, as near as he could, to divide his estate equally among his children.

Yours, &c,

J.

up the household every morning the year pd between the hours of four and five. In the ter season, you might see the lanterns moving ut in different directions, to the stables, the 1, the smith-shop, &c. At a quarter to six, the n sounds, and the family all come together for ily prayers, none are permitted to absent themes, it in good health; a chapter is now read the Bible, a hymn sung, and a devout prayer red to the Father of all our mercies, for his ction and guidance in the duties and labors he day, with thanksgiving for mercies and efits received. Breakfast is now announced. ! family surround the bountifully supplied table; Is blessing asked upon the provision of his nty Soon the laborers hie away to the fields, or work-shops. The father, the sons and servants joout to the different labors of the farm. All are ' engaged till half past eleven or a quarter to Ive when the horn again sounds for dinner. \J the time the teams are properly cared for, and laborers' ablutions performed,' dinner is on table, say quarter to half past twelve. In the rf momhs - when the days are long and the t hard, an hour or two is spent in rest. About down the laborers quit work ; an early supper aten. The family aeain called together for ling devotion, before the children yet get sleepy, r which the familv generally retire to rest \lf later than nine P. M.

'he father of this family has taught his sons and ghters to wait upon themselves, and never call rvant to do what they can do equally well themes. They^ are models of industry, economy, thrift They are public spirited, charitable social; all owning servants, but not ashamed aoor with their own hands. Their general til is good, and I do not know that there has i a death in this family, ehiMien or grand chil-i, for near fifty years. Surely God hns watched r them, and kept them; has smiled on them approved their walk.

he manners of the good old pair are primitive, r mode of living plain, but abundant and sub-'.iai. Their hospitality proverbial.

MESSRS. LAWES AND GILBERT vs. LIEBIG.

The article in this nnmber on the controversy between these distinguished experimenters will well repay the cost of perusal. It gives the substance of the whole controversy, and some of the most important and practical results of Messrs. Lawes' and Gilberts' experiments.

We are indebted for it to Joseph Harris of the Genesee Farmer, an agricultural chemist, whom we esteem and confide in as a candid, reliable and scientific man.

RARE FLOWER SEEDS. We have recently received from Mr. James Vick, of Rochester, N. Y., proprietor and co-editor of the Genessee Farmer, a collection— not. for distribution—of rare and beautiful specimens of flower seeds. They are a portion of what he has just imported from France, and will be found, we think, of very superior quality.

EXPLANATION TO SUBSCRIBERS.

Several of oar friends' are surprised, and *some indignant, that their accounts are sent to them, when they have paid our agents.

The reason we send the accounts is, that the agents have failed to make returns, and cannot now he got to do so, though written to repeatedly and urged to settle. We therefore are ignorant who have paid and who ha7e not.

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

Just now we are in a general muss with our subscribers in the Northern Neck, many of whom have paid our agent ihere, who has never paid us one cent.

We except all amateur agents, if we may so call our personal friends, who have kindly consented to act gratuitously for us. . They have all, so far as we recollect, remitted punctually, and we are, the more indebted to them in that they are acting without any compensation and are taking a good deal •of trouble on their hands.

As we have one or two rather length}- articles in this number, we shall defer the completion of ■what we had to say about Overseen until our next.

BLACKWOOD AND THE REVIEWS.

We have received from the publishers. Messrs. Leonard, Scott &Co., 79 Fulton street, New York —Woodhouse, Richmond—the February number of Blackwood's Edinburg Magazine, containing a variety of articles, which we have not had time as yet to look into.

We have also received the January number of the London Quarterly, containing Table Talk, Reformatory Schools, Reviews of the Life of Fielding, Landscape Gardening, the Zoological Gardens, &c. The Table Talk is a good article, and the Landscape Gardening, and Zoological Gardens, are both very instructive and entertaining.

The Edinburg and Westminster for January have also come to hand. In the former the articles headed respectively, Rural Economy of France and Britain, and the Minister Von Stein, and the Life and Writings of Henri Bayle, will well repay perusal.

In the Westminster we have only been able to read the article on German Wit, which is not particularly witty; but quite interesting, as it gives a sketch of the great Henrich Heine, recently dead, and esteemed, next to Gcethe, the greatest literary writer of Germany.

RELATIVE PROGRESS OF VEGETABLE FOOD IN THE UNITED STATES, AND THE INCREASE OF ANIMALS.

In two or three articles recently prepared for the Record, we have shown, first, that the increase of the classes engaged in the varions branches of the arts and commerce was much more rapid than that of those engaged in agriculture; and second, that the town or civic population, was increasing much more rapidly than that of the country, or rural population. In connection with these facts, we may remark en passant, and as intimately connected with them, that the prices of agricultural products have been for several years gradually growing higher, while, on the other hand, the prices of

manufactured goods have generally declined. This rotation of prices is perfectly consistent with, and, indeed, is a direct consequence of, the former facts, which we have stated and illustrated in preceding articles.

We shall now proceed to inquire whether vegetable food, which is the basis of all animal life, has or has not increased in the United States in proportion to the increase of population. If it has, we, at least, whatever ma»r be the case with others, have not lost ground in relation to the due support of animal life. If it has not, then all the boasts we so frequently see in the newspapers, about an unlimited power to supply Europe with food, is a mistake and a delusion. While we are obliged to use the returns of the census of 1850 as a basis; we are well aware that the-crop of 1849, on which it was based, was comparatively a bad one, and the present crop (55) is a • vastly better one. Nevertheless, it is probably true that the crops of 1854 and 1855, taken together, would not make more than an average production. Comparing, then, the crops returned in the two censuses of 1840 and 1850, and the increase with the increase cf population, we shall get a very near approximation to the relative growth of food and population in the United States. In doing this, it is not necessary to give the smaller crops in detail, but only the large crops, which support men and animals, and with them the number of men, and the number of animals which are used as food. The latter is n#t essential, for vegetable food of some kind is the basis of all animal life, and therefore to determine the crops is to determine all. But the number of animals used for food will illustrate the conclusions, aad therefore .we give it.

In the table below, the first column gives the number for 1840; the second for 1850; the third the ratio of increase; and the fourth the variation from what might to have existed in 1850, in order to be equal to the ratio of increased population:

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

117

Here it will be seen that there is a deficien-i indeed a probable cessation of the rise, till

y in everything, except corn; that is, there is !S5 than there should have been in order to Lake the amount correspond with the increase

population.

In "regard to corn, at least 3 5,000,000 of ash els of the increased product is used in hiokey, which enters not at all into food deducting this, we have the following results:

DEFICIENCY.

Wheat, Rye, -

15,000,000 bushels 11,000,000 "

20,000,000

.

46,000,000 61,000,000 15,000,000

"

"

orn crop of 1340, -

1830, - -, -Annual increase, 6 pi

■Em

Increase of corn Apparent gain,

Bat it must be observed that wheat is al-iost exclusively used among the white in-abitants for bread; and that of eorn we are ow exporting (which we formerly did not) an mount equal to the apparent gain. On the hole, it is apparent that the increase of veg-table food, in the United States, has rather illen behind than kept up with the progress of opulation. It is also apparent that, in future, he great staple in breadstuffs for us, and for ae world, is the maize, or Indian corn. This i the only crop, even in our fertile country, duch keeps up and goes beyond the increase f population It may be well to look for a loment at the increase of this crop. We have le following date for a calculation, viz :

377,531,875 bushels. 592,071,104 " •ct cent.

rop of 1935 calculated on this basis, 800,000,000 " robable crop of 1856, - - 1,000,000,000 "

This increase, however, will not take place nlc-ss we find a foreign market, which we shall robably do. On this head we intend here-fter to give the data for supposing that the ipid increase of the corn crop will continue

One of the most remarkable facts in relation ) the diminution of the agricultural produc-on, is that of the diminished relative increase F animal}.

Take the following proportions :

crease of population, 36 per cent.

Do horses, 14 do

Do cattle, . 23 do

Do sheep, 13 do

De swi«e, 15 do

These are very instructive facts. They ach very distinctly some of the principles hich have been silently at work to raise the ■ices of wheat, of beef, and pork ; nor do we e from this state of things any remedy but e increased application of labor to a^ricul-

high prices react in producing a renewed attention to agricultural employments.

There is another* question connected with the production and consumption of vegetable food, of great interest and importance. Other parts of the world are even less fortunate than ourselves. The result is that there iff a pressure upon this country to supply the wants of Europe. The export of breadstuffs at this time, is beyond anything this country has ever known. With high prices and a good harvest, this demand will be supplied for a time; but, as the facts above stated prove that our surplus, especially of wheat cannot be very large, it follows that this demand, if continued, will so far exhaust the country as to make prices still higher, and, in fact, almost exhaust the home supply of wheat flour. If this be repeated from year to year, where will it end ? Can we increase the supply of wheat so as to meet a perpetual European demand for grain V or, must the people of Europe come here in still greater numbers? or, finally, as we just remarked, is not Indian corn the last resource and hope of nations? Our opinion on this subject is fixed; that, as corn is the great staple of our country—is easily raised, and may be indeSuitoly extended, that this crop will go on increasing, at a very rapid rate, and it will be exported to Europe in immense quantities. In looking to the increase of vegetable food in the United States, we think it evident that the productions which are likely to increase most rapidly are those of corn, potatoes, sugar cane, and grapes. If we are right in this supposition, the United States have yet before them a field of vast enterprise and profit in agriculture.

Since the introduction of Texas, the land suitable for the cultivation of the cane has been greatly increased. We suppose there can be no doubt of the capacity of Louisiana and Texas to raise a million of hogsheads of sugar, without any great effort. This is equal to a thousand millions of pounds—quite a large item in the general provision of food.

The vine is a recent and much smaller addition to our agricultural list. But large parts of the United States, and especially the valleys of the Ohio and the Missouri, are admirably adapted to the cultivation of the vine. The time is not distant when millions of gallons of wine will be made on the Ohio.

The potato is a native of America, but has ire, and, as there is no power to enforce this been much les3 attended to in the United it the presence of a real scarcity, so we can States than it-ought to be. At 100 bushels e no permanent diminution of prices; nor!per acre, which with suitable soil and culture

THE SOUTHERN PLANTEE.

is a email crop, it is one of the most profitable raised.

We c-onc-lude, therefore, that while it is an entire mistake to suppose that the United States can supply the world with wheat, when the world has driven its agricultural laborers into the hot beds of cities; yet, the United States has a staple grain in Indian corn, which can supply the world, and there are new crops with which America can enrich itself.— Railroad Record.

Communications to the Virginia State Agricultural

Society.

ESSAY ON BLUE CLAY.

By Robert Harrison, M D., op Princb .George.

[A Premium, of T<m Dollars.]

I design in this communication to present to the consideration of the Slate Agricultural Society of Virginia, my experience in the use of blue clay and the effects resulting from its use.

My farm is located in I he county of Prince George, three miles south of James River; the land is generally light, with a clay subsoil, but portions of it have no clay substratum. On portions of this farm marl is found varying in strength from 25 to 75 per cent. A 11 the arable land has been marled in the proportion of 300, or more, bushels to the acre. And the most of this marling was execuled at least fifteen years ago.

This marl is about six leet thick, mostly dry, of a buff' color, containing clam shells, oyster and other shells, some perfect, others decomposed partially; next to this marl is found a blue marl, inferior in quality, of a blue color, abounding in sand. This marl contains very large bone, some of the vertebral bones measuring eight or ten inches in diameter. This blae marl is about four feet thick. Immediately subjacent is found this blue clay, of unascertained depth, but which has been excavated to the depth of twelve or fourteen feet. This clay in physical appearance presents a homogeneous mass, but by careful examination it is found to contain innumerable shining panicles. This clay is blue in its appearance, feels and cuts like soaj), tenacious but somewhat friable. By atmospheric exposure either at the pit or after having been applied to land it scon breaks up into small masses sufficiently fine to be spread with a spade or hoe, or even to be scattered with the hand, as 1 have sometimes used it as a top dressing to clover. Rain and freezing also sufficiently disintegrates it for agricultural purposes. I consider it one of our best fertilizers, not inferior to lime or marl, abounding in carbonate of lime. Its use was commenced by me more than twelve years aeo. It was analyzed by Professor Hare, of the University of Pennsylvania, but I have misplaced the report. He was of opinion that it possessed no fertilizing properly whatever. Professor Rogers, of the University of Virginia ; also subjected it to anal-

ysis—"Composed, (he says) almost entirely of a silicious clay, having a few shining particles of rnica.

' A . c '• ■ i almost entirely. Alumina, $

Oxide of Iron, about 7 per cent.

Carbonate of Lime, a trace.

Sulphuret of Lime, a trace.

Carbonaceous Matter, a trace.

It abounds in Alumina, Bisulphuret of Iron, Sulphuret of Lime, Acid, Ammonia, and some other ingredients according to another analysis, but many grains of allowance should be made for the present infancy of agricultural chemistry.

The first experiment I made with this clay was upon a remarkably light piece of land that I was endeavoring to improve by the application of our common red clay ; at the same time I hauled out about twenty bushels of this earth. It was here spread, sown in oats and clover seed; the clover vegetated upon all, but died out during the summer upon the land upon which the red clay had been applied, but continued to grow finely and luxuriantly where the blue clay had been applied ; and during this year some of the stalks of clover grew to be knee high, and was the best on the farm. After this, 1 have continued to use it from year to year, until I have nearly applied it to every part of the farm, and some portions twice, with very satisfactory results. Upon some portions of the light land I have known the blades of corn to turn yellow, but whether it was owing to a superabundant application of this earth or to other causes, I have not yet satisfied myself, but uniformly it makes the land produce more corn and the blades are of a deeper green. On wheat, the increased product, particularly on my light fields, has been very apparent, both in the growth of the straw and the number of bushels. This earth is particularly adapted to the growth of peas. I think I may safely say the growth of the vines have been nearly doubled since the commencement of its use. Now all my corn land is sowed down in peas, unless I am deficient in seed. •This gives me an additional product of wheat, that I estimate at four to five bushels to the acre. This mode of getting a green fallow with peas I consider to be the more economical with me, and I get a more luxuriant growth. I avoid the trouble and expense of fallowing land exclusively for peas, and the trouble •of getting in the peas is much les3 with the corn, for it is not necessary to give any additional ploughing, and I am not yet satisfied that the pea crop produces any detriment to the corn crop. Eut I have now an experiment in progress lo ascertain the fact.

I have taken some pain? to sow my land in eastern shore bean, and here again the value of this manure is very apparent, the beneficial effects being equal, if not greater, than when applied to peas ; but this latter plant belongs to the pea tribe.

My usual mode of using it is by applying about a hundred and fifty bushels to the acre.

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

113

But this year 1 applied about two hundred bushels more to land that had had an application of an hundred and fifty bushels of this earth. My corn is decidedly better than it ever was on this field before] and the peas as luxuriant as if they had been heavily manured ; but where this earth was applied this year the peas were much better than the peas on the land which had had an application of this earth three ysars ago.

It is true, for several years I have been remarliug my lands, also with marked benefit; but it is only with the marl I remove to get access to the blue clay, as I consider I get more benefit from the latter than the former. This opinion is not peculiar to myself. Dr. A. Bryant, a farmer of Prince George, informs me that he has discovered greater benefit from the use of his marl than is manifested by that. of his neighbors, and he attributes the superior benefit to the fact that he is in the habit of mixing about four feet of this clay, which he finds at the bottom of his marl pits, .with his marl. So far as my experience .goes, I have never used this blue clay to lands that had not been marled or limed. I carried some a distance of four miles, and applied it to land that had been limed—a close, stiff, tenacious soil; and applied it to clover with marked benefit.

This earth act? promptly. On one occasion, the cloud? indicated rain; I ordered a boy to haul several loads and scatter it on clover, and in a very lew days the benefit from its use was very apparent in the increased vigor and greenness of the clover. This earth is soluble in water. Soon after a rain, if one rides or walks in a field on which this earth has been spread, a strong sulphureous odour is manifest and rather unpleasant; the same may be discovered at the pits. This is much more evident after a rain than at any other time.

Again, another fact connected with the solvent powers of rain is, that vegetation is considerably increased in the direction of the descent of water v/here this earth has been applied on the aides of hills.

It is beneficial to lands that have not been limed or marled, to our knowledge. .

Mr. W. Gee, of Prince George, who lives twenty miles south of James River, has-used this earth, and also what ia called olive earth, with decided improvement upon lands that had had no lime or marl; but this land may be naturally calcareous. Thi3 blue clay is found at the bottom of his marl pits; he applies about three hundred bushels to the acre. A portion of his land was remarkably poor and light; he observed it has been in succession of crops under the regular rotation, for a great number of years, and was unproductive, producing only about one and a half bushels of corn to the acre. After the application of this earth, without any additional manure, the same land produced about four barrels; wheat and clover also grew successfully.

Another fact connected with this earth is of a very important character. The sheep sorrel.

I a plant common with us and remarkable for the acidity of its leaves, generally disappears after land has been marled or limed ; but it reappears ! after the use of this blue clay and grows more abundantly and luxuriantly, and this is the most serious objection to the use of this clay. Now this fact presents a stubborn reality against some, of the fashionable theories of the day. Hen peas are increased in quantity and are more productive; the eastern shore bean becomes more abundant, and the clover increased in growth and improved in color ; corn and wheat increased by the application of an earth that causes the sheep sorrel to reappear on land from which it had disappeared by the use of marl and lime. From this and other considerations, i should infer that acidity is not opposed to fertility.

This earth also possesses the power of counteracting the injurious consequences resulting from an over application of the carbonate of lime, or what is popularly called marl-burnt land. The bisulphuret of iron being placed in justaposition with carbonate of lime, chemical affinities may produce new combinations. Sulphuret of lime may result, and productiveness the ultimate consequence, or the caustic properties of the lime may be neutralized. On my farm an example may be seen of a piece of land in which all vegetation was destroyed, mould, &c, gone, and the land presented the appearance of worthless sand, which has been restored to comparative productiveness by no other manure than this blue clay. This clay is usually hauled upon the land after it is broken up, suffered to remain until it breaks up into flakes or becomes somewhat pulverized, when it is scattered. Here we occasionally find round balls about the size of large marbles, presenting a dirty appearance on the exterior, but internallv these balls are crystaline. To what principle, to which ingredient in its constitution are we indebted for its fertilizing property ? Is it because its metallic oxide forms a base with which humic acid unites, and this combination is subsequently easily dissolved by rain water, and is thus assimilated by the growing crops— or may not this oxide form other combinations with lime or other inorganic substances—or may it not more properly be a positive manure, independent of chemical affinities or atmospheric combinations?

We are thrown upon the ocean of conjecture; theory may be piled upon theory, and one hypothesis upon another without affording satisfaction to the man of science, or without materially benefitting the agriculturist.

Professors Hare and Rogers inform U3 that alumina abounds in this earth. Who knows the effects of whale oil, fish oil, &c, uniting with this earth ? It is impervious to water in its present condition in the pits. It may in this form refnin other organic animal matter. But it is not my object to discuss a theory or advocate a system, but to invite the attention of farmers to the use of this invaluable fertilizer.

The effects of this earth on the appearance

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

"!

SB?

:

of my land, on my growing crops, upon peas, vegetation, clover and eastern shore bean are positive realities, and I shall continue to ase this earth so long as beneficial results follow its use.

Blue clay is considered by some to be a peculiar deposit, but we consider its fertilizing property de-dends in a great degree upon the animal matter formerly existing in the superincumbent marl, united with aluminous and ferruginous earth; for we have never heard of its existence with us, without being accompanied with marl, or unmistakable evidence that marl pre-existed. Does this not go to render it highly probable that they are intimately connected, and its efficiency dependent in a great degree upon the animal matter, previously existing in the marl above; also, from the decay of large whales, the bones of some now remaining, and yet ibund in removing the marl. This clay consists of many of the ingredients of guano, phosphoric acid, soda, potash, ammonia, and sulphuric acid.

Now phosphorus, sulphur, potash, and soda are fbund to exist in the ashes of plants.

In this earth are many of the essential ingredients of vegetable organizations; ready when dissolved to he absorbed, and assimilated by the growing crop, after its application to the soil.

In Vol. XIII. No. 4 of the Southern Planter, page 165, in an analysis of a line blue clay, from Marl-bourne farm, which consists of carbonate of lime, smlphate of lime, bisulphuretof iron, potash, soda, phosphoric acid, alumina, an oxide of iron, organic matter and water, silica, ammonia from the crgauic matter. In appearance and physical properties, Professor Gilham says: " This clay is like ♦he blue clay mentioned in my essay, and I have but little doubt it is equally fertilizing." Agricultural chemistry has made rapid improvements, and yet the science may be said to be in its infancy. The agricultural community are under many obligations to Professor Gllham, for his valuable contributions to agricultural chemistry.

If the present surface of this earth was formerly the bottom of the antedeluvian ocean, which seems to be the fact from the discovery of marina shells on the Pyreunean mountains, 10,000 feet above the level of the sea, and other evidences of a deluge ; and the fact also established, from the discovery of the rhinoceros, an animal of the equatorial regions), and also the mammoth, in a frozen condition in Siberia and the arctic regions, this whole country must bave been submerged by sea water, abounding in muriate of soda; and Sir Humphrey Davy informs us that muriatic acid, acting on animal or vegetable fibrine, albumen or easeine, changes it to a purple color. Therefore wo conclude, this blue clay owes its color to the action of sea water on these organic constituents o'f animal matter. So the color itself would go to prove the probable presence of either animal or vegetable matter, neither does its chemical analysis conflict in the least with this supposition, but rather goes to establish the probability, that animal or vegetable matter, or both, in a decayed condition, exists in combination with aluminous and ferruginous earth.

Red clay is immediately in contact laterally with this blue clay, and the lino of division is of an intermediate color.

From the application of this earth to our soil peas are increased in quantity, and are more prpduc-live; clover b increased in gro«vih and improved

in color; cora, wheat and vegetation improved the application of an earth, that causes the she sorrel to reappear on land from which it had d appeared by the use of lime or marl. From this fi and other considerations I should conclude tl acidity is not opposed to fertility or increased pi ductiveness. Now I do not think that sorrel see are carried in this earth, nor believe in spontaneo generations; but the lime having destroyed neutralized the acid, necessary for the growth sorrel, this blue clay restores it, or liberates either directly or by combination, and the sen having the elements necessary for its growth r ! stored, grows more luxuriantly after this eart than it did previous to liming or marling.

I suppose the seeds of the sorrel had remain( in the earth for years, and it only required tl necessarj- material for its growth and developmen

Now if the disappearance of sorrel is an eviden< of the correction of the acidity of the soil, ar the existence of a certain degree of alkalinit then the reappearance of the sorrel is the eyideuc of the restoration of the acidity, and increase productiveness is the consequence, going to proi that acidity in a soil is not the cause .of i poverty.

It is the generally received opinion in our vichl. ity, that our lands that have had an application < marl or lime, in sufficient quantity, are not trouble with sheep sorrel after these alkaline earths ar fully incorporated with the soil.' There are somjl exceptions to this rule, but what are the modifyin. circumstances vre are unable satisfactorily t explain.

The sorrel (Rumcx acclasella) is remarkable fo the agreeable acidity of its leaves, which is chierbj; dependent on the presence of the binoxolate o potash. Oxalic acid is formed in both the anima and vegetable kingdoms. It is found as an ox] alate of ammonia in guano, which accounts whj sorrel so frequently follows its use.

Many other plants besides the sorrel produce it J such as rhubarb, valerian and lichen. It is also produced from a diseased condition of the kidneys of aninals.

Now the sorrel does not grow on all soils, buti with us it generally grows on light and sandy soils, sometimes in isolated patches, again more general-l ly distributed Over a field. Now, this oxalic acid,! which predominates in the sorrel, it is fair to conclude, must exist in certain localities favorable for its formation, and wherever it does exist we have a s*oil favorable for the growth of sorrel. But oxalic acid has a very strong chemical affinity for lime, so strong that it will unite with the lime that is presented to it, in combination with sulphuric acid or gypsuni. Therefore whenever land is limed or marled, in which oxalic acid exists, an insoluble oxalato of lime is formed, and the necessary ingredient for the growth of sorrel is neutralized by the lime, and consequently the sorrel ceases to grow, i This appears to our mind, a sufficient reason to account scientifically and satisfactorily for the disappearance of sorrel after liming or marling. Certain plants require particular, ingredients for their growth. It is an acknowledged fact, that marine plants will not grow without the presence of muriate of soda. Why will the sorrel again grow after the application of blue clay and guano, unless they abound in acids or favor the generation of oxalic acid 1 It does exist?in guano as an oxalate of ammonia. We know, from the constitu-

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER

121

ot' oxalic acid, that vegetable decay and at-pheric air, would furnish carbonaceous matter oxygen favorable for the development of oxacid. Thus we have attempted to account ;he disappearance of sorrel by the union which is place with lime by one of its ingredients, ling an insoluble oxalate of lime. In confir-ion of the great value of blue clay, I send a :r directed to me by my friend and countyman a most excellent farmer, Mr. Gee. ails I think is demonstrated, that this earth, in quantity applied, is equal if not superior to iviaa guano. Poor land that originally pro-3d 4. bushejs per acre, afterwards produced 20. increase of 500 per cent. This earth, I con-r very imporcaat towards the renovation of i ou; land, and towards neutralizhig tUs aika-y arising from an excess of marl or lihifij

Robert Haiif.ison. i;;;e George, Va.

Sa.*ta Rosa, Prince George Coanry, Va.

October 15th, 1655. R. Rossbt KaKSIsC".

ir Sir :—In compliance wiih your request, I send tatement of ray experiments made '.villi blue clay, ubstance we find beneath our marl beds. &c. 1349 I dug from pits about twenty thousand bushels r!, and in getting out this quantity, I concluded to ruent With the two substances usuaiiy found above e'ow the beds of marl, called red and blue clay. The r contains no shell, but bears the prims of every kind ly found in the m2rl bank; the latter contains neither, s the application of the strongest acids detect in either mallest portion of lime

jaccnt to my pits, there is a piece of worn out land, y light soil, and of about eight acres, which had cultivated a greit number of years w'tbout any im-ment; this 1 divided in'o two equal parts; upon the I put three hundred bushels of the red clay per acre, a ih': other, the same quantity of blue clay; had it i brozdasi and ploughed under. In the spring I plac-'hole in corn ; it came up well and gfX;w off liaely, produced to iny astonishment, twenty bushels per each piece producing about the same quantity. This lad not produced mare than four bushels per acre, in e-.r, for the last twenty-two years to my knowledge. ■■ fall, I seeded it in wheat, which grew oft finely, and a very laiuriant growth until the 14th day of May ; at day it was (together with all my crop of wheat,') :iy destroyed by a hail storm I had seeded the in clover, and such as escaped being destroyed by ail was of fine growth. After remaining one year in ■, it wa3 put in corn again, and produced a crop equal to the first. I then put it in wheat again, which f fine growth, but owing to injury sustained by rust, duced a very indifferent crop. * * * *

Your?, most truly,

Win. Gee.

For the Southern Planter.

NEGRO CABINS.

>itor Southern Planter: —I make no apology ffering you a few hints upon the construction management of "Negro Cabins," as thesubject

important one, and the ideas I offer chiefly red from a medical friend, in whose sound judg-

both yon and myself place great confidence.

3 ends aimed at in building negro cabins Id be: First, the health and comfort of the oc-nls; Secondly, the convenience of nursing, sur-

nce, discipline, and the snpply of wood and

■-. and Thirdly, economy of construction.

course, the convenience of locality must be

d of by the builder. I only propose to consider

the subject in its economic and healthful aspect, and to this end recommend that negro cabins should be built of plank, have, large glass windows and good chimneys; should be elevated at least two feet above ground, and never placed within less than 75 or 100 yards of each other. When inch plank is not worth above $1.25 per hundred feet, 1 consider the plank bouse cheaper than either log or masonry. At this price the cost of plank for a house 1G feet square will not exceed g 15, for which sum I would not furnish, hew. h3ui and put up logs to build a house ©f the same size. The planking is put on up and down, and Fuse a double course of planking instea-d of narrow strips; this I find makes a very comfortable cabin both for summer and winter, if the builder choose to incur a slight additional expense and should dress the outer course and give it a coat -of paint, this, with a projecting eave and some cheap ornamental cornice, m.-.kes a verv prettv house and obviates the ntcessicy for sticking the negrp cabin out of sight of the mansion.

Plank houses are considered by P hysieians as more firvJihyfor cegraes Lhan log,-for the reason that there is constantly accumulating in and about the negroe's house a vast quantity of animal matter in the form of excrements and emanations from the human body, which has fewer places of lodgment and is more easily removed frem the plank than the log house. To form an idea of the strength of this matter, you have only to call to mind the odour of a sweating negro or il:e stench which pervades a room in which several of them are sleeping. The Doctors tell us that these smells are clouds of animal matter, absolutely capable of being wciglud and seen as well as tasted and smelt, and ate constantly collecting in the walls and under the floors of negro cabins, and there rot and slink as any oiher putres-cible matter—(you must excuse an unrefined word now and then, for to tell the truth, I can't find a syno-nyme for that word which would at all convey the idea I intend.) This is beyond doubt the fre-qusnt cause of disease and should be carefully pro-vided-against, and hence I recommend the elevation of the floor above the ground, with a view to the frequent cleaning up of this accumulated filth. On my own farm a few years ago, typhoid fever., a disease until then unknown upon it, broke out in an old negro cabin, closely underpinned, and which for many years had been used as a negro house. My family physician advised me to tear away the underpinning and have all the filth cleaned up. In doing so, I found an accumulation of foul matter iu layers almost denoting the number of years if had been collecting, which required six loads of a eom-mbn cart to haul off, and from which eame a stench equal to the concentrated essence of all bad smells put together. I would not if I could give you or any other friend of mine an idea of its faHidness. I tore down the house and found the old logs impregnated with foul smells, which continued in them long after they were exposed to winds and rains. The old house was like the "vase in which roses have ^once been distilled," except that it wasn't exactly the "scent of the roses" lhat hung round it stilly

The floors of negro cabins should be of plank rather than dirt, and should be dressed and jointed, but not nailed down, that every plank might be taken up occasionally and cleansed of any filth -that may have settled upon them. Lime and other disinfecting agents should be freely used. Negroes should be well supplied with light. They "prefer darkness to light," and unless watched will exclude the light eniireiy from their houses.

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

Their howses should be provided with large glass windows, and when a pane is broken they should be made to replace it rather than fill its place with old rags. Light and air are necessary to the proper making of blood; and negro women and children, who spend so much time within doors, should be compelled to enjoy both these elements. They Lave to be forced to it, for in sleeping a negro will eover his head if his feet freeze, and thus breathe over and over again the same air, charged as it becomes with carbonic acid and exhalations of the body, and deficient perhaps in oxygen, the element so needful in making good arterial blood. It is considered by medical men, 1 believe, that this bad elaboration of blood develops lurking scrofula and even generates it.

Glass windows enable the negro to do much work "in doors," and are surely more convenient than a lightwood knot in enabling the physician or nurse, in case of sickness, to examine the patient or minister to his wants. I think a doctor has just cause of complaint when forced to burn a negro's eyebrows off with a pine torch before he can get a sight of his tongue at mid-day.

Negro houses should be provided with chimneys that don't smoke. Air-tight stoves are liable to give negroes cold from the extremes of temperature they produce and are objectionable 1 in that they give no light. The Franklin stove is well adapted to negro cabins, and was used by yourself while you lived in Albemarle. Any thing is better than a smoking chimney. On many of our Virginia Farms, 1 doubt not there is lamp-black enough accumulated in the breathingtubesof the negroesduringthe night to black the master's boots in the morning.

Cabins should not be placed at a less distance than from 75 to 100 yards from each other, for the reason that it is highly probable that infectious diseases, such as scarlet and typhoid fever, measles, whooping cough, and even small pox may not be eommcnicaled at that distance.

Yours truly,

R. W. N. N.

iiLBBMARLE, Feb., 185G.

For the Southern Hooter. CORN PLANTERS.

Mr. Editor :—I have tried several kinds of corn-planters. The first was made by Sinclair & Co, Baltimore, which has received the premium at the two last fairs, but which I think is a very indifferent machine in many respects. It is so top-heavy that it will take one ltand to keep it in proper position, and a more awkward implement I have never seen. After using this one probably in all one day, I laid it aside, and having an oppoitunity to get Emery's Planter, which was highly recommended to me, I purchased it and used it a good deal. The performance of the machine is very good, and 1 could recommend it, if it were made in a style to suit our latitude; but this is not the case. The gentleman from whom 1 got it commenced ta repair his before getting it to the field.

If some of our Southern Manufacturers would make them in as durable manneras they make other implements for a home market, I do not doubt but what it would be used very extensive!)', especially by farmers who own large fields, free of stumps and roots.

In haste, yours truly,

Richard Iret.

NorrovTii-. V.i. Mar. 14th. 1856.

For the Southern Planter.

BELLS ON SHEEP.

February 6th, 1856. Friend Ruffin :—In the January number of the Planter I ;eaw an article upon bells " to prevent dogs from killing sheep. " When a boy, I passed by Mr. Richard Sampson's farm, of Goochland county, late in the evening, and saw his servants penning his sheep with his cattle. I asked the reason. The boy said it was to protect the sheep from dogs. I remembered it, and have practised it ever since I have owned a sheep, which has been twenty odd years, and have never had a sheep killed or attacked by dogs ; whilst my neighbors have sustained great damage, and some have had their entire flock destroyed. I have told my plan and my luck, and strange to tell, I do not know a man who thus pens his sheep; and there is not a man in Albemarle county, who has lost fewer sheep from any and all the evils to which this valuable stock are subject, than I have. Sheep cannot stand dirt, in or out of a pen ; my cow pens are frequently moved or well littered', and the sheep always turn out the first thing in the morning, and after a little practice will come to the pens everj* evening themselves, as if for protection.

Yours respectfully,

G. C. Gilmer.

P. S. My sheep boy would not hire for five dollars per year. This winter sheep have suffered much for shelter and for water. To do well, sheep must have water every day.

For the Southern Planter. DITCHING.

February 7th, 1856. Friend Rui-fin :—Yours of the 8th of January was received, and should have been answered, had this been the season for such work. You ask if I have ever tried ditching with the assistance,of a horse and coulter. I have for years done much of this work with two horses, a coulter and plough, then scrape out with a cast iron two horse scraper, by which I easily and quickly remove all the dirt from the channel I wish to make, end deposit it in some washed or sunken place, thereby killing two-birds with one stone, lean, and have done more work of this kind per day, with one man thus equipped, than could have been done in the old fashioned way of spading and shovelling by fif- ' teen if not twenty as good hands. I do all of" ray straightening of my creeks, clearing Out my mill race, and removing the sand bars, shoals, and' obstructions in my creek with ray horses and scraper. It is a great labor saving machine. I have never tried it upon the narrow or common ditches of the farm, but will try it as you adyise, and inform you of its result and my opinion. Yours, truly,

G. C Gilmer. Ingxewood, near Cartersbridge P. 0., Albemarle co.

For the Southorn Planter. EXPERIMENTS WITH MANURES. In April 1,8-53, I made a compost of one ton Peruvian Guano, half ton of Plaster, and two tons of leached ashes. I applied this mixture in the hill. to corn on about twenty acres of land, ten acres-

THE SOUTHERN PLANT Ell,

123

low grounds and ten acres high land (or hills) This experiment paid a larger profit than any 1 have ever made on corn. The distance was four feet by two, furrows for planting opened with a two horse plough, the corn dropped, and the compost upon it, and eo-vc-red with a coulter; on the high land one stalk.in the hill, on-the low-gicuuds one and two alternately. The low grounds averaged about twelve barreIs. and the high laud about s\x barrels peracre. I lajfnk the yield in both cases was doubled by. tile application.

About the Gt-'a of June, 185o ; I applied two tons of Peruvian gnrtiio en corn at the rare oi ISO pounds per acre, sow.e<l in. -a narrow string about the corn and c'< vefecf immediately wifh' ;r raouid-board plough, the drrt thfb'wri to the ecru. Thi j application, was on low gpcftinds, and increased the yield per acre, i suppose. from two to three barrels.

Experiments wiih Guano and Ksitlewdl's Rt ■iuia-tor. —On a pieca of poor low grounds, containing 2200 square yards, I applied between the 5th and 10th of June, 1353, 75 lbs. P. guano, sowed close to the eora and covered immediately with the dirt thrown to the corn; gathered and measured three barrels and three pecks, making about eight barrels per acrg. On the same quantity and quality of land, and immediately adjacent. I sowed and covered in the same way one barrel of Kettlewelfs Renovator, costing here within a fraction of 84, and gathered and measured two barrels and four bushels cf corn. Difference in favor of guano, four bushels and3 pecks.

4| bushels corn at 70 cents S'3.32i 75 lb3. Peruvian guano at 2-J cents 2.06}

Nett gain $1.26| or about

$2.75 per sore.

I do not conceive that the Renovator increased the yield at all, and! am led to this conclusion froai other experiments 1 mads with it. I sowed seventeen barrels of it on tobacco land in 1853, at the rate of one and a half barrels to the acre, costing per acre here nearly six dollars, and if it benefitted the erop I am entirely igDorant of it. In order to give it a fair ;riai, I reserved two barrels and applied it in the hill to corn in 1851, according to Mr. Kettlewell's directions, and L could perceive no benefit whatever. Mr. Kettleworth advised its application with Peruvian guano if I had it, and without the guano if 1 had not. In my experiments I preferred to try it alone, and let it stand or fall upon its own merits.

In 1851 I used about four tons of Peruvian guano on corn land, sowed broad-cast and in the drill from 150 to 200 lbs. per acre ; very little benefit was realized from this application, in the increase of graiD, except oh damp spots, but a decided increase in the quantity of fodder. I also applied two tons Peruvian guano on tobacco land, 300 lbs. to the acre, in 1854, without any decided advantage in the growth of the plant, but I perceive it thickened and ripened faster in the Fall and was ready for the knife earlier than that upon which the application was not made, thus avoiding any risk of frost.

In 1855 I selected damper land (but not subject to inundation) for the application of guano on (Tobacco, ant applied froai 30J to 400 lbs per acre in the drill. Tbfefcxperitffe it succeeded admirably, and, should the tobacco bring a reasonable price, a good per cent will be realized. Tnc same year [ measure! !.ne acre of poor (and, very slightly manured withsjm.nfif c r .w pens in 1851, and aprlied tothis

piece a compost of 200 lbs. Peruvian gaano, 200 lbs. leached ashes, 100 lbs. plaster, and one bushel table salt, costing about $7, sowed in a drill, and the hills made upon it. This was a remarkably good piece of tobacco, and paid better for the outlay than any other experiment,

I h <ve used stable (horse) manure with and with-out paster in the hill for com with beneficial re-sijTfs, especially so in a wet season* I consider there is but a slight difference in the yield of corn in favor of guano over this manure; but gnano has the advantage i:i the smaller bulk to be carried to di'tnnt parts of the field and the greater rapidity and less labor in its application.

In my experiments with wheat, I have not been very successful, owing measurably to the advice of your contributors end farmers with whom I have conversed, as to the quantity to be used, fiom which ;b.e largest per centum could be realized. Taking that, advice I used it at. firU ioo sparingly for this region to counteract the ravages of the joint-worm. From experience and observation I have learned that in this section of country, on pom land, unaided by other fertilizers, less than 300 lbs. Peruvian guano per acre will not pay well, and then the farmer may not calculate on much clear gain, unless he sell at high figures.

In 1853, I matlea trial of one ton Peruvian gtaano on oats, sowed on high land, and have cot since repealed the experiment; that being a dry season and the experiment consequently not succeeding well.

In dripping seasons gaano acts charmingly on spring and summer crops. But the farmer will be disappointed in dry seasons, unless be be very cautious in the selection of the land for its application.

I agree with Mr. Noland, that rolling the seed corn in guano is worth the trial, if only to accelerate the growth of the young plant, so as to push it out of the way of worms and other pests; and moreover the great advantage, in my opinion is, to enable the farmer to Work it earlier and get it in good order by harvest; for my little experience teaches me that in the main the working of the corn crop must cease then, unless the farmer has an extra force to keep his ploughs running in harvest time. Robert N. Trick.

Mychustk, near Keswick Depot,

Albemarle Co.

For the Southern Planter. ROLLING SEED IN GUANO.

Editor Planter :—As there seems to bo some diversity of opinion as to the effects of guano upon the germination of seed when the two are brought in*immediate contact, I take leave to report my experience, which has been. sufficient to satisfy my own mind upon the subject. I have practiced roiling grain in guano —both corn and wheat—for several years and have always found it to act beneficially, when the grain is planted immediately after the application is made. Last fall, however, I had a small quantity of rolled wheat leftover from the day's sowing, which remained during the night in the guano. This failed to come up—not one grain in an hundred germinating—while the reM of the jrop came up well. The contact with the clay, I prerume, destroys the caustic property of the guano, which otherwise, if the article he good t is sufficient to prevent the ger-

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

mination of seed. The guano I used, I purchased of Fowle & Co., of Alexandria, and proved to be a very superior article, being perfectly dry and giving out a strong ammoniacal smell. The guano we buy, varies as much in quality as does the whiskey we drink, (that is not we exactly, but some of our friends.) and . the article I got last fall was as far superior to the lot sent to this county from Baltimore, as "old Bourbon" is to S. & B.'s "Blue head." Good guano is dry and strong-scented, not wet and inodorous, as is much that is offered in our market. The farmers of Virginia need no in spection of guano. They should either judge for themselves, or deal only with merchants in whom they can place confidence.

It is the business of the commission merchant to acquaint himself with the means of judging of the quality of guano, just as he learns to distinguish between good sugar and bad. The loss to the State, from the use of inferior guano, is incalculable. The first cost of the article, is as nothing compared with the" failure of crop from the application of worthless guano, for it seems now that wheat will not ripen well, even upon our very best lands, without the use of this fertilizer. Our farmers should be more particular in testing the quality of guanq, and think less of economising a dollar or two in the price, for they may rest assured that a good article is cheaper at $00 a ton, than some we* use as a frae gii't. It may be true that " eggs is eggs," but it it does not follow that everything sold under the name of guano will make a wheat crop. The best tests I know are older and odour. If guano be perfectly dry and give out a good strong smell, it may be depended upon. Clean bags usually contain the best guano, as any addition of water, either from sprinkling or atmospheric absorption, shows itself in the staining of the bags.

I take occasion, while upon this subject, to mention that I have experimented in a small way with Mexican guano, on tobacco, corn, and wheat, alone, and mixed with Peruvian, atid have yet to seethe slightest effect from it. My experiments have not been made with sufficient accuracy to demonstrate to others its worthlcss-ness, but has satisfied roe tiiat that it is not quite equal as a fertilizer to common Ivy creek sand.

guano to two acres of land then being fallo ed with a two-horse plough for wheat; the r mainder of the field was fallowed in the san way, but no guano was applied until Octobc the time of seeding, when about 150 lbs. p acre was sown, the guano and wheat bo turned under with a one-hori=e turning ploug a portion immediately adjoining the firs mentioned two acres, and so nearly alike th I could not perceive any difference. T' wheat was sown on both fields about the sac time—perhaps the fame day. The wheat the first two acres was covered with a twent four tooth harrow. Throughout the seasi and at present the difference in faror of so' ing guano and wheat at the same time was four to one.

I would, as one of the committee appoint to test the value of guano applied to co: broadcast ,at the time of planting, and oc half the same quantity applied in the dri the other half broadcast at the last ploughin report that, in April, 1854, I measured ts cor.tiguous spaces of land, about 70 yar square each, of as nearly equal fertility ai texture as could be obtained. To one acre applied 3£ bushels (estimated to be 200 lb: guano broadcast, and turned it in with a od horse plough ; to the other acre I applied bushels guano in the drill at the time of plar ing. The drills were opened by throwing o one furrow each way with the single ploug the guano sown in the drill and closed Ij throwing back two furrows with the sau plough. The drills ior planting were open with a trowel hoe—both pieces planted £

From the Papers of the x Noiioway Farnurs Clvb.

COMPARATIVE EXPERIMENTS WITH GUANO.

Fallowing it in and putting it in along with tub Wheat : — Drilled and Broadcast on 1 Corn.

In compliance with the constitutional requisition of our club, making it obligatory upon each member to report in writing the result of some operation or experiment made daring the year, I report that, in the month of August, 1853, I applied 300 pounds of

same day and in the same way, ezcept above—the land inclining to sandy. At t] last ploughing of the corn, I applied Is- bus els guano broadcast to the drilled acre;—wo: done with the cultivator. The broadcast ac produced 4 barrels, 4 bushels and 3-1G of bushel. The drilled acre, 4 barrels and bushels corn. Both acres in all respec alike, planted at the same time, worked on i same days and with the same implemen Both suffered from drought, as did the rt of my crop. Wh, R. Bland

Best Mode of applying Guano to Coax.

Mr. President: In accordance with a ] quest of the club, the following experimer were made with guano on corn, in order to s certain the best made of its application

I selected four acres of thin land, about t same quality. On the first I applied £00 11 of guano broadcast, and turned it under t 1st of March with a double plough.

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

125

On the second acre, I applied 200 lbs. guano in the drill, in the following way : The land having been previously fallowed with a double plough, furrows were made at the time of planting by running twice in a place with a single plough, in which the guano was drilled; a harrow was tien run over it, which covered it two or three inches deep; the corn was then dropped and covered with harrows.

On the third acre, I used no guano.

On the fourth, I applied 100 lbs. of guano in the drill, in the same way as on the second acre ; and at the second ploughing I applied 100 lbs. in furrows made by a single plough on each side of the corn, and covered with single ploughs. The results were as follows :

1st acre, 200 lbs. broadcast, produced 4 barrels, 4 bushels, and 3 pecks, at S3 50, $17 44

2d acre, 200 lbs. in tile drill, produced

3 bbl3., 4 bushels, and 3 pecks, at

$3 50, 13 95

3d acre, nothing used, produced 1 b'ul.,

4 bushels, and 2 pecks, at S3 50, 6 75 4th acre, 100 lbs. in-drill and 100 lbs. at

side, produced 5 bbls., 2 bushels, and

1 peck, at S'3 50, 19 16

In the ahove there is nothing said about short corn, as it was put at half price, and carried out in the estimate of each acre.

By adding to the product of the unimproved acre, which was §6 75, the cost of guano and interest thereon for one year, (say $5 30) and deducting the amount, $12 0.5, from the product of the first acre, the remainder ($5 39) will show the profit by the use of guano, applied broadcast. In the same way, $1 90 is the profit by its use in the drill, and $7 11 is the profit by its use as applied on the fourth acre.

But in order to ascertain more accurately the profits by the use of guano, w.e should charge for cultivation, which I will put down down at $5 per acre, which is moderate, supposing the laborer to find himself and horse ; also $5 30 per acre for guano when used. By this estimate, it will be found^ that the nett profit on the unimproved acre is $ I 75; on the 1st acre, $7 14; on 2nd, $3 65; and on the 4th, $8 86. The result of the above experiments Is decidedly in favor of using half the guano in the drill at the time of planting, and half at the second ploughing. I will state, in connection with these experiments, that the corn on the acre on which the guano was applied broadcast-, looked decidedly better than any other until it was about three feet high, about which time that on the acre on which the 200 lbs. guano was used in the drill, overtook it. This acre, during the summer,

and even after the tops were cut, I thought would have produced at least a barrel more than any other, but to my surprise I found the ith acre produced the most. This is an exemplification of the fallacy of judging as to the results of experiments by the eye. Respectfully submitted.

Wm. Irby.

Comparative Effects of 300, 200, and 100 lbs. of Guano on an Acre of Cohn.

As one of a committee of three appointed to make experiments with guano upon corn, I have performed, very satisfactorily to myself, the duty assigned me by the club, and hereby report the results to which I have come.

The object of the experiments was, to test the comparative effects of 300 lbs., 200 lbs., and 100 lbs. of guano, on an acre of corn.

Being unfavorably situated, however, for executing my task, I have conducted the experiments only in a pro rata form ; that is, a half acre of ground was selected and divided into four parts, or lots, each containing five rows of corn. ,

• As late as about the 15th of May last, this plot of ground, which was poor and had been seeded to oats with guano the year before, was thrown into 5 feet beds with the single dasron, and planted with corn at 2 feet distance. Before fallowing, three of the lots had been dressed respectively with 38 lbs., 25 lbs , and and 13 lbs. of guano each, while the fourth lot was left undressed, for comparison.

Besides being planted late, the crop was badly worked. It suffered, also, from the depredations of birds, especially the lot which was undressed—being an outside one, and remotest from the houses.

On the 30 th of November, the ,corn was gathered and measured, as follows, (at the rate per acre:)

Lbs. guano. Bbls. Bush. 1st *cre, 300 2 4, exclusive of nubbins. 2d acre, 200 2 2, 3d acre, 100 2

4th acre, - 4, "

Estimating corn to be worth $3 50 per barrel, and putting guano at $50 per ton, we arrive at the following results in gam and loss. Deducting in each case four bushels as the unaided product of the land.

Bbls. Value. Cost of guano. G&in. Loss. 1st acre, 2 $7 $7 50 50 els.

2d acre, 1 3-5 5 GO 5 00 CO cts.

3d acre, 1 1-5 •! 20 2 50 S ; l 70

On giving credit to the guano only for the increased crop produced by it, and allowing 1

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER.

barrel per acre to the unaided powers of the land, the result will he :

1st acre, loss, $4 00

2d acre, " 2 10

3d acre, '• 1 80

Respectfully submitted.

Nottoway, April 12, : oo. Gr. FlTZGERALB.

AGENCY.

For the celebrated Manney Reaper and Mower, which possesses advantages overall other Reapers. Full irifofinatiori, or machines furnished upon early application to the undesigned, Special Agent tor the counties of Loadon, Fauquier, Clarke, Frederick, and Warren, andGeneral Agent for the Str.te.

White Post, P. O. " J. J. HITE.

Clarke Coithiy, Va. apr 2t.

CONTENTS OF NO. IV.

J. B. Lawos and Justus Yon Liebig

The Ohio Farming and Stock Breeding Co... A Family Group fn the Valley of Virginia Relative Progress of Vegetable Food°in U. S

Essay on Blue Clay ' ' .,

Negro Cabins ,

Bells on Sheep

Corn Planters

Ditching t

Experiments with Manures

Rolling Seed in Guano

Comparative Experiments with Guano

Be.st Mode of applying Guano to Cora,

Increase the V/heat Crop

Prince George of Cambridge,

LIST OF PAYMENTS From 1st to VMh March. 18-56.

S S Alsop, Jan 1857 Dr W T Banks, Jan 1857-Wra HiU, Oct 1856 B Hiner, Jan 1857 J A Montague, Jan 1S57 T H Montague, Jan 1857 Jos C Eubank, Jan 1857 W A Street, Jan 1857 WC Stribling,.Jan 1857 Gen \V H Richardson, Jan A E Sinith'e, July 1850 • H Handlcy, Apr 1857 R V Lockhart, July 1809 Geo Johnson, Nov 1350 .las C Kasey, Jan 1857 Dr G G Minor, Jan 1857 C H Winfree, Jan 1857 W W Harris, Jan 1S57 D B M'Gehee, Mar 1857 L A Crenshaw, Jan 1857 W P Wajighj Jan 1857 Dr W E Dodson, Jan 1857 Dr T B Anderson, Jan 1357 O Moore, Jan 1857 B W Bellamy, Jan 1857 R T Pleasants, Jan 1857 Dr If Wood, Mar 1855 W Frazier, July 1856 W F Earner, Jan 1857 Sam'l A Griater, Jan 1857 J E Smith, July 1S56 L Burruss, Jan 1857 A Meandon, Jan 1857 A Pointer, Jan 1858 E Cunningham, Jan 1857 W II Roy', Jan 1856 T L Hundley, Jan 1857 Jno W Paxton, Jan 1857 Col Geo Townes, Jan 1861 Jno N Griffin June 1856 O C Fowler, Jan 1857 Jas D Gibson, Jan 1857 Jno N Rylarid, Jan 1857 W D Blanton, Oct 1856, Jos Janney, July 1856 \V Logan, Jr Jan 1857 Col W Rison, Jan 1857 S Gouldin, Jan 1857 W F Lc-.vjs, Jan 1857 Jno Phillips, W F Hobbs, July 1857 AV R Scarlett, Jan 1857 S Dickson, Jan 1856 Jos Reunie, Jan 1857 S B Major, Apr 1856 J P Cocke, Jan 1S57 J Michaux, Jan 1857 F B Welton, Jan 1857

1 00

1 00 3 50

2 00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 00

1 00 1357 1 00

2 00 2 00 5 00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 00 5 00 I 00 1 00 3 25 1 00 1 25

2 00 2 50

2 00

3 00 1 00

1 00

2 00

2 00

3 00 1 50 1 00 1 00 1 00

C C Hightower, Jan 1857 E Hancock, Feb 1857 L H B Whitater, Jan 1857 W J Lawrence, Jan 1357 M Cason, Jan 1857 VV Turnbull, Nov 1855 S L Lewis Jan 1857 Rev P Cleaveland, Jan 1857 J H Carrington, Jan 1857 Mrs L P Miller, Jan 1857 R C L Moncure, Jan 1857 R L Rudusilla, Jan 1857 Jas Harding, Feb 1857 ■X Hurst, Feb 1857 T Dunawav, Feb 1857 C Harding",'Feb 1S57 TH Finckard, Feb 1S57 Dav Graham, Jan I860 J M Fray, July 185/ R B BurrusS, Jan 1857 Dan'l Jones, Jan 1857 J B Whitehead, Jan 1857 A Phillips, Jan 1857 IJ W Reese, July 1856 i J D Massenburg, Jan 1857 A J Greene. Apr 1857 R Robinson, Jan 1857 S D Watkins; Jan 1857 Jno F Lynk, Apr 1856 S P Mitchell, Jan 1857 Maj C Yancey, Jan 1857 3 Petty, Jan 1856 A R Stringer, July 1856 ' W P Tatum, Jan 1857 S Rixey, jr Jan 1857 T Michau.v, Jan 1857 Capt T Nelson, Jan 1857 L N Dagis, Jan 1857 S B Jones, Jan 1857 J M Taylor, Jan 1857 ' J F Greenlee, June 1856 R J Davis, Jan 1857 Judge W Daniel, jr Jan 1857 T B Robertson, Jan 1857 A W Womack, Jan 1857 N Piggott, Jan 1857 Jno C Bell, Jan 1857 R Wilkinson, Jan 1857 T J Hoduet, Jan 1857 S C Townes, Jan 1857 C T Sutherlin, Jan 1857 W Woodson, Jan 1857 R N Hudson, April 1857 YVS Carter, Jan 1857 W B Aston, July 1356 W C Rives,, jr. Jan 1857 V Markham, Jan 1857 B L Walker, Jan 1857 H I Opie, Sept 1S56 A W Cousins, Jan 1857 W C Cai-uugton Jan 1657

OCiJas MM'Cargo, March 1857 00 Gen W T Bailew, Jan 1357 fjO W Dupuy, Jan 1857 00 J H Knight, Jan 1857 00 R V Watkins, Jan 1337 50 J J Scott, Dec 1858 00 B S Scott', Nov 1856 00 FP Wood, April 1857 75 .1 D Lison r May 1857 00 Jas W Walker, July, 1S56 00[Maj J H Lee, July 1357 G Hairstun, sr Jan 1857 L Hundley, Jan 1637 J J Ewin, Jan 1357 Dr C M'Dowell, Jan 1857 T E Shannon, Jan 1857 Dr G S Newman, Jan 1857 Jno Grasty, Jan t€51 E R Coke, Jan 1657 Dr TJ Williams, Jan 1857 J S Quisenberry, Jan 1858 F Jones, July 1857. J Y Hardy, Apr 1856 G R Trant, Jan 1857 W B B Walker, Jan 1856 Jos Rock, Jan 1857 Col T J Randolph, Jan I85G A. G Moody, Jan 1857 K. S Nelson, Jan 1857, Dr C D Evereit, Jan 1857 Mrs S J Colston, Sep IS56 VVm Eddins, Apr 1857 J W Mason, Jan 1857 Fl Gwathmey, Jan 1857 W- C Tucker, Jan 1857 ET W Ashton, Jan 1857 ft H Carter, Jan 1857 J Ferreyhough, Jan 1857 Jos Alsop, Jan 1857 A P Rowe, Jan 1857 Thos Yerby, Jan 1857 Wm Carter, Jan 1857 C Morgan, March 1857 M Wallace, Jan 1857 A H H Bernard, Mar 1856 A P Stroiher, Jan 1859 A G Binford, Jan 1857 R L Brown, Jan 1857 Geo Jones, April 1856 E C Turner, Jan 1857 VV J Webb, April 1856 M R H Garnet, Jan 1858 Jos B Howe, April 1856 Jno Sclater, Jan 1857 E T Douglass, March 1857 Col T Brown, January 1856 L C Berkeley, April 185G B L Cason, March 1S57

i l 1 i i i i

2 5 I

1 1 i

1 1

2

I 1 3 3

1 111

5 2

3

8

3

1

1

3 ^

1

2

2,

1 in

THE SOUTHERN PLANTER

127

DOUBLE SCREENED ROCKAWAY,

E GREAT PREMIUM FAN STILL VICTORIOUS.

Invented and Manufactured by J. MONTGOMERY & BRO., at No 135 North High Street, Baltimore. Patented Dec. 20th, 1S53, and June 9lh, 1S55. This Fan lias taken the First Premium at all the leading Agricultural Shows of Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina; We haTe never been ten since we improved our Fan, and we do not think tbere is any Fan in the United States that will do its rk as fast and clean as our Rockoway. They are rked easy, are very simple, can be rigged for cleaning an intelligent farmer, are very durable, and when out >rder can be repaired with great ease, by any Mechanic nd they are adapted to cleaning all kindd of grain, have had ample opportunities to test our Fan, during present harvest, with several of the latent improved is, and our experience is, that we can clean nearly, if quit", as fast ami clean, as any two of them in the ae time. We think we know what the farmer wants 1 needs, and that our experience enables us to suit them ter than any other person in the Fan business—and y may rest assured that no pains will be spared to gue m the best machine in the market. Our Fan has gained present popularity entirely in consequence of its merits iur sales have increased 50 per cent, in our old dis-ts, showing that those sold heretofore have given full isfaction. We have sold over 550 Fans this season, and ) will not more than supply the demand from present >earances. It is an easy matter to puff up an article "ore the public, through the Journals as some have been season—but for a Fan to retain its popularity, and to rea^e in demand, as ours has done in the same Coun-i and districts for 3 and 4 years, is the best evidence of value. Oar sales are extended over six States, namely, .ryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, laware and Georgia. Having secured Letters Patent our Fan, in 1853 and 1855, we are now prepared to Rights far any State or County not mentioned above. offer a good chance to any enterprising mechanic > desires to go into business—a business that can be ried on a small capital and yield as fair profit as any know of. \V§ will give all the Patterns and any (ruction requisite.

!)ur Fans, delivered on board the vessel in Baltimore S3). All orders, by mail, as promptly attended to as made in person.

[t is deemed almost nnnecsesary to give certificates or ;renc.-s, as to the superior qualities of our Fan, as they so universally known—but for the information of those o have not as yet used them, we subjoin the following:

Charles County, Md, 1855. iVe have tried Montgomery & Bro's improved Double ■eened Rockaway Fan, and find it to be the best \ve id ever seen. It cleans cleaner, faster, and works ter, in general, than any we have ever tried. We ominend it to all our friends. John Wise,

m'l Cabhington Joseph Young, Jos. H. Cooksev. This i< to certify that I purchassd of Messrs J. Mont-nery & Brother, one of their wheat Fans, the 17th of ly, 1893, and I consider it an excellent fan. It is now ning wheat this day, and I think it is as perfect as en I first purchased it, except the usual wear and tear, vould recommend them to the public. Dan'l NawsAM.

Rockfield, Nelson Co., July 23d 1835-*8sra. J. Montgomery &. Bro :

[ am more than pleased with your Rockaway Fan ; had beamed your.; in time on my last year's third and inferior klitied wheat, (the remnant) I could have saved $150. H. N. Coleman, sr. Ml orders addressed to the undersigned, at Baltimore ./ (Md.) Post oftUe, will be promptly attended to.

J. MONTGOMERY & BRO., ; >' Hig^i ■•., bet HilSen and Gay, Bil'o. April 185G.

i'-x-.-.N'--;-. /y r \-x-.:iiAX "/}jMfe>

AGRICULTURAL WAREHOUSE.

The Subscribers are prepared to receive Orders for all kinds of Agricultural Machines and Implements of the latest and most approved patterns, which will be made of the best materials and of superior workmanship. They ask attention-to " Card well's Double and Single Geared Horse Powers and Threshers," which have taken a Premium at every Fair at which they have been exhibited. Also, to"Croskill's Clod Crusher;" "Manny's Patent Reaper and Mower," the best in use ; Fawke's Patent Lime and Guano Spreader, highly approved; Whitman's Corn Planter, a superior machine ; Rich's Patent Iron beam Plow, of various sizes, &c. They subjoin the opinion of the Hon. Wm. C. Rives of these Plows.

BALDWIN, CARDWELL & CO.

Richmond, February 27th.

Castle Hill, Dec. 15, J&51.

Col. Wm. B. Stocciiton: —Dear Sir: I take pleasure in recording here my impressions of the performance of your Plow (Rich's Iron-beam Patent) at Cobham to day. The work was far more thorough and complete than that of any plow I ever saw in operation before. The furrow opened by it was very generally 13 inches deep and about 30 inches wide in hard close land, and most effectually snd perfectly cleaned out, none of the sod earth falling back into it.

The trial of the plow was witnessed by many of my neighbors, among whom I will mention Messrs. Frank K. Nelson, J. H. Genell, J. H. Lewis, C. B. Hopkins, Thomas Watson, of Louisa, &c, all practical men and most excellent judges of agricultural implements, and there was but one opinion among them as to the superiority and unexceptionable performance of your plow.

Wishing you equal success elsewhere in making* this valuable implement favorably known to our agricultural brethren, I remain yours, truly,

aplt WM. C. RIVES.

OUR CATALOGUE OF AGRICULTURAL, BOOKS,

COMPRISING SEVENTY-FIVE DIFFERENT BOOKS ON AGRICULTURE,

Will be sent postage free to all who will favor us with their name and address.

Among the books recently published by us are:

Chorlton's Grape Grower's Guide. , COc.

Reemeline's Vinedresser's Manual. 50c.

Cranberry Culture. 50c.

Strawberry Culture. COc.

Elliot's American Fruit-Grower's Guide. 81 '25.

The Stable Book. $1.

Boussingault's Rural Economy. £,1 25.

Thompson on pood op Animals. 75c.

Practical Land Drainer. 50c.

For sale by all To ksellers, or sent by us .'re's of postage on receipt. < f price.

C. M. SAXTON & CO., Agricultural Book Publishers,

ap-It No, 140 Fallen St., N. Y.