60 The Bulletin. 



of nitrogen. Almost every dollar of this vast sum may be saved by our 

 farmers, when the legumes ai-e given their proper place in our agricultural 

 scheme. 



HOVV LIVE-STOCK ADDS VALUE TO THE LEGUMES. 



The leguminous plants have a three-fold value to the farmer, (1) as humus 

 makers, (2) as nitrogen gatherers, and (3) as food for animals. The first 

 two values may be obtained without the aid of live-stock, but, as I will en- 

 deavor to point out, they are obtained at too great a sacrifice of food value. 

 Take only one example, that of the cowpea : Two tons of this most popular 

 legume grown on one acre of land will produce about .$25 worth of plant food, 

 and its value as humus will be at least one-half of this sum. That is to say, 

 that, if we allow two tons of cowpea-vine to remain on the acre of land on 

 which it was produced, we will have added to the soil some $38 worth of plant 

 food and humus. But this two tons of pea-vine, when harvested as hay, has 

 a food value of from $25 to $27. Now, if we plow this valuable food in we 

 are losing altogether more than \ve can afford to lose. It is not good business 

 to bury $25 in each acre of our land when we can, with a little labor and at 

 small expense, secure the manurial, the humus, and the food values of this 

 legume. The harvesting of the two tons of pea-viiie may be accomplished, by 

 the use of machine-tools, at a cost of $3 at the most. The product may be fed 

 to animals and the manui'e returned to the laud at a cost of not more than $1. 

 The humus value of the plants will be the same whether plowed under in the 

 natural state or after having passed through the animal. But in the feeding 

 of the product less than twenty-five per cent of the plant-food value will have 

 been lost, going to make up animal tissue and later sold from the farm. 



GETTING THE MOST OUT OF HOME-GROWN FEED. 



So we will charge our feeding account with twenty-five per cent of the 

 plant-food value, or $6.25 ; adding the cost of harvesting and feeding to this, 

 we have a total of $10.25 to be subtracted from the food value of the hay 

 ($27), and have as the result $16.75 as clear profit per acre to pay us for our 

 enterprise in handling the product in this up-to-date business manner. Fur- 

 ther, we return our manure to the poorer sections of the field, where the 

 humus and plant food are viost needed, instead of turning in the bulk of the 

 pea-vine on the richest spots, on which the bulk of it was produced, and where 

 it is least needed. 



We plow under millions of dollars worth of cotton-seed meal each year for 

 fertilizer, when we could .just as well secure both three-fourths of the ma- 

 nurial and all the food value by combining it with corn silage and feeding to 

 first-class animals. The foregoing part of my talk applies more particularly 

 to the eastern section of our State. 



HOW LIVE-STOCK MAY BRING A PROFIT FROM ROUGH LAND. 



Now let us turn our attention for a little to the Piedmont section. All over 

 this vast section — probably the most fertile of our State — may be seen thou- 

 sands and thousands of acres of land lying idle, growing up in worthless 

 brush and I>riars, bringing not a cent to its owners. All these vast acres 

 should be producing grass, on which to graze first-class cows, hogs, sheep and 

 horses. The rougher portions of this land can never be made profitable plow 

 land because of the great loss (by washing) of soil and fertility which attends 

 the plowing and working of this character of soil. So the only course, in our 

 opinion, open to the farmers of this favored section is the production of live- 

 stock, hay and grass, uses to which this section is especiall.v adapted. 



The people of our mountain section have already found that only in live- 

 stock farming can they hope to attain to the greatest success ; and our north- 

 western counties, with their clean fields, productive meadows, and fine, nicely 

 painted homes, are as good an argument as we need to convince the most 

 skeptical as to what live-stock can do in a country, and I am glad to know 

 of the increasing numbers of good animals being produced in this section. 

 Only one thing, in my opinion, stands in the way of doubling the number of 



