Mek bey Pi ae yigiet 
NER OF AGRICULTURE. — i 
_ The juices treated during the interval of this work remained, so far ' 
as could be ascertained, essentially uniform as respected adaptability 
to filtration, as, indeed, they have done up to present writing, being — 
referred in this regard occasionally to an arbitrarily selected standard: ie 
, by careful weighings of defecated juice, brown coal, and products ~ 
operated upon in observed times on tarred-paper filters. The analyses 
of raw juices for, those dates which cover this series of determina- .— 
tions, as made in the course of diurnal routine work, are presented —. 
below. in 
While they may serve for general comparison with the like as ob- 
\y . Z 
270° REPORT OF THE COMMISSIO 
4 
served in other portions of our tropical cane belt, no relation has yet 
been noted to exist between the amounts of sucrose, reducing sugars, 
or other known constituents of the juice, and the difficulties exhibited 
by this in filtration. In the latter regard it is not possible to say if -' ~ 
that which has here been experimented upon fairly represents Louis- 
iana’s average. It would seem, indeed, to be otherwise, since,inthe 
treatment, of scums, great difficulty is renee to have been expe- 
rienced in almost if not every other local factory possessing filter- 
¥ 
_ presses, while at this no other process of manufacture was through- © — 
out so satisfactorily performed. oe 
y 7 hi 
aH 9 a.m. 3 p.m. 9 p.m. Moye 
: Sage aa 4 
Date. | henge : | I ya abe =a a : g eS 
ee) a et oe te Navas Pe Say eee elo ae vee 
RAG ee: mn Pee Maen oi Sabie 5 ah S/O) Mae 5 
ed ant sequel SD 2 us) = 3) 2 cs Ps 5 1 
[eee a ee Ba at a2 
| ee na oS e a mm | eo rs mn | o is a. 
weet —) |e =. - - ets =| | — ae | 
1887. | : 
Nove coud: 96! PIS O01 Led) BAL 58 cet oulias cee [howl go Jato com ciers Reete eS | ae tevail snide cial eae : 
Dec, 1 | 15.03.) 1<.U | 1.31 | 79.84 | 15.28 | 11.6 | 1.25 | 76.16 | 15.48 | 1250 | 1.14 | Wi ‘a 
2} 15.30 | 12.1 | 1.27 | 79.08 | 14.78 | 11.0 | 1.09 | 74.42 | 14.48 | 11.7] 1.33) | 81.08 a 
3 115.27 | 12.3 |) 1.52 | 80.55) 14.07) 11.2 ) 1.47 | 79.60 | 18:78") 9.7%.) 1256)) 705389 
5 | 14.09 | 10.4 | 1.62 | 73.81 | 14.69 | 10.7 | 1.50 | 72.83 | 14.91 | 11.5 | 1.36 | 77. 12 | 
6 | 14.18 | 10.1 | 1.50 | 71.22 | 14.03 | 11.0 | 1.43 | 78.40.| 14.23 | 11.2 | 1.36 | 78.20 | 
©) 14.06 | 10/8 ) 1.45.) 76.81 | 14.58, | 10.7 | 1.50.) 73.38].....:.|2..2..).... A tei ce : 
Bit 4, 48 | 11 Br] B68 | 29060 | 407 PB a Br Ty. 86.| eon 21! Siem 
9 | 14.63 | 11.7 | 1.56 | 79.97 | 14.69 | 11.3 ) 1.38.) 76.92 )20 oc cade arse Je wee ee 
10 | 18.96 | 11.8 | 1.48 | 80:94 } 14.69 | 11.5 | 1.47 | 78.28 | 14:96} 11.4 ]...... | 76. 20 
12 | 15.09 | 11.7 | 1.64 | 77.53 | 15.68 | 12.1 |...... Cte AU TAS OOM TENG aleoow sare 82. 85 
, | 14 | 14.17 | 12.1 | 1.61 | 85.39 | 14.93 | 12.¢ | 1.66 | 81.04 | 14.20} 11.3)...... 79.57 ¥ . 
\ | 15 SOS DSO Tae OL Po209 7 AL IB Es oe) eC OshOM emcee Jeveeeeleceeeefeeenees } 
| 16 | 14.63 | 12.5 | 1.66 | 85.44 | 14.69 | 12.9 | 1.43 | 87.81 |....... oc seracessi| tat sista ee Pl vy 
Lie ta OF st 200)) 1.645) 80506. |) T4569) /S13* 4s) A 24 le ON OT a oneness Benoa cere | sao K 
19 | 15.16 | 12.3 | 1.85 | 81.13 | 15.43 | 12.6 | 1.84 | 81.65 | 15.20 | 13.6 | 1.22 | 88.94 
Woe | Rewer Laer at 
Average SOlHdS. 3.5... ...5.6.5- Bailie, a ia\as oho Sn Ne han gitira Set ny 5 A i Se ete SS a 14.72 * 
AVET ALO ISUCKOSO wry ape tem bn price ace R Ree teats too sco Nea ee here Se eeerigat 11.68 ; 
Average reducing sugars (glucoSe). ... 2. 22...2. 5.02 n eee e ees Pete oo As oh he eee 
Average co-efficient of purity (exponent)..................... SNAP AES Lede ore SI. 79, 34 
Plant cane, 27.5 tons (circa) per acre, blown prostrate September 16. 
From these trials the resulting extremes, in round numbers, have € 
alone been given. Variationsin temperatures and in pressures, both | 
with juice and displacement water; in density and completeness of 
defecation with the former; in perfection of cake and lixiviation 
sought, as in other similar qaniabled some premeditated, others at — 
times uncontrollable, render, as will be understood by a trained ex- 
perimentalist like yourself, absolutely definite and thoroughly iron- 
clad figures quite out of the question. Theaverage amounts of juice 
put through given filtering areas in fixed times have, however, in fact, ‘i 
most nearly corresponded with those presented as minima. 
