COMMERCIAL FERTILIZERS FOR MAINTENANCE or FERTILITY 111 



in the cotton belt to the restoration of those new ground conditions which 

 all planters have noticed are so favorable to the profitable culture of cotton. 

 On lands newly cleared from the forest every cotton farmer has noticed that 

 the crop is not only more certain without the fertilizers, but that a heavier 

 application of fertilizers can be more profitably made than on an old field that 

 has so long been in the crop that it has lost the black humus that the new land 

 has so plentifully. Therefore, the effort of the farmer should be towards the 

 keeping up of these soil conditions where they exist and the restoration of 

 them where they have been exhausted, and in no way can this be done so 

 economically as through the culture of the "clover of the South," the cow pea. 

 Not that the cotton farmer should sacrifice a valuable feed crop as manure 

 direct to his land, for the cutting of the hay and the feeding of it to stock 

 is far more business-like and profitable than the burying of the whole growth 

 at once in the soil. The roots and stiibble contain a large amount of the 

 manurial value, and by saving the manure carefully the land loses little of 

 the tops, while feeding can be made an important part of the farm profits. 

 Barnyard and stable manures are more profitable to the cotton planter, as a 

 means for the bulking up of his soil with organic matter, and for the forma- 

 tion of the important humus, than as manures direct to the crop ; for we have 

 seen that crude manures may tend to delay the ripening of the crop. Drib- 

 bling a little manure or compost of manure in the row is not the best way to 

 get a stand of cotton, and is far from being the best way to improve the soil. 

 All home-made manures, and all woods-mold collected, should be spread 

 broadcast Over the whole soil. As we have said, the place for these crude 

 manures is on the corn crop following the cotton and preceding the oats or 

 wheat, so that by the time the field comes around again in cotton, in a three- 

 year rotation, the remaining manure has been reduced to a state of humus 

 and aids the commercial fertilizer applied to the cotton crop in doing its 

 work. The editor from whose work we glean these conclusions, says that 

 cotton may be wisely assigned a place in a judicious rotation, and suggests 

 a rotation of small grain, followed by corn with peas, and then cotton; and 

 adds that each crop should be properly fertilized. To this rotation we see 

 the objection that there are no peas for mowing and making hay for stock, 

 and no mention of making manure. Now, as the feeding of live stock is at 

 the very foundation of all rational farm improvement, in the cotton as well 

 as the corn field, the rotation that does not provide a forage 

 crop other than corn is defective. Then, too, while an application 

 of fertilizer to every crop grown may produce an increase of the crop, it is 

 not always profitable farming. One of the chief values of a good rotation, 

 to my mind, is to enable the farmer to increase the productiveness of his 



