25 



60 Ib. bonedust and 30 Ib. English superphosphate, 12 bushels; 35 Ib. 

 of King's Early Solid Straw wheat drilled with 100 Ib, 

 of Thomas phosphate, 17J bushels; and he believed 

 Thomas phosphate would pay for their heavy soil. Mr. 

 A. Robinson agreed that it gave better results on dry than on marly 

 lanJ. Mr. Ratten had from Purple Straw, with 112 Ib. Kangaroo 

 Island guano, 9 bushels; with 112 Ib. colonial bonedust, also 9 

 bushels; with 75 Ib. superphosphate per acre, 16 bushels. Others 

 also recommended drilling with 100 Ib. superphosphate, and Mr. 

 Frost broadcasting apparently with 120 Ib., although Mr. Nicholls 

 found a crop manured with Thomas phosphate was far better than. 

 one with English superphosphate. Both fields had been badly 

 affected with take-all the last time they had been cropped. 



Mr. A. Jarrett, of Maitland (19.80 in.), Yorke Peninsula, 

 had taken seven crops from his land before drilling in Thomas phos- 

 phate, and reaped 24 and 28 bushels per acre. Mr. E. Kains, of 

 Balaclava (15.94 in.), reported well on Thomas phosphate, much 

 against his expectation on rubbishy limestone land, and also as 

 regards after-effects. Mr. T. Corlett, of Yorketown (18.08) reported 

 that a plot of wheat manured with Thomas phosphate yielded four 

 times as much than an adjacent unmanured plot; and Mr. Domas- 

 chenz had quite doubled his crop. Mr. A. Bairstow, of Narridy 

 (16.78), applied 5 cwt. bonedust per acre, and to another field Thomas 

 phosphate (how much ?), and reaped 3 bushels 20 Ib. more than from 

 the former. Mr. P. Anderson had no drill, and broadcasted in 1895 

 on 20 yards square 15 Ib. of Thomas phosphate, which yielded 

 double as much straw and four times as much wheat as the land 

 alongside ; and in 1896 the patch showed very distinctly that the 

 manure was not all taken out by the crop of 1895. Professor Lowrie 

 also stated in a lecture at the eighth annual Congress that Thomas 

 phosphate giving 3 to 4 bushels less than different superphosphates 

 would no doubt show to advantage in the next crop. It was applied, 

 however, also with profit to the crop then reaped, though the year 

 was exceptionally dry, the rainfall being only about 14 in. Mr. 

 Jos. Correll, of Minlaton (17.62 in.), remarked once that superphos- 

 phate and Thomas phosphate, sown side by side, yielded equally 

 well. He also gave in 1900 to his wheat 100 Ib. of Thomas phos- 

 phate, and to other fields from 73 to 93 Ib. of Lawes superphos- 

 phate per acre, and mixed with the latter 7 Ib. of Thomas pho&- 

 phate (Bilston's) to counteract any injurious effect from an excess of 

 sulphuric ,<acid the superphosphate might contain. There was no 

 difference visible in the two crops ; but the fertilisers ought 

 to have been given at different times. Mr. T\\ Correll 

 tabled wheat plants manured with Thomas phosphate, also 

 ivitli it and sulphate of potash, and with mineral super. 

 The plant which received potash was much more robust than the 

 others. Where potash and super, had been applied there was appa- 

 rently no benefit from the potash. He thought the potash made 

 th-r phosphoric acid in the Thomas phosphate more readily available. 



