1839] 



FARMERS' R E G 1 S T E R . 



167 



authority ofprofessor Ducatel in the follovving ex- 

 tract i'rom his geological report. After giving.the 

 analyses oflO specimens o( lime-stone, from Balti- 

 more, Harford, and Frederick counties, Maryland, 

 he proceeds : 



"It will be perceived that three out of ten are 

 magnesian lime-stones ; all of them contain more 

 silica or sand than has been found in oyster-shells, 

 and one, said to be most extensively used in Har- 

 ford county, contains as much as 11 percent, of 

 inert matter. It lollows, therelbre, that as oyster- 

 shells are composed nearly of pure carbonate of 

 lime, they will afford a lime contaming scarcely 

 an appreciable quantity of impurities. If well 

 burnt, (which is the case when no efl'erverescence 

 is observed on treating them with a weak acid,) 

 lime obtained from them may be deemed, with a 

 fractional difference, equal, weight for weight, to 

 the best stone-lime; and as theii' chemical compo- 

 sition does not vary, there is nothing to be deduct- 

 ed from the value of the product in consequence 

 of the impurities that exist, as exhibited by the 

 foregoing table, in most hme-stones, and that must 

 necessarily form a part of the residue when these 

 are burnt. 



"If the comparative value of the two products be 

 estimated by measure, a greater difference is dis- 

 covered ; but there is at the same time a dispro- 

 portionate difference in price. A bushel of the 

 best alum-lime weighs from ninety to a hundred 

 pounds; whereas, the same bulk of shell-lime, 

 unground, weighs from sixty-five to seventy-five 

 pounds, and perhaps when ground v/ould weigh 

 eighty pounds — a difference of from twenty to 

 twenty-five per cent. But the former costs li:om 

 thirty to thirty-five cents at Baltimore, the most 

 convenient spot for its delivery on tide-water, 

 where the latter can be had for ten cents ; whilst 

 farmers conveniently situated on the bay side, 

 might themselves burn the shells at an expense 

 not exceeding six cents a bushel. These remarks 

 refer to the hme obtained from recent or fresh oys- 

 ter-shells; but there is little or no difference be- 

 tween it and that procured by the burning of those 

 contained in the Indian shell banks, provided pro- 

 per care be taken to separate them ti'om the black 

 mould and dirt with which they are mixed. 



"It has been supposed, that because alum-lime 

 has been found to admit of a greater mixture of 

 sand than shell-lime, in the making of mortar, it 

 was to be inferred that it is correspondingly better, 

 "or, as it is termed, stronger for agricultural purpo- 

 ses. But this is an unwarrantable conclusion ; 

 lor, as this circumstance seems to depend upon the 

 peculiar aggregation among the particles of the 

 lime, which prevents it from setting too rapidly, 

 (or, in other words, attracting water and carbonic 

 acid from the atmosphere sooner than the wants 

 of the mason require,) it would appear, on the con- 

 trary, that if any inference is to be drawn from it, 

 it is adverse to the conclusion; whilst, on the other 

 hand, the lact that shell-lime sets very quickly is 

 favorable to the opinion, entertained by some per- 

 sons, of its superior efficacy in agriculture — it be- 

 ing generally understood that lime acts in the soil 

 in the condition of carbonate of lime. Admitting, 

 however, that the peculiar arrangement of the 

 particles in stone-lime which renders it in general 

 coarser than the lime obtained from shells, may 

 better fit it as a mechanical amendment to cerfain 

 soils, the difference is at most as one to three, ac- 



cording to the datum upon which its superiority id 

 predicated ; namely, that in the preparation of 

 mortar, stone-lime will bear three times as much 

 sand as shell-lime. But even in this respect the 

 conclusion is not warranted, except perhaps in the 

 case of a purely sandy soil, in which lime alone 

 would, it is believed, prove of little service." 



Shell and sto?ie-Iitne iriay therefore be regarded 

 as nearly equivalent substances, and may be ap- 

 plied in agriculture with equal, if with any benefit. 

 If the majority of our farmers were what they 

 ought to be, reading men, it would be deemed 

 unnecessary at this late day, to enter into an ar- 

 gument to prove the beneficial effects of lime in 

 agriculture. The works of Sir fl. Davy, M. 

 Puvis, and other standard authors, and the con- 

 tributions of many practical correspondents alrea- 

 dy published in the Register, taken in connexion 

 with the eminent success of its application in 

 Pennsylvania, in many other parts of our own 

 country, and over nearly the whole of Europe, are 

 sufficient to satisfy any person whose prejudices 

 are not unconquerable. But as these works are 

 by no means generally read, it may not be amiss 

 to cite in a few words one of the very highest au- 

 thorities in practical agriculture, Robert Brown, 

 of Markle, author of the article "Agriculture," in 

 the Edinburgh Encyclopsdia. He says: "In fact, 

 the majority of soils cannot be cultivated with 

 advantage till they are dressed with;(?/ie; and 

 whether this beneficial effect, shall be considered 

 as an alterative, or as a stimulant, or as a manure, 

 it will be found to be the basis of good husbandry, 

 and of more use than all other manures put to- 

 gether. VVheneverlime has been properly appli- 

 ed, it has constantly been Ibund as much superior 

 to dung, as dung is to the .scrapings of roads or the 

 produce of a peat mire." 



That errors have been frequently committed in 

 the use of lime, in consequence of which, injury 

 rather than benefit has resulted in many cases 

 from its application, cannot be denied. What 

 may have been the cause of the failure of the ex- 

 periments of the writer in the 'Farmer and Gar- 

 dener,' it is difficult at this distance to say ; but 

 doubtless, if all the circumstances were known the 

 reason might be readily assigned. Perhaps the 

 soil was already sufficiently calcareous; or was 

 deficient in insoluble vegetable matter; or contain- 

 ed a quantity of soluble vegetable manure, which 

 was destroyed by the action of the quick-lime; or 

 the writer may have expected a greater and more 

 immediate return from the lime, than could be rea- 

 sonably anticipated. Let us examine his commu- 

 nication and see if one or the other of these rea- 

 sons will not account for the failure of his experi- 

 menis and iiis consequent disappointment. 



His first experiment was with lime used in com- 

 post. The result was exceedingly favorable, al- 

 though he is now unwilling to give the credit of 

 the improvement to the lime. This experiment 

 of the writer is the only one in which his practice 

 seems to have conformed to the principles of 

 science and the experience of the best practical 

 farmers. This method of using lime is almost the 

 exclusive practice of the best cultivated districts 

 on the continent of Europe, and has been success- 

 fully practised wiihin my own knowledge, by 

 some of the best fi:irmers in Virginia. On this 

 subject M. Puvis uses the following language: 

 "Lime in compost is never injurious to the soil. 



