332 



THE GENESEE FARMEB. 



ness in the ground we cultivate, is not to write down 

 the application of analytical chemistry to the study 

 of soils, but direct it into a more promising line of 

 research, where its powers will disclose new facts, and 

 the most important relations that really subsist be- 

 tween plants and the earth in which they grow. 

 These relations are not now so well understood as 

 they ought to be, and will be, if farmers wisely foster 

 the critical study of their calling. No man has a 

 more cordial contempt for quackery, of whatever 

 kind, than the writer; but in rebuking n^iere preten- 

 sion, one should be careful not to depress an earnest 

 desire for more light in the science of agriculture. 

 In no department of this science is light more needed 

 than in that which relates to the fertility and bar- 

 renness of land. Let chemists, then, extend their 

 researches in this direction, and not be discouraged 

 by the agricultural press. (H) D. Lee. 



Athens, Ga., Sept. 30, 1857. 



Eemaeks. — (A) We have never presumed to say 

 that analytical chemistry, at some future day, will not 

 be able to afford useful information in regard to the 

 composition and value of soils. Our remarks referred 

 to the present state of the science. 



(B) This is a fair deduction from our remarks, 

 and if the facts which we have adduced do not sus- 

 tain it, we can bring forward many others which we 

 think cannot fail to convince all candid minds that 

 the analyses of soils which have hitherto been made, 

 or can be made by the best chemists at ike present 

 time, are of no direct practical utility to the farmer. 

 ■ (C) All knowledge is " desirable," but all knowl- 

 edge is not, necessarily, of practical utility. 



(D) We have no doubt that the analyses of soils, 

 like the search for the "philosopher's stone," may 

 at some future day lead to valuable results. But 

 this is not the question. The chemist has no right 

 to take money from the farmer, under the pretext 

 that an analysis of his soil will afford him definite 

 information of great practical value — information 

 which will enable him to raise larger crops at less 

 cost — and then in lieu of this information, tell him 

 that he did not know but what he might have 

 stumbled upon some fact that would prove valuable. 

 The labors of the alchemists incidentally led to the 

 development of many new chemical laws, and so 

 may soil analyses. But the alchemist of the, dark 

 ages differed at least in one respect from the advo- 

 cates of soil analyses in the nineteenth century. He 

 did not profess to be in possession of the philosopher's 

 stone, and advertise to convert base metals into gold. 

 The chemist who asks the farmer to send him a sam- 

 ple of his soil, (with a check for .$25) does not pro- 

 fess to be seeking the philosopher's stone, but to have 

 already found it. 



(E) In analyzing a soil it is usual to separate from 

 it the organic matter, sand and clay, before deter- 

 mining the quantity and relative proportion of the 

 more important constituents of plant-food. Our re- 

 marks in regard to the inability of the chemist to de- 

 termine the quantity of these substances with .suffi- 

 cient accuracy for practical purposes, referred to the 

 vei^ best processes at present known. If Dr. Lee 

 has discovered a process that affords more accurate 

 results, we hope he will lose no time in communica- 

 ting it to the world. 



(F) With all due respect we would say that this 

 JH dodging the question. Who ever before heard of 



a chemist asking for half a ton of the soil? Where; 

 has it been stated that it would be necessary to leach 

 half a ton of the soil for six months before commen- 

 cing the analysis proper? The chemist who analyzed 

 Mr. Pell's soil, and found in it more potash, soda 

 and lime after a summer's drought, than in the spring, 

 probably never dreamed of siich a process — certainly 

 he nor no other man ever adopted it. Dr. Lee ia 

 too well acquainted with agricultural literature not 

 to know that what is usually understood by analy- 

 zing a soil is a very different process from that which 

 he now alludes to. We very much doubt whether 

 this new process of leaching half a ton of soil would 

 afford any mors accurate results, but this is not the 

 point under discussion. 



(G) To show what has hitherto been meant by 

 " soil analyses," we may be allowed to quote from an 

 article, written by Dr. Lee himself, in the Gtnesee 

 Farmur for 1846, page 57: 



" The editor of this paper is prepared to analyze 

 soils in the most critical and satisfactory manner. 

 He has incurred a large expense for apparatus, and 

 devoted, first and last, not a little time to the investi- 

 gation of the subject." 



"Specimens of soil— a pound or so o-f earth is 

 enough — can be sent, done up in a strong paper, to 

 the office of the Genesee Farmer. An analysis of 

 the surface soil, and the subso'il, will be made at five 

 dollars." 



" The following is the analysis of General Har- 

 mon's soil, which we made in th elaboratory of Fro 

 Emmons, in Albany, not long since:" 



SURFACE SOIL. 



After the soil had been well dried in a warm room 

 for many days, 100 grains had^ 



"Water of absorption, 4.T>0 grains. 



Organic matter, 8.00 " 



Silica 75.67 " 



Carbonate of lime 1.96 " 



Oxide of iron '. 4.68 » 



Magnesia (phosphate) 1.00 "■ 



t^iiljiliate of lime (gypsum) l.o5 "' 



Alumina 2.47 " 



Potash and Soda traces 



Loss 37 " 



lOOJX) 



SUB- SOIL. 



Water of absorption 4.00 



Organic matter 3.40 



Silica 78.29 



Alumina and oxide of iron 13.08 



Carbonate of lime 0.95 



Loss 0.2.8 



100.00 " 



" The above analyses are highly valuable in the 

 cultivation of the soil referred to. First, they reveal 

 the important fact that the soil of Gen. H.'s farm 

 contains a plenty of magnesia, lime, gypsum and 

 iron. Secondly, that it lacks potash, soda, and to 

 some extent 'phosphoric acid." 



Dr. Lee says that his half-ton analysis "differs 

 materially from the ' soil analyses' to which you (the 

 Genesee Farmer) refer." Such an analysis (provid- 

 ing it ever has been, or ever shall be made) also 

 " differs materially from the soil analyses" made by 

 Dr. Lee, as given above, and which are pronounced 

 " highly valuable." When farmers are urged to have 

 their soils analyzed, it is understood that such analy- 

 ses as those given above are referred to. Dr. Leb 

 has never informed the agricultural public that there 

 r baa been any change in his views on this subject 



