PROCEEDINGS OF THE FARMERS^ CLUB. 165 



COtn. And pure Sorghum more than doubles the value of the corn. 

 Oomsceana (OtahcitaiO is worth 1^ more than t^orn; Eengha, l^ more than 

 corn^ Neeasana, 1^ more than corn; Boomvwana, \^ more tiran corn; 

 Eeanamooda, ly more than corn^ Zimmooniana, 1^' more than corn^ (But 

 I believe it costs me 610 more per acre to raise cane than corn the com- 

 mon way.) Of course it is to be undci-stood thut the cultivation is the 

 same in both cases. But the canes to be planted as thick agai{» in the 

 rows, and costs as much a^gain to each hoeir.g, which must be deducted 

 from the cane. I estimate the expense of raising- one acve of cane the pre- 

 sent year as follows: 



Plowinj; and harroNving one ■acrr;, and mjirkiag seme ....>...«............ $2 00 



Planting sniue by hand (carefully as mine v/as) 2 00 



First but-ing bi-turc {jjowing Q 00 



First plowing ..^v.... ,.,v ...,..,,... . 1 00 



Second hoeing ..>........ ....,..« '6 00 



i^econd plowing >.', «...«..>«.> 50 



Third hoeing and pulling w««ds ,. ».,. 1 50 



Kentofland ...» .....,, 4 59 



Totel : $20 50 



MucK^ — Its Value as Manure. 



Mr. J. A. Donaldson, St. Joseph, Berrien county, Michigan, writes the 

 following letter to Mr. Solon Robinson : *' In a late number of The Country 

 Gendeman, a writer over the signature of " Old Hurricane," states, that an 

 intelligent friend of his in New Jersey considers muck of no value as a 

 fertilizer. Also, that a neighbor of his expended a large sum in hauling 

 muck and composting it with lime; but he considered the labor and expense 

 lost, as his corn was no better where the compost was applied, than parts 

 of the field without it. As you were so well pleased to find a muck bed on 

 your friend's farm, I conclude you have a very high opinion of it. Will 

 you please to state before the club whether your opinion of muck as a fer- 

 tilizer is founded on actual experiment." 



To tliis Mr. Solon Robinson answers ; I have had a little personal expe- 

 rience and a good deal of observation in the use of muck as a fertiliser, 

 and am just as well convinced of its value as I am that barn-yard nmnure 

 is good. I am also satisfied that muck is as variable in its value as soils 

 are variable in their ability to produce crops. Sometimes muck, or what 

 is called muck, is quite inert ; it often is when used in a raw state. It is 

 often very unskillfuUy prepared. This was the case in the article referred 

 to, as it says : 



"Our conversation at on<; time turned on muck, and lie said that it was 

 worthless as a manure — not half so good as common earth for mixing with 

 manure. I expressed my astonishment, after reading so much about muck, 

 and buying andcarting it myself at an expense of $1.50 per load. It was 

 good as an absorbent on the principle of a sponge, and his opinion was 

 the result of .experiments, of draining and cultivating, and selling a forty- 

 acre rnuck farm. He had taken off the nigger-heads, put them into large 

 heaps,' haystack fashion, made them hollow within, filled with lime un- 

 slaked, then covered all with more muck, poured on hogsheads of water, 

 left it for a twelvemonth, then tincfjvered, expecting to find iL cluirrod and 

 reduced, but found it uninfluenced by the burning of the lime and (;ontar.t 

 with it." 



