436 FE. W. Hilgard—Soil Analyses and their Utility. 
soils, if we abandon as hopeless the determination of their 
chemical character? Are the proofs that have been brought 
against the utility of soil analyses really of such a character as 
to justify so grave an omission? an omission, too, which in 
many cases cannot hereafter be supplied. ven in the com- 
paratively youthful State of Mississippi, I have found diff- 
ni in obtaining reliable specimens of some soils, whose great 
productiveness had led to their cultivation by the earliest set- 
tlers, over the entire area of their occurrence. eae 
I question the propriety of this omission, and the justice of 
the testimonium paupertatis thus inflicted upon agricultural and 
analytical chemistry. 
To define my position, I premise that-— 
1. I fully agree with Prof. Johnson as to the comparative use- 
lessness of a single analysis giving the percentages of soil ingre- 
dients found, zn ordinary cases. It is only when such analysis 
demonstrates the great abundance, or very great deficiency, of one 
or several primarily important ingredients, that, by itself, it con- 
veys information of considerable practical importance. Note, 
bbe such cases are not altogether infrequent, even in virgin 
soils. 
2. I agree that an “average soil” is a non ens, except as 
referred, comparatively, to a particular set of soils closely related 
in their origin. ‘ 
3. Also, that the claim of being able to detect the minute 
differences caused by cropping without return to the sou, 18 
i Hi the power of our present ana 
re 
4. I farther admit that, ordinarily, the analysis of soils long 
cultivated, and treated with manures, can give but little and very 
soil; from the great difficulty, if not impossibility, of obtaining 
fair representative specimens. 
urthermore, that to designate soils by the names of the 
Cretaceous, Carboniferous or Silurian strata they may happen 10 
overlie, is very loose practice; since in most cases they are 
derived from Quaternary deposits, which may or may not have 
_ On the contrary I demur, in the first place, to the broad 
assertion that “it is practically impossible to obtain average 
as inapplicable to a very large class, 
ially of virgin soils, covering large areas with a uniformity 
. : rocesses. ~ 
_ The Hepeeneeot this exception is not, it is true, very 
