THE SOUTHERN PLANTER. 



The ash of 3 loads of wheat atraw gave j The experiment!! in Gecscrqft y on beana?, 

 19 bushels. J peas, aad tares, show that these plants,. whMs? 



The ash of 3 loads of wheat straw and 224 j contain such a large amount of nitrogen,, aye* 



'benefited little it an j by an application cC 

 ammonia or nitrogen. The same, to a certain? 

 extent may be said of clover. There is evi- 

 dently srrcat difference in the manurtal ret* 



ibe. sulphate of ammonia, 27 bushels, nearly 

 identical with the yield obtained from the 

 same amount of ammonia alone. 



448 lbs. of 

 30£ bushels. 



448 lbs. of Liebig's wheat manure, and 

 1 12 lbs. each of sulphate and muriate of am- 1 peas, tares, and clover. The mineral theory 



Lvebig's wheat manure gave 



auirements of wheat, and probably of to- 

 other cereals, and those ' of turnips, beac&i 



xnonia, gave 29 bushels. 



| of Liebig, indeed, points out a difference, ' ht& 



14 tons farm-yard manure gave 27 i bushels, ; it is the very reverse, of what the above ®x 

 or precisely the same amount as that ob- j periments and others which might he brought- 

 tained from 2 cwt. of ammonia salts alone. ; forward, show to be the ease. 



The third year, the same unmannred tur- \ Liebig claims these experiments as a mMt- 

 nip plot produced only Iff cwt. of bulbs [tical confirmation of his theory ; and by 

 |>er acre. | pressing some of the principal facts, mistaking 



6 cwt. of sulphate of ammonia, -it tons, j others, and seising on one or two results., task 

 534 lbs. superphosphate of lime; nearly j are manifest exceptions to the general indict 

 13 tons. 1 jtions of the experiments, and by a series c*£T 



3 cwt. of sulphate of ammonia, in addition j ingenious special pleadings, ho endeavors 8*» 

 to the same amount of superphosphate, gavel to twist the results as to make them sanction 

 no more, but rather le;>s, than the super- [the mineral theory. Let us examine the 



jguments of the great chemist 



From the facts that the unmannred wheafc. 

 plot yields annually about 18 bushels of wheat*, 

 per acre ; that the addition of a great vasie&p- 

 of mineral manures givefe little or no increase ~r 

 and that the addition of ammonia alone give©, 

 a great increase, we had concluded that tktsfe 

 field contained an abundance of all the mm*- 

 oral elem-e/Us of plants capable of assimila- 

 tion, and that the reason why it produced £&- 

 bushels per acre, instead of 28, as when am- 

 monia was used, was to be attributed to, j* 

 lack of ammonia. In other words, that whea& 

 on this soil, Ottltiyated after the most approved 

 methods, hand-hoed thrice in the spring,. 

 abounding in all the mineral elements @§ 

 We might extract from tiiose extensive and plants, was not able to obtain efficient amm&~ 



phosphate alone. 



1 1 cwt. of superphosphate of iiine gave 1 4 £ | 

 tons. 



The same amount of superphosphate, with 

 % cwt. of sulphate of ammonia 4n addition, 

 gave 1 4 tons and a half. 



We may here remark — and we call par- 

 ticular attention to it, as showing that it is 

 tl*o phosphoric, and not the sulphuric acid, 

 to which superphosphate of lime owes its effi- 

 cacy as a manure for turnips — that 12 cwt. 

 e£ sulphate of lime gave less than 5 J tons ; 

 aaid the same amount of sulphate of lime, 

 with 3 cwt. of sulphate of ammonia in addi- 

 tion, gave only 4| tons, while superphosphate, 

 with and without ammonia, gives 14^ tons 



long continued experiments many more sim- 

 ilar results for other years, but surely we have 

 given enough to show that so far as applied to 

 wheat, the mineral theory, as taught in the 

 extracts we have given from Liebig and his 

 followers, is at fault ; and also that for turnips, 

 while the rain and atmosphere are capable of 

 supplying to a great extent the ammonia they 

 require, and that it is partly true that the 

 crop " increases or diminishes in a direct ratio 

 with the supply of mineral elements capable 

 of assimilation;" yet it is evident that the 

 proportion in which mineral elements are 

 required, are precisely the opposite of what 

 the analysis of the ashes of the \ urnip would 

 lead us to expect* 



' Our limited space baa compelled us to leave out tha 

 Msaltq of repeated applications (of potash,) of which' the 

 turnip ;,,L contains some 40%per cent.,) soda, r.a.-^m-t.ia, 



&<■,., but we may x. 

 little or as benefit. 



\&t that they weTfl attended 



nia from the atmosphere for a maximum crops. 

 Were this admitted, the dearly cherished 

 mineral theory must be given up; and Liebig^.. 

 therefore, endeavors to prove that the reasons 

 why 1 8 bushels per acre only were obtained 

 is attributable to a deficiency of available 

 minerals. He asseits that the cause of the-. 

 beneficial effect of the sulphate of ammonia 

 is due to its solvent action on the phosphates 

 of the soil ; and that it simply or principally 

 acted by rendering an increased amount of the* 

 mineral elements of the soil capable of as- 

 similation. 



We would ask, in reply, if maximum wIie&SL. 

 crops were not obtained from lack of soluble 

 phosphates, why it was that an applica- 

 tion of soluble phosphates, «fec, did not in- 

 crease the crop? They were used in various 



with forms and proportions, without stint, yet they 



