356 



THE RURAL NEW-YORKER'S ANSWER TO JOSEPH HARRIS. 



nitrate of soda, salts of ammonia or organic nitrogen as 

 he, by trial in an inexpensive way on small plots here 

 and there, may find them serviceable. The advocacy 

 of the use of one-sided, low-priced fertilizers on the part 

 of the mixers ("manufacturers") and their agents, has 

 done incalculable harm in the way of inducing those 

 who till the soil to purchase fertilizers which do not fur- 

 nish the full or partial meal which their land demands. 

 The consequence is that they denounce fertilizers in toto. 

 Thus, bone or South Carolina rock, kainit, superphos- 

 phates, ammoniated superphosphates, sold under high- 

 sounding, taking names and at prices far below those of 

 high-grade brands, are tried and condemned, not for 

 what they really are, but as "fertilizers" which are as- 

 sumed to furnish everything in the way of plant food 

 that the name represents. So it is that in every case 

 gifted and well-known writers, like Mr. Harris, whose 

 words of advice are taken without question, should place 

 all possible emphasis upon the economy of purchasing 

 either high-grade complete fertilizers, or of "incom- 

 plete" fertilizers only as the farmer or gardener has 

 learned from experiment that his land responds fully to 

 bone, to potash or to nitrogen, and that the other con- 

 stituents are not at present needed. 



Mr. Harris says that it is a matter of surprise that the 

 editor of the Rural New-Yorker does not see that his 

 own experiments demonstrate that, so far as the produc- 

 tion of potatoes is concerned, his worn-out soil was more 

 deficient in nitrogen than in any other constituent of 

 plant-food. "Superphosphate and potash, without ni- 

 trogen, did no good. They could produce no effect with- 

 out nitrogen. Nitrogen alone on one plot produced 183 

 bushels per acre," or, we may add, 105 bushels above 

 the iwerage of the plots of natural soil without fertilizer- 

 It is true that if this single trial be taken as a basis for 

 comparison, Mr, Harris's reasoning is logical enough. It 

 should be stated in fairness, however, that this little ni- 

 trogen-plot yielded more for some reason than any other 

 nitrogen-plot either of that year's experiments or of 

 those of preceding years. Another plot which received 

 not only the same quantity of nitrate of soda per acre 

 (200 pounds), but also 200 pounds of sulphate of potash, 

 produced but go bushels of potatoes to the acre, or 12 

 bushels above the natural-soil plots. Again, raw bone 

 (1,000 pounds), furnishing perhaps three or four per 

 cent, of ammonia, gave but 77 bushels per acre. Again, 

 in our similar experiments of the year before, nitrate of 

 soda (200 pounds) gave a yield but little more than the 

 average of the natural-soil plots. The several no-fer- 

 tilizer plots yielded an average of 143 bushels to the 

 acre. Nitrate of soda (200 pounds) yielded but 125 

 bushels; sulphate of ammonia (120 pounds) yielded the 

 same, nitrate of soda (200 pounds) and dissolved bone- 

 black (400 pounds) yielded i58 bushels. Nitrate of soda 

 (200 pounds) and sulphate of potash (300 pounds) gave 

 233 bushels per acre. Nitrate of soda (200 pounds), 

 dissolved bone-black (400 pounds), sulphate of potash 

 (300 pounds) — a complete fertilizer — gave 217 bushels. 

 The Mapes Potato Manure (800 pounds) gave 257 bush- 



els to the acre, while in the later experiments quoted by 

 Mr. Harris 1,200 pounds of the Mapes (3.70 nitrogen 

 guaranteed) gave a yield of 273 bushels to the acre. 



From a glance at the experiments carried on at the 

 experiment grounds of the Rural New- Yorker during the 

 season to which Mr. Harris alludes, it is admitted that 

 nitrogen alone gave a greater increase over the unma- 

 nured plots than either potash or phosphoric acid or 

 both. It is just as evident, withal, that in no instance 

 was a large crop raised except when a high-grade com- 

 plete fertilizer was used. 'Whether a smaller quantity 

 of the fertilizer and an additional dose of nitrogen would 

 have given as large a crop we have no proof one way or 

 the other. If we were striving to raise the largest pos- 

 sible yield per acre, we would not use nitrogen in the 

 form of nitrate of soda alone, but in the blended forms 

 of nitrate of soda, sulphate of ammonia, dried blood, 

 urate of ammonia and other organic salts of ammonia 

 found in Peruvian guano, all of them soluble, but in 

 varying degrees. Moreover, we should supply them, 

 especially on light and fallow land, in minimum quanti- 

 ties consistent with experience, on account of their ex- 

 pense and the liability of loss by leaching. It is easy 

 to supplement nitrogen to a growing crop by top-dress- 

 ing, if it is thought that it will prove serviceable, as, es- 

 pecially in the form of nitrate, it is exceedingly prompt 

 in its action. On a portion of the same impoverished 

 field upon which the potato trials alluded to were made, 

 the effects of a dressing of 150 lbs. to the acre of nitrate 

 of soda on corn were plainly visible 50 feet away three 

 days after the application in the darker color of the 

 leaves as compared with the rest of the field which had 

 received potash and phosphoric acid only. 



Our great authority. Sir J. B. Lawes, grew potatoes 

 on the same plots for nine consecutive years, from 

 1876 to 1884 inclusive. The average yield from the use 

 of 400 lbs. of ammonia salts alone was 103 bushels 

 per acre ; that from 550 lbs. of nitrate of soda was 104 

 bushels. The same amount of ammonia salts with the 

 ash elements added (complete) produced an average for 

 the nine years of 325 bushels per acre. Nitrate of soda 

 (550 lbs.) with the ash elements added, gave 300 bushels 

 per acre. Farmyard manure (16 tons) — an average of 

 six years — gave a yield of 253 bushels per acre. 



Mr. Harris remarks that the 200 lbs. of nitrate of 

 soda, used in several of our experiments to form complete 

 fertilizers, can be bought for $5. Three and a-half per 

 cent, of nitrogen equals 70 lbs. in a ton. Seventy lbs. 

 of nitrogen are contained in 368 lbs. of nitrate of soda, 

 which at 2'< cents per lb. (Mr. Harris's figures), would 

 cost SS.70, and not as he states. Still we agree with 

 him that for potatoes it is an ill-balanced fertilizer in 

 most cases, not, however, because it contains too little 

 nitrogen necessarily, but because it does not exist in 

 varied forms and also because the potash is too low by 

 half for soils deficient in potash. Where a large crop 

 is anticipated it is always safer to use an excess of food 

 constituents, particularly of those that do not waste by 

 leaching. Phosphoric acid is, next to nitrogen, the in" 



» 



