Attgust I, 1893.J THE TR@PICAL AGRICULTURIST. 107 
III. Poonac mixed with bullock manure, &'c. 
Cost of 
Manuring. Yield. Profit. 
£ s. a. 
1 Poor soil 5 10 0 
2 Dark mould 3 10 0 
3 Keddish 2 6 8 
4 Rich 2 0 10 
£ s. a 
7 0 0 1 10 0 
8 15 0 6 5 0 
9 12 6 7 5 10 
10 10 0 8 9 0 
IV. Tying a pair of bullocks for ten nights. 
V. One Cart loaa of husks, 
£ s. d. £ s. d. 
1 Poor soil 163 700 5 13 9 
2 Dark mould 163 8 15 0 789 
3 Reddish 168 9 12 6 863 
4 Rich 1 6 3 10 10 10 9 3 9 
Thus the poor soil fields £5 ISs 9d manured with 
a cart load Im.-^Jcs or by tying bullocks round the trees. 
£ s. d. 
The fame soil unmanured yield .. 2 10 0 
Manured with poonac .. 1 10 0 
Whilst manured with Hultsdorf compost there is a 
clean loss of £3 lUs per acre. The dark mould yield 
£7 8s 9d manured with husks or by tying cattle; 
£6 5s, manured with poonac and cattle dung ; £5, 
unmanured and only £2 lis 6d manured with the 
compost. The reddish soil gives the highest return 
manured with husks or by tying cattle £8 63 3d; 
poonac and cattle manure £7 5s lOd, unmanured £7, 
with the compost £6 Us 'Id. The rich soil gives the 
higoest return with the comt-ost £10, followed closely 
by the husks or cattle with £9 3a 9d, unmanured 
£8 15, and manured with poonac and cattle manure 
£8 9s 2d. 
From the above it is seen that the manures 
which have proved most successful in all soils are 
coconut husks and fresh dung and urine from cattle 
tied under the trees. The costly compost is a failure 
in all soils except the richest, and strangely enough 
it has decreased the net profit iu all other soils. 
The composition of this compost is not given any- 
where and it would be interesting to know 15 if 
possible. 
The mixture of poonac and cattle dung appears 
from the above tai'le to be far inferior to coconut 
husks and iu the case of a poor soil the profits are 
less than when unmanured. But the question comes 
now. Have the tables been correctly prepared ? If so 
is it possible, that, coconut husk is a better manure 
than others? 
That rich manures have no effect (comparatively) 
on poor soils '? Or, does the coconut plant depend 
more on the texture of the soil aud the moisture 
which it is able to absorb than on rich and concen- 
trated nutritive matter ? Does salt act in keeping the 
soil moist aud porous and improve the condition of 
the coconut plant ? These are questions which if 
even partly decided should prove of value to the 
coconut planter. 
The values of the respective manures were computed 
above after deducting their costs. But if we look 
at them for a while without taking into considera- 
tion the cost of manuring, we find the compost 
standing first in the list, for it has been able to 
increase the crop nearly five times iu the poor soil, 
and to a large extent in all the other soils. Poonac 
mixed with bullock dung and mud ; coconut 
husks ; fresh dung and urine from cattle tied under 
the trees, all take the same rank as regards the crops 
they produce. The cost of the composts prevents its 
profitable use in any but ve y rich soils. 
Poonac and dung mixed together must according 
to the analysis of tlic manures contain more nutritive 
matter than husks But in the yield of nuts they 
have proved to bo of equal value with the dis- 
advantage for poonac in its higher cost. 
Howtver well husks'are represented in the tables 
referred to, many practical planters do not rely 
much on its value except perhaps in very heavy soils, 
besides it takes a long time to decompose and be 
of use to the plant. Chemically the £.ubstances 
contained in the husks are not equal to those in 
other manures, however the former has a large 
percentage of potash ; and has the great advantage 
o£ " quantity," and cheapneaa. It would be well to 
ascertain from your numerous correspondents whether 
" husks" could be given so high a rank as a coconut 
manure and for my part I am sceptical on that point. 
Fresh dung and urine obtained by tying cattle 
round the trees have come up in the same rank as 
husks and poonac, as regards its yield and when the 
cost is compared it takes the first rank along with 
husks. As regards the chemical composition of this 
manure it is decidedly superior to "hvtpks" and 
contain more nitrogen than the poonac, (in the 
absence of the compositi' n of the composts there is no 
way of comparing with it;. The only difficulty which 
presents itself in the way of adopting this form of 
manure is the want of a sufficient number of cattle 
to effect it systematically. W, A. D. S. 
Bombay. 
[The ahore reviewed hi/ JV. J.) 
The first part of W. A. D. S.'s paper deils almost 
exclusively with the question as to whether salt is 
the cause of the heavier crops yielded by coconut 
trees growing within the influence of the sea air, 
over those growing inland, or whether soil, rainfall 
and other conditions have a part in it. I, am 
entirely of the latter opinion and deny that trees 
growing along the sea-borde are heavier producers 
than those growing inland in free soils such as are 
common along the coast. It should also be remem- 
bered that the coconut groves along the coast are 
thickly inhabited and are constantly receiving assist- 
ance from man, cattle, pigs, refuse, &c,; and a garden 
under the same conditions inland would bear equally 
well. I have in my Eaview of the chapter on the 
Coconut, in Dr. H. A. Nicholls' " Tropical Agricul- 
ture," alre>idy expressed my views upon this matter. 
Here is Liebig's opinion of salt as a manure :— " We 
have every reason to believe that where the crops 
are increased by manuring with common ealt alone, 
or where the favourable influence of salts of ammo- 
nia or nitrate of soda is augmented by the addition 
of common salt, the operations of these three salts 
essentially depends upon their power of diffusing the 
nutritive substances p e^ent in the soil, or of pre- 
paring those substances for absorption. * • * As 
that part of the action of nitrate of soda, sea salt, 
and salts of ammonia, which consists in effecting 
the distribution in the soil of other elements of food, 
may consequently be replaced by careful tillage, the 
effects produced upon the crops by these salts 
afi'ords a pretty safe indication of the condition 
of a field. If all o:her circumstances are the 
same, their effect will be much less marked upon 
a well-tilled field than upon one not in the 
same condition." Again after recording the results 
of certain experiments with salt he says: — " In both 
these series of experiments the crops of corn and 
straw were remarkably increased by the addition of 
common salt ; and it is scarcely necessary to repeat 
that such augmentation could not possibly bave taken 
place unless the soil had contained a certain quantity 
of phosphoric aiid, silicic acid, potash, &c., capable 
of being brought into operation, but which without 
cousmon salt was not assimilable." These extracts 
show that 
can hardly be classe 1 as a manure, as it scarcely, 
if at all, adds anything to the fertOity of 
a soil ; but that it is a most valuable agent for dis- 
solving and bringing into an assimilable condition 
ingredients already iu the soil, and thus increasing 
crops. But this very property would soon exhaust 
a soil unless the ingredients removed in the shape 
of crops were restored by suitable manures. 'W. A. 
D'S.'s analyses of the tables given in "All About 
Coconuts," and quoted by Mr. Cochran are in- 
teresting ; and, as he says, raise important qnestiona 
which it would be well to have established or re 
futed. Especially is this the case with reference to the 
value given to coconut husks as a manure ; they are 
placed on a par with pnre cattle dung applied directly to 
the trees by tying cattle to tbem. This does not tally 
with experience, whatever deductions may be drawu 
from a chemical analysis of husks. If the analysis 
given in "All about CQConuts," of the " Total iitoryaiitQ 
