Advances  in  Agricultural  Chemistry. 
11 
oilers  an  illustration  of  an  importaTit  part  of  the  economy  of 
nature,  and  of  the  happy  order  in  which  it  is  arranged.  The 
death  and  decay  of  animal  substances  tend  to  resolve  organised 
forms  into  chemical  constituents  ; and  the  pernicious  effluvia 
disengaged  in  the  process  seem  to  point  out  the  propriety  of 
burying  them  in  the  soil,  where  they  are  fitted  to  become  the 
food  of  vegetables.  The  fermentation  and  putrefaction  of 
organised  substances  in  the  free  atmosphere  are  noxious 
processes  ; beneath  the  surface  of  the  ground  they  are  salutary 
operations.  In  this  case  the  food  of  plants  is  prepared  where 
it  can  be  used  ; and  that  which  would  offend  the  senses  and 
injure  the  health,  if  exposed,  is  converted  by  gradual  processes 
into  forms  of  beauty  and  of  usefulness  ; the  fetid  gas  is 
rendered  a constituent  of  the  aroma  of  the  flower,  and  what 
might  he  poison  becomes  nourishment  to  man  and  animals.” 
This  was  what  was  done  for  agriculture  by  Davy  under 
the  patronage  of  the  Board  of  Agriculture,  which  was  dissolved 
in  1822.  Sixteen  years  afterwards  (1838)  the  Eoyal  Agri- 
cultural Society  may  be  said  to  have  arisen  from  its  ashes  to 
do  its  work  on  a larger  scale  and  on  a wider  basis. 
The  Society,  which  has  for  its  motto  “ Practice  with 
Science,”  cannot  but  wish  to  have  its  natural  association  with 
Davy  set  forth — the  philosopher  who  upheld  the  same  principle 
w'hen  he  wrote  : “ Nothing  is  more  wanting  in  agriculture 
than  exj)eriments  in  which  all  the  circumstances  are  minutely 
and  scientifically  detailed.  This  art  will  advance  with  rapidity 
in  proportion  as  it  becomes  exact  in  its  method.” 
The  next  great  movement  was  set  in  action  by  Liebig.  In 
1840  appeared  his  Chemistry  in  its  Application  to  Agriculture 
and  Physiology,  in  which  he  “ clearly  traced  the  relations 
between  the  nutrition  of  plants  and  the  composition  of  the 
soil.”  Mr.  Kowland  Prothero  tells  us  that,  in  spite  of  views 
subsequently  })roved  to  be  erroneous,  “ his  book  revolutionised 
the  attitude  which  agriculturists  had  maintained  towards 
chemistry.”  ’ Ifinks  continued  to  be  added  to  the  chain,  but 
still  there  was  much  to  be  done,  and  the  science  was  not 
sufficiently  recognised.  ' 
Dr.  Joseph  Henry  (afterwards  Sir  Henry)  Gilbert  was  a 
])upil  of  Liebig’s  in  the  laboratory  at  Giessen.  In  London  he 
had  for  a fellow  student  at  University  College  John  Bennet 
Lawes,  and  the  names  of  these  two  men  will  ever  be  indis- 
solubly united  in  the  grateful  appreciation  of  all  Englishmen 
' Jouinal  R.A.S.E.,  Vol.  62,  1901,  page  24. 
