132 
THE SOUTHERN CULTIVATOR. 
sulphuric acid, 33 per cent, of lime, and 21 per 
cent, of water. When gyp.'jum is exposed to a 
red heat, the water is driven oli, and then, strict- 
ly speaking, it is “ plaster of Paris.” 
Phosphate ot lime is a combination of phos- 
phoric acid and lime, in the proportion ol 54^ot 
lime, and 454 of acid. It is not a very abundant 
product ot nature, although it is found in small 
quantities in several different locations and 
countries. It has been said that it existed in 
large quantity in the province ot Estremadura, 
in Spain. 
From the similarity of its composition to 
bones, it has been thought that it might be im- 
ported into England, and in a finely powdered 
state, answer as a substitute lor bones. 
Within some two or three years, Dr. Daube- 
ney, of England, has visited liie above named 
place, and ascertained there is but a small vein 
ot the phosphate, some six or eight feet in thick- 
ness, and but a part of pure phosphate ot lime. 
In England, there are some limestones, or ra- 
ther strata in the limestone, that contain capre- 
litis, fragments of bones, teeth, &c., that con- 
tain a considerable amount of phosphate ot 
lime, and it may in some measure answer as a 
substitute for bones, though 1 believe it has not 
been used to any great extent. 
In regard to the value or use of lime for agri- 
cultural purposes, there seems to be a difference 
of opinion among writers upon the subject. 
Professor Johnston devotes some forty or fifty 
pages ol his published lecture.s, delivered at 
Durham, in 1841, to the subject ol lime in ail its 
bearings; and from that time to the present, he 
is a strong advocate for its use, and is continu- 
ally recommending the use of it to the farmers 
in Scotland and England. The English farm- 
ers have used it for improving their lands from 
time immembrial, and unquestionably with 
profitable results. 
Mr. Ruffin, of Virginia, who is well known 
as an able agricultural write-, on both sides of 
the Potomac, from the St. Lawrence to the Rio 
Grande, has spent years of unwearied study 
and practice, upon the use of lime and marl lor 
manures, and his valuable Essay on Calcare- 
ous Manures, with Prof. Johnston’s works, can 
be most profitably studied by farmers. 
Lime ahd marl are used in vast quantities lor 
improving the soil, and increasing the crops in 
Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and many of the 
Southern States. Mr. Rives, of Virginia, sta- 
ted in 1842, that he had used about 12,000 bu- 
shels of lime on about 150 acres of land. He 
says that he has not perceived that it much ben- 
efitled the crop of corn or wheat that immedi- 
ately succeeded the limine-; but this, he says, 
“was more than compensated by the marked, 
unequivocal and decided effect that I have ne- 
ver failed to perceive from lime alone, in the 
clover succeeding the wheat. “All my con- 
clusions,” says he, “in regard to lime, would 
lead me to the opinion that it is the most perma- 
nent of all manures.*’ 
Lime has been used in New' England, some- 
times with good results, at other times without 
any apparent effect. So With plaster of Paris, 
guano and other substances. It has generally 
been supposed that lime would be a good appli- 
cation for the wheat crop, but it sometimes fails. 
In the N. E. Farmer of Oct. lOth, 1838, you, 
Mr. Editor, gave us some account of the farm 
of the Hon. B. V. French, of Braintree, in 
which you state that “in his efforts to raise 
wheat the present season, he has had a com- 
plete failure, although a liberal application of 
lime and other manure was made, and the best 
variety of seed procured; yet he has the morti- 
fication, after his field exhibited the most flat- 
tering appearance, to see the whole of it blight 
and fail.” 
Atone of the agricultural meetings at your 
State House, in February last, Mr. French 
gave some account of his attempts to raise 
wheat, (as reported in the Boston Cultivator.) 
One year he failed in raising a crop of Black 
Sea Wheat— destroyed by the rust. Upon a 
gravelly soil, he reaped a crop of 23 bushels to 
|b« acre. “He then consulted a chemist, who 
thought lime was wanting in his soil, and he 
recommended 160 casks to the acre. (That 
chemist was a dealer in homeopathic doses.) 
He did not apply so much, but limed liberally, 
and sowed two bushels to the acre ; it grew well 
and was promising till the berry was about fill- 
ing, when it blasted, and there was not a peck 
to the acre.” - 
Perhaps il Mr. French had plowed Ids land 
the previous autumn, and applied his lime then, 
the result would have been different — it would 
have had lime during the winter to have become 
carbonate of lime — and some of its alkali 
would have been dissolved, and rendered the 
silex in the soil soluble, so as to have given a 
stronger coating to the straw, and probably 
have prevented the rust. And applying newly 
slaked lime to highly manured land, has the ef- 
fect of liberating the ammonia, and it flies off 
into the air and is lost to the farmer. It Mr. 
F.. alter taking one or two crops of hay from 
this limed land, had then plowed it and sowed 
wheat, I think he would have obtained a good 
crop. 
One of your correspondents, (over the signa- 
ture of “Authentic,”) who has recently, through 
your columns, had a little sparring with “ M. 
A.,” of Pembroke, on the cultivation of wheat, 
recommends the application ot ten casks ot 
air-slaked time (in August or September,) per 
acre, for winter wheat. Where that amount ol 
lime had been used, forty bushels of wheat per 
acre were harvested last year in Massachusetts. 
There is no question but lime has frequently 
been misapplied and injudiciously used. Used 
in too large quantities, its effect would be to 
destroy for a while all vegetation. Guick, or 
newly slaked lime Upon highly or recently 
manured land, would drive off Ihe ammonia. 
1 have within the past year been asked by more 
than a dozen farmers, how much lime they 
should mix to a cartload of clear manure. 
They have, somehow, got the idea that lime 
will add to the value of their clear manure — 
while the truth is, its application would very 
much lesson its value. Lime is valuable mix- 
ed with peat or swamp muck. If the peat or 
muck contain sulphate of iron, or alumina, it 
will decompose it, and the lime will become 
gypsum, or plaster of Paris, and the acidity of 
the muck neutralized and converted into good 
manure. 
Where lime is as dear as it is here — from 
$1 50 to $l 75 per cask — 1 do not think il would 
be good economy for farmers to purchase it to 
spread broadcast upon their lands; but for com- 
posling with manure and muck, to be used on 
soils containing salts of iron, either the sul- 
phate or oxide of iron, from my own experi- 
ence I am satisfied of its economy, even at the 
prices named. Where 1 applied a limed corn- 
po t six years ago, the land has produced nearly 
double the amount of several kinds ol crops 
that the same kind of land has that had an 
equal amount of clear manure. Of its dura- 
bility, 1 am ol the opinion of Mr, Rives. 
Since writing the foregointr some weeks ago, 
I have received a file of the London Gardeners’ 
Chronicle, for March and April. In the No. of 
April 4th, there is a report ot an experiment of 
“Spanish Phosphorite,” or the phosphate of 
lime mentioned in this article. The experi- 
ments with the phosphate of lime, in compari- 
son with several other manure.s, was made by 
or under the direction of Prof. Daubeney. 
The experiments with twelve kinds of ma- 
nures w'ere made upon an exhausted piece ol 
land. There were thirteen plots of ground. 
Lhs. of roots 
No. 1, Without manure, produced 14,298 
“ 2. Shavings of bones, It) cwt. to an acre,, . 19,239 
“ 4. Nitrate of soda, l^cwt. ‘‘ ...28,459 
“ 5. Spanish phosphorite alone, 12 cwt 29,639 
6. Spanish phosphorite, with sulphuric 
acid, 12 cwt. per acre. 30,869 
“ 7. South American guano, 260 lbs, per acre, 3), 1 14 
“8. Bones with sulphuric acid, 1 i cwt. . i, . ..31,899 
“It. Bones finely powdered, 12 cwl ..30,185 
“ 13. Stable dung, 22 tons to the acre 39,476 
Prof. Daubeney says : “ As the Spanish phos- 
phorite, which appears to act so beneficially, is 
wholly destitute of organic matter, it seems to 
follow that the more valuable portion at least 
of what is applied to the land, when bones are 
scattered over it, is the pkesphate of lime, and 
not, as s^me have supposed, the oil or gelatine.” 
I do not think il worih the while to copy all 
bistable of manures, as my object was to 
show the effect of the natural phosphate of lime. 
The same paper also contains an article on 
the application ot lime to the land in autumn, 
copied Irom the Farmer’s Gazette, in which the 
writer argues that lime applied in the autumn 
at the rale, of 240 bushels ol slaked to the acre, 
will all be dissolved out of the soil by April. 
The writer says; “Now, suppose this ample 
dose is, at a heavy expense, laid on by the 5th 
of October, and the field has a incdeiate slope ; 
it is all, or nearly all, dissolved and washed out 
ot the soil by the rain, before the 15th of the 
next April ! No lime remains but any little 
that was spread in lumps. It is all gone to the 
nearest stream, before 1 get a single crop off it. 
Is this good economy 
If that is the fact, f do not think it is good 
economy ; but his statement is ir direct opposi- 
tion to Mr. Rives’s opinion, contrary to my ex- 
perience, and probably to that of thousands of 
others wbho have used lime. I do not know but 
the rain water ot Scotland (where the writer 
resides,) hos greater solvent powers than our 
Yankee rain water; here it takes about 800 lbs. 
of water to dissolve one of lime. 
A vveetc or two since, I received Irom the au- 
thor, Hon. J. H. Hammond, of Silver Bluff, 
South Carolina, a printed copy of a letter he 
addressed to the Agricultural Society of Jeffer- 
son County, Ga., written by the request ol said 
Society, on the use and application of “ shell 
marl.” 
Gov, Hammond has used marl (about 60 per 
cent, of it is carbonate of lime,) lor a nuiiiber of 
years on his plantation, with good results. He 
says : 
“I cannot give you a better evidence of the 
firmness of my faith in the virtue ol marl, than 
to state, that notwithstanding the discourage- 
ments of the last three extraordinary seasons, I 
have, at great expense, brought up l.■'om Shell 
Bluff, within four years, over 300,000 bushels, 
carted it out, and spread it over about 2,300 
acres of land, and am at this moment as active- 
ly engaged at il as ever. Nordo 1 looklorward 
to a period when 1 expect to cease using it to a 
considerable extent every year, either on Iresh 
lands or incieasing the dose on those already 
marled.” 
The length of this communication prevents 
my making more extracts from this valuable 
pamphlet, except one relating to gypsum. Mr, 
H. says: 
“Sulphuric acid itself is often used as a ma- 
nure, but experience has fully established the 
fact, that it is of little value except on calca- 
reous soils; and what is more remaikable, that 
sulphate of lime will also act with far greater 
effect on limed land. I tried some ol it myself 
the past year on marled land. I rolled the cot- 
ton seed in it, previously to planting them, and 
thus applied il at the rate of only one peck of 
the plaster per acre. I am satisfied that the 
product on the few acres to which it was applied 
was cne-ihird greater than on similar adjoining 
land, marled also, but not plastered.” 
He adds, in a written note to me— “The.se 
acres, the plastered and uuplastered, received 
equally about 30 bushels ol lime per acre, last 
spring. Is it possible that the 3 quarts of addi- 
tional lime in the peck of gypsum could have 
made a difference of 33 per cent, or any differ- 
ence, in the produce. I was struck with the 
absurdity ol BoussingauU’s theory, and men- 
tioned il, last summer, to Mr. Allen, of the 
American Agriculturist, New York, who re- 
plied that it must be a 1 thought of 
writing something about it, and was glad to see 
your article.” 
The article here referred to by Mr. Hammond 
I suppose was a communication of mine pub- 
lished in the N. E. Farmer, of October 22, 1845, 
in which I attempted to show that M. Boussin- 
gault was wrong in his assertion that the appli- 
