244 
CULTURE OF SEA-ISLAND COTTON. 
by common consent ends in ‘ uret.’ This word 
from the Latin, uror, to be burned, seems well 
adapted to express the character of inflammability, 
while, by its addition to carbon, &c., it forms the 
common chemical designation of the class when 
combined with metals.” 
According to Mr. Dana, the old names were so 
familiar, that their enumeration conveyed at once 
an idea of their properties; yet he undertakes to 
find what he terms a new name in place of the 
word inflammable, or acidifiable combustibles, and 
he takes the Latin word “ uror,” to be burned. 
By turning it into “ uret,” he establishes a generic 
term for all inflammable substances. The term 
“ acidifiable combustible,” also originates with Mr. 
D. Now it happens that some of the combusti¬ 
bles produce no acids, therefore Mr. D. must find 
another generic term to contra-distinguish these 
from the acidifiabies. 
Can it be possible that Mr. D. is so ignorant of 
the science of chemistry, as not to know that the 
term uret has been used from the commencement 
of the science, and can be found in every chemical 
nomenclature, and dictionary, that have been pub¬ 
lished ? Does he not know that there are such 
terms as carb-uret, sulph-uret, phosph-uret, tell- 
uret, &c., &c., and used to describe the action of 
inflammable substances on metals, &c. ? If Mr. D. 
had not informed us that he introduced it as a 
new term, we could not have given him credit for 
so large an amount of ignorance. He may rest as¬ 
sured, however, that when the chemical nomencla¬ 
ture requires altering, some one will be called upon 
to work it out, who understands the science. 
It would have been much to the credit of Mr. D. 
had he submitted his manuscript to some scientific 
friend, and that friend could have persuaded him 
to have “ urorised.” it, instead of sending it to 
press. By such a chemical process he would not 
only have saved his own credit, but have prevented 
our farmers from reading a babelous confusion of 
nonsense under the cognomen of science. 
It appears throughout Mr. Dana’s work, that in¬ 
stead of making his manual plain to the farmer, 
he has gone out of his way to find isolated terms, 
some of them never having had existence in any 
creditable scientific work; and what is worse, he 
applies the selected terms in a way to make con¬ 
fusion worse confounded. Look at his organic 
constituents of soil, how he misapplies the term 
“ isomorphism,” pages 56,57, and 58. Again, page 
59, where he explains the term “geine.” He 
says, “ Ge is the Greek for earth, and the suffix 
ine, is in conformity to chemical names given to 
those vegetable or other organic products, whose 
independent existence has been determined; for 
example, quinine, morphine, &c.” Our farmers 
would scarcely suppose that geine means merely 
the elements of the earth, and is as foreign from 
quinine and morphine, as Mr. Dana’s manual is 
from true science. Again, page 60. “ The first 
class, or non-nitrogenous, comprises three substan¬ 
ces, which have been termed, 1st, extract of soil, 
or of humus; 2d, geine, or humic acid; and 3d, 
carbonaceous soil, or humin. These are chem¬ 
ically the same, passing from one state to the 
other, without changing the relative proportions in 
which they are combined.” This is dancing a 
chemical trio very comically. 
I can follow Mr. Dana no farther; his work is 
anything but scientific, and he has clearly shown 
us that he is unacquainted with geology, mineral¬ 
ogy, and chemistry. The work he has published 
is a curious jumble concocted in the brain of the 
writer, never having had any existence in ac¬ 
knowledged scientific works. 
This work of Mr. Dana’s has unfortunately been 
used by many of our intelligent agriculturists as a 
text-book, who have adopted the non-chemical 
terms, uret, humin, geine, geinic acid, humic acid, 
&c., without attaching any definite meaning to 
them. On attending some of our farmers’ clubs in 
New York, I frequently heard them talking very 
learnedly on humus, uret, geine, &c., and never 
could conceive, until I read Mr. Dana’s manual, 
where they obtained those terms. I know not 
what Mr. D. may think of imposing a confused 
mass of information on our farmers, under the 
sanction of mineralogy, geology, and chemistry, 
just as science began to be applied to agriculture* 
misleading them, and thereby bringing science 
into disrepute. Mr. Dana is not the only specious 
scientific writer in the field, they are springing up 
in every direction as thick as hops ; and our far¬ 
mers must be on their guard, or they will suffer 
severely in their pockets as well as in their minds, 
by these mushroom pretenders. What we want 
are facts, such as have been given by Mr. Pell and 
others; and when a series of such-like facts are 
collected to form the base, a science of agriculture 
can be reared that will benefit the human family 
for all future generations. 
Wm. Partridge. 
N. B. In a few months, when I have time, I 
shall take a peep at Mr. Dana’s prize Essay on 
Manures. 
Having in our last volume given an able series 
of articles from the pen of Dr. Philips, an eminent 
practical planter of Mississippi, on the culture of 
Short Staple Cotton, we have now the pleasure 
of laying before our readers one equally deserving 
their attention, on that of the Long Staple. The 
respected writer of this has had 50 years’ experi¬ 
ence in the cultivation of Sea-Island Cotton on the 
coast of Georgia, and whatever he may have to 
say upon this subject, will be found wmrthy of at¬ 
tention. We feel no less honored than obliged, 
that gentlemen so truly practical and well qualified, 
should favor us with their communications on 
these interesting and highly useful topics. 
CULTURE OF SEA-ISLAND COTTON. 
The Sea-Island cotton was introduced into Geor¬ 
gia from the Bahamas; the seed was from a small 
island near St. Domingo, known as Arguilla, then 
producing the best cotton of the western world. 
It in no way resembles the Brazil cotton which is 
the kidney-seed kind, introduced some years later, 
and which after trial, was rejected in Georgia, 
