Much more elaborate experiments were planned for 1887 and 1888 
plots being secured for the purpose on the farms of Mr. Andrew Me 
Murray and Mr. George Corson, near Tonti, in Marion county. Thes< 
plots, properly subdivided, were treated in September 18t 7, (1) witl 
stable manure, (2) with phosphates, (3) with potash, (4) with stabL 
manure and phosphates, (5) with stable manure and potash, (6 
with phosphates and potash, and (7) with all three of these fertili 
zers together, (8) with sulphate of ammonia alone, (9) witl 
ammonia and potash, (10) with ammonia and phosphates, and (11 
with ammonia, phosphates, and potash combined. The grain wa 
all heavily infested by the chinch bug, but the general winter 
killing of the wheat, leaving a very light and unequal stand, sc 
far destroyed the value of these experiments that they are no 
worthy of detailed description. 
A critical comparison of the plots on Mr. Corson’s land, mad< 
January 29, after the grain was ripe, gave the following genera 
results, of value only as indications of the direction in whicJ 
future experiments may best be made: — 
1. The plot, (one tenth of an acre) treated with phosphate 
alone (200 pounds to the acre)* bore about twice as much whea 
as that treated with potash alone, and the growth was tallei 
stronger, and more thrifty. 
2. The addition of potash to the phosphates made no appre 
ciable difference in the appearance of the grain. 
3. I could not see that the plot treated with potash alon 
differed especially from the plots on which nothing was used. 
4. That on which ammonia was applied alone was but littl 
better than the potash plot. 
5. That on which ammonia and potash were combined (20 
pounds each to the acre) bore probably twice as much wheat a 
either plot where these were separately used. 
6. The plots with ammonia and phosphates combined were de 
■cidedly and conspicuously the best of the lot,—a difference easil; 
seen at a distance, and to their very margins. There was proba 
bly three times as much wheat on these as on the ground adjacenl 
which had not been fertilized. The wheat was also clearly heaviei 
From the above it appears, as a matter of judgment, but no 
of exact experiment, that neither potash nor ammonia alone wa 
of much value on the soil as a fertilizer for wheat attacked b; 
chinch bugs, but that the two combined about doubled the crop 
that phosphates alone produced a noticeable effect; and that am 
monia and the phosphates formed the best combination for whea 
under the circumstances there appearing, potash adding little o 
nothing to the value of this combination. 
Timothy seed had been sown on all three plots in fall, but gre^ 
poorly on most, owing chiefly to the chinch bug damage. Th 
*This was the ration of each of the commercial fertilizers, wherever applied. 
