234 
THE  RURAL  NEW-YORKER. 
April  9 
Some  of  the  analyses  printed  on  fertilizer  bag's  puzzle 
the  farmer;  “bone  phosphate”  and  two  or  three 
forms  of  phosphoric  acid  printed  together  only  mislead 
farmers.  So  do  “  sulphate  of  potash,  “  total  potash, 
etc.  Then  to  say  that  a  fertilizer  contains  8  to  12  per 
cent  of  phosphoric  acid  is  folly.  If  8  is  all  they  will 
guarantee,  let  them  say  that  and  no  more  ! 
Commercial.  Fertilizers. 
CHEAPER  AND  BETTER  THAN  STABLE  MANURE. 
If  a  man  will  buy  and  put  on  one  acre  of  ground 
$15  worth  of  each  of  these  he  will  be  satisfied  of  the 
truth  of  this  assertion.  When  a  man  says  “I  don’t 
believe  that  phosphate  does  any  good ;  I  never  used 
any,”  it  may  be  set  down  for  certain  that  his  bald  as¬ 
sertion  will  have  more  weight  with  poor  farmers 
than  the  statement  of  Joseph  Harris  about  his  experi¬ 
ence  on  the  Moreton  Farm  near  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  or 
those  of  the  numerous  correspondents  of  The  Rural 
New-Yorker,  who  give  testimony  on  the  other  side  of 
the  question.  If  you  do  not  use  fertilizers,  try  them  in 
a  small  way,  and  on  various  crops,  side  by  side ;  try 
different  quantities  also,  and  note  the  results.  I  do 
not  claim  that  commercial  fertilizers  are  better  than 
good  stable  manure  ;  but  I  do  claim  that  a  high-grade 
fertilizer  is  better  than  the  average  manure.  Make  all 
the  manure  you  can,  save  it  and  use  it,  and  if  you  fall 
short  of  enough,  then  fill  out  with  fertilizers.  Do  not 
for  the  want  of  a  few  dollars’  worth  of  these,  worry 
over  poor  crops  all  summer,  and  lay  the  blame  on 
Providence,  when  you  have  not  done  your  part.  On 
our  old  farms  crops  must  be  fed  the  same  as  stock. 
What  would  you  think  of  a  farmer  who  would  turn 
a  dairy  of  cows  into  a  pasture  that  could  not  supply 
more  than  half  their  wants,  and  give  them  nothing 
more  ?  Would  you  call  him  a  good  farmer  ?  No.  The 
good  farmer  would  supply  the  deficiency  by  giving 
grain,  etc.  On  the  one  hand,  you  would  see  poor  cows, 
poor  feed,  poor  fences,  poor  buildings  and  a  poor 
farmer,  who  would  deserve  the  pity,  or  perhaps  the 
contempt  of  all  mankind  for  his  ignorance  of  what  is 
right.  On  the  other  hand  you  would  see  fine-looking 
cows,  good  fences,  good  buildings  and  a  man  who  asks 
for  no  pity,  and  j^ou  will  find  that  he  takes  The  R. 
N.-Y.  or  some  other  good  agricultural  paper.  The  one 
will  attribute  all  his  poor  crops  to  Providence.  There 
was  too  much  or  too  little  rain,  or  various  other  mis¬ 
fortunes  occurred  ;  while  the  other  who  has  fed  his 
crops  as  he  has  his  cows,  smiles  and  thanks  God, 
and  keeps  more  stock,  and  adds  to  the  size  of  his  barns, 
because  he  uses  fertilizers.  A  farmer  must  have  more 
brains  than  a  woodchuck  ;  he  must  have  brains  and 
common-sense  enough  to  knowr  that  all  fertilizers  will 
not  act  in  the  same  way  on  the  same  land  and  that 
therefore  there  must  be  experimenting  and  he  must 
note  the  results  of  the  different  experiments. 
In  my  1(5  years’  experience  in  the  use  of  fertilizers,  I 
have  learned  a  great  deal.  I  now  use  more  than  ever, 
and  a  better  grade,  at  a  higher  price.  I  take  the  guar¬ 
anteed  analyses  for  my  guide.  One  writer  in  The  R. 
N.-Y.  two  or  three  weeks  ago  said  that  he  had  gener¬ 
ally  used  200  pounds  to  the  acre  ;  but  that  last  season 
lie  had  used  300  pounds  to  the  acre  on  oats  and  he 
thought  the  last  100  pounds  had  paid  him  best,  but  he 
did  not  know  whether  using  another  100  pounds  would 
produce  proportionately  better  results.  That  man 
will  know,  because  he  will  try  the  experiment  and 
report,  and  1  shall  read  his  statement,  if  I  live,  because 
we  both  take  The  R.  N.-Y.  c.  m.  lusk. 
[Every  query  must  be  accompanied  by  the  name  and  address  of  the 
writer  to  Insure  attention.  Before  asking  a  question,  please  see  If  It  Is 
not  answered  In  our  advertising  columns.  Ask  only  a  few  questions 
at  one  time.  Put  questions  on  a  separate  piece  of  paper.] 
Growing-  Sweet  Corn  for  a  Factory. 
It.  E.  P.,  Fleming,  N.  Y. — 1.  A  corn  canning  establish¬ 
ment  is  about  to  be  started  3%  miles  from  my  place. 
1.  Would  it  be  profitable  for  me  to  raise  sugar  corn  for 
it  at  50  cents  per  cwt  ?  2.  How  many  cwt.  would  be  a 
good  yield  per  acre  on  good  corn  land  ?  3.  How  many 
acres  had  I  better  “  tackle  ?” 
Ans. — It  depends  upon  how  it  is  to  be  weighed.  If 
the  50  cents  per  cwt.  is  for  the  unhusked  corn  just  as 
it  is  picked  from  the  stalks,  it  should  prove  quite 
profitable,  but  if  that  price  is  to  be  paid  for  the 
husked  corn,  it  would  not  give  nearly  so  large  a  profit. 
Still,  even  in  the  latter  case  good  corn  land  should 
yield  a  fair  profit.  The  factories  with  which  I  am 
most  familiar,  buy  the  corn  by  the  bushel,  paying 
usually  25  to  30  cents  per  bushel.  The  whole  load  is 
weighed  ;  then  enough  is  husked  to  make  a  bushel  of 
husked  ears,  and  these  and  the  husks  removed  are 
weighed  together.  The  weight  of  the  load  divided  by 
this  gives  the  number  of  bushels.  In  this  case  the 
weight  of  a  bushel  varies  greatly,  but  perhaps  a  fair 
average  would  be  not  far  from  60  pounds;  it  should  be 
rather  under  than  over;  so  with  these  data,  R.  E.  P. 
should  be  able  to  determine  for  himself  as  to  whether 
it  will  be  profitable  for  him  to  grow  this  crop.  2.  I 
have  known  160  bushels  per  acre  to  be  grown  on  a  five- 
acre  field  of  good,  well-manured  corn  land,  but  most 
growers  consider  100  bushels  a  fairly  satisfactory  crop, 
while  the  majority  will  probably  average  considerably 
less.  Something  depends  upon  the  variety  as  well  as 
upon  its  adaptability  to  the  soil.  The  canners  require 
some  early  varieties  to  be  planted,  in  order  to  prolong 
the  season  of  canning.  These  do  not  yield  so  well  as 
the  later  varieties.  Then  again,  varieties  that  succeed 
on  one  soil  are  not  worth  planting  on  another  and  dif¬ 
ferent  soil.  These  are  things  that  can  be  learned 
only  by  experiment.  3.  “  Tackle”  no  more  than  you 
can  care  for  thoroughly  and  on  time.  Sugar  corn  is 
not  quite  so  vigorous  as  field  corn,  especially  when 
small,  and  it  requires  more  nursing.  There  will  be 
more  profit  in  a  small  field  well  cared  for  than  in  a 
large  one  indifferently  cultivated.  There  are  many 
things  to  learn  about  planting  and  caring  for  the  crop, 
picking  the  corn,  etc.,  and  these  can  be  learned  more 
cheaply  on  a  small  scale.  Under  ordinary  circum¬ 
stances,  I  should  say  four  or  five  acres,  possibly  less, 
would  be  enough  to  begin  with.  A  few  points  in  re¬ 
lation  to  this  crop  may  be  of  interest  to  beginners.  It 
must  not  be  planted  until  the  soil  is  thoroughly  warm, 
or  the  seed  will  rot  instead  of  germinating.  The  soil 
should  be  most  carefully  prepared,  and  the  seed 
planted  as  soon  as  feasible,  that  the  crop  may  be 
gathered  and  the  stalks  cured  early  in  the  fall.  The 
cultivation,  fertilizers,  etc.,  differ  little  from  those  in 
use  in  the  cultivation  of  the  common  field  corn.  Fre¬ 
quent  and  thorough,  shallow  and  level  culture  are 
needed.  The  seed  is  usually  furnished  by  the  canners 
to  be  paid  for  from  the  crop.  The  field  must  usually 
be  gone  over  twice  in  picking,  which  makes  the  labor 
of  harvesting  greater.  The  canners  usually  pay  for 
the  crop  during  the  succeeding  winter  to  suit  their 
own  convenience,  though  some,  I  believe,  pay  when 
the  crop  is  delivered.  The  time  is  specified  in  the  con¬ 
tract.  The  stalks  of  sweet  corn  are  superior  as  feed 
to  those  of  field  corn,  but  are  more  difficult  to  cure. 
I  always  found  the  crop  a  profitable  and  satisfactory 
one  to  grow,  though  there  are  some  risks.  For  in¬ 
stance,  a  wet  and  cold  spring  is  likely  to  give  a  poor 
stand.  It  may  be  impossible  to  get  the  corn  all  picked 
before  it  gets  too  ripe  for  canning,  in  which  case  the 
canners  will  not  receive  it.  Most  contracts  contain  a 
clause  which  releases  them  from  taking  the  corn  in 
case  of  a  fire  in  the  factory,  or  other  crippling  acci¬ 
dent.  Rut  there  are  risks  in  growing  all  crops,  which 
must  be  met,  and  those  in  growing  sweet  corn  are  no 
greater  than  the  average.  f.  h.  valentine. 
The  Manurial  Value  of  Stock  Foods. 
Q.  IF.  D.,  Tenafly,  N.  J. — What  is  considered  the 
manurial  value  received  from  feeding  cattle  or  horses; 
that  is,  what  percentage  of  the  cost  returns  in  manure? 
Ans. — It  is  not  easy  to  answer  this  question.  The 
experiments  on  the  late  Duke  of  Bedford’s  estate  at 
Woburn,  England, were  originally  instituted,  under  the 
auspices  of  the  Royal  Agricultural  Society,  primarily 
to  answer  this  question;  but  though  they  have  been 
carefully  carried  on  for  15  years,  they  have  thrown 
much  light  on  every  other  question  except  this  partic¬ 
ular  one.  The  fact  is  that  science  and  practice,  though 
they  do  not  exactly  differ,  do  not  seem  to  agree.  We 
have  overestimated  the  value  of  the  manure.  The 
value  is  there  ;  the  elements  of  plant-food  are  there  ; 
there  is  no  flaw  in  the  argument,  but  the  crops  fail  to 
show  what  we  expected.  For  instance,  the  value  of 
the  manure  from  a  ton  of  cotton-seed  cake  is  $27.86  ; 
while  that  from  a  ton  of  Indian  corn  is  only  $6.65.  And 
“figures  will  not  lie.”  I  have  fed  out  many  thousands  of 
dollars’  worth  of  food  on  my  farm,  relying  on  the  truth 
of  these  figures.  I  have  just  as  much  faith  in  the 
figures  as  I  then  had.  I  have  no  doubt  of  their  essen¬ 
tial  truth.  But  let  no  one  think  he  is  going  to  get 
$27.86  in  the  manure  derived  from  feeding  a  ton  of 
cotton-seed  cake.  He  may  and  he  may  not.  It  de¬ 
pends  on  what  he  does  with  the  manure.  I  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  it  does  not  pay  to  manure  the 
land.  We  must  manure  the  crops.  If  land  gets  hold 
of  manure  it  will  keep  it.  I  cannot  now  discuss  this 
subject.  It  is  clear  to  my  mind,  however,  that  while 
the  manure  from  a  ton  of  cotton-seed  cake  is  worth,  so 
far  as  actual  plant  food  is  concerned,  four  times  as 
much  as  the  manure  from  a  ton  of  Indian  corn,  it  may 
not  infrequently  happen  in  practical  farming  that 
the  manure  from  the  ton  of  corn  may  do  as  much  good 
for  one  or  two  crops  as  manure  from  the  ton  of  cot¬ 
ton-seed  cake!  Why?  Because  the  soil  locks  up  the  ele¬ 
ments  of  plant-food  and  lets  them  out  very  slowly.  If 
it  were  not  for  the  retentive  powers  of  the  soil  this 
earth  would  have  been  a  desert  ages  ago.  Nature  pre¬ 
serves  plant  food;  agriculture  wants  to  get  hold  of  it 
to-day  and  convert  it  into  crops  that  will  nourish  man 
and  beast  and  bring  in  some  money.  :We  want  to  make 
our  plant  food  soluble  and  available  and  apply  it  to 
those  crops  which  will  pay  for  its  use  at  once.  Just 
now  it  is  hard  to  tell  what  those  crops  are.  Prices  of 
ordinary  farm  crops  are  too  low.  That  they  will  be 
higher  seems  certain,  and  when  that  time  comes  those 
of  us  who  have  been  feeding  out  large  quantities  of 
food  on  our  farms  to  stock  nuiy  get  our  money  back.  I 
think  we  shall.  The  manure  is  not  lost. 
There  is  one  branch  of  this  subject  on  which  we  have 
reliable  information.  When  we  feed  a  given  amount 
of  food  to  a  sheep,  a  horse  or  a  steer  we  know  just 
what  and  about  how  much  of  the  different  constitu¬ 
ents  of  the  food  are  retained  in  the  animal  and  how 
much  are  voided  in  the  manure.  A  crop  of  wheat  or 
grass  as  drawn  to  the  barn  contains,  in  100  pounds,  a 
little  over  one  pound  of  nitrogen  and  five  pounds  of 
ash  that  it  has  got  from  the  soil,  and  the  one  pound  of 
nitrogen  and  five  pounds  of  ash  (half  of  this  is  silica  or 
sand)  have  enabled  the  plant  to  get  94  pounds  of  car¬ 
bonaceous  matter  from  the  atmosphere.  This  carbon¬ 
aceous  matter  is  the  principal  food  of  man  and  animals. 
It  has  no  direct  manurial  value.  The  nitrogen  and 
the  ash  of  the  wheat,  hay  and  other  food  are  all  that 
we  need  consider.  Of  the  nitrogen,  sheep,  horses  and 
steers  take  out  of  the  food  about  five  per  cent ;  if  they 
grow  very  rapidly,  possibly  sometimes  as  high  as  10 
per  cent.  Of  the  ash,  but  one  per  cent  is  retained  in 
the  animal.  Ninety-nine  per  cent  is  voided  in  the 
manure. 
With  milch  cows  that  are  giving  a  good  flow  of  milk 
more  plant  food  is  taken  from  the  food  and  is  carried 
off  in  the  milk.  As  high  as  30  per  cent  of  the  nitrogen 
of  the  food  and  perhaps  two  or  three  per  cent  of  the  ash 
of  the  food  are  carried  off  in  the  milk,  and  instead  of 
having  from  90  to  95  per  cent  of  the  nitrogen  of  the 
food  in  the  manure,  as  is  the  case  with  sheep  and 
horses,  we  have  only  70  to  80  per  cent.  Even  this, 
however,  shows  what  a  great  advantage,  so  far  as 
enriching  the  ground  is  concerned,  there  is  in  feeding 
hay  and  other  foods  to  crops  rather  than  selling  them. 
If  you  can  manage  to  feed  out  food  to  animals  with¬ 
out  actual  and  decided  loss,  there  is  no  other  way  of 
enriching  a  farm  so  surely,  permanently  and  economic¬ 
ally  as  by  feeding  animals  and  carefully  saving  and 
applying  the  manure.  If  you  can  feed  without  loss 
and  have  the  needed  capital,  you  cannot  buy  too  much 
cotton-seed  or  linseed  cake,  bran,  shorts,  brewers’ 
grains  (fresh  or  dried),  malt-sprouts,  or  clover  hay  and 
feed  them  out  to  horses,  sheep,  pigs  or  cows.  On  this 
point  there  can  be  no  question.  The  only  question  is 
how  best  to  use  the  manure  when  you  have  it.  This  is 
where  the  doubt  and  the  difficulty  come  in.  At  present 
prices  it  is  hard  to  make  farming  pay.  But  prices, 
especially  for  meat  and  other  animal  products,  are 
advancing  and  are  likely  to  advance  more  and  more. 
There  is  hope  for  us  yet,  especially  in  the  production 
of  good  animal  products,  such  as  mutton,  beef,  poultry, 
eggs,  cheese,  butter  and  milk.  Joseph  Harris. 
Ridding:  Ferns  of  Snails  and  Angle-Worms. 
Mrs.  E.  K.  L.,  Athens,  Ga. — Most  of  my  ferns  are 
planted  on  a  greenhouse  bench,  three  feet  from  the 
floor,  12  inches  deep,  and  three  feet  wide.  The 
soil  is  two-thirds  wood  earth,  and  one-third  well- 
rotted  manure,  sand  and  broken  bits  of  charcoal 
for  drainage.  They  have  been  planted  three  years. 
The  first  year  they  were  lovely.  Since  then  they 
have  been  infested  by  hundreds  of  angle-worms, 
and  numerous  snails.  I  catch  all  of  the  latter  I 
can  by  laying  pieces  of  wet  chips  on  the  bed, 
and  they  hide  under  them.  What  will  kill  angle- 
worms  without  injuring  the  fern  roots  ?  I  also  have 
some  maiden-hair  in  pots,  which  are  full  of  angle- 
worms.  I  don’t  want  to  disturb  the  beds  if  I  can  avoid 
it.  What  should  be  done  ?  My  ferns  all  grow  better 
with  well-rotted  and  fine  manure  added  to  the  soil. 
Ans. — To  get  rid  of  the  angle-worms  use  lime-water 
on  the  soil ;  this  will  make  the  worms  come  to  the  sur¬ 
face,  so  that  they  may  be  caught.  You  cannot  use  an 
insecticide  to  kill  them  in  the  soil,  without  endanger¬ 
ing  the  plants.  In  the  case  of  pot  ferns,  as  the  worms 
are  usually  at  the  bottom  of  the  soil,  turn  the  plants 
lightly  out  of  the  pots,  and  examine  for  the  pests.  It 
is  not  a  very  easy  matter  to  get  rid  of  these  worms 
when  they  have  become  numerous;  for  the  reason 
that  both  the  soil  and  manure  used  in  potting  should 
be  examined,  for  the  purpose  of  excluding  them  as  far 
as  possible.  To  destroy  snails  distribute  lettuce  and 
cabbage  leaves,  or  slices  of  raw  potatoes  about  the 
benches  at  night ;  in  the  morning  collect  these  traps 
and  destroy  the  snails.  This  course  persisted  in  soon 
extirpates  them. 
Don’t  Let  Them  Cultivate  Deep. 
J.  P.  W.,  Unity,  Ohio. — In  the  cultivation  of  corn, 
potatoes  and  such  crops  would  it  not  be  better  to  cul¬ 
tivate  deep  the  first  time,  to  get  the  soil  loosened  up 
well ;  then  cultivate  shallow  during  the  rest  of  the 
season,  especially  if  the  weather  were  dry  and  hot  ?  I 
believe  that  deep  cultivation  during  hot,  dry  weather 
injures  the  roots  of  large  corn  or  potatoes,  etc.,  and 
