682 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
October 14 
KAINIT IN PLACE OF PLASTER! 
WILL IT ABSORB AND RETAIN AMMONIA ? 
Is it a fact that kalnit is as effective for preservlnej manure 
as plaster? Has it an equal power of “ fixing ” 
ammonia ? 
Will Do All That Plaster Does. 
It is true that kainit sprinkled on manure will absorb 
ammonia, perhaps as effectively as gypsum ; though 
the latter has the advantage of fine pulverization, 
which secures more even distribution. Kainit con¬ 
tains both chloride of magnesium and chloride of 
calcium as well as gypsum, all of which are able to 
“fix” ammonia. All the potash applied to the man¬ 
ure heap will be available for the crop—if it is not 
leached out in the heap before hauling to the field— 
and this is an economical way of using kainit. The 
actual potash of kainit costs more at present prices 
than that of muriate of potash. Kainit will do all that 
plaster does in preserving manure. Half a pound per 
day and head for the manure of cows and horses and 
the same amount for 10 sheep is the quantity recom¬ 
mended by Storer. [dr ] e. h. .ienkins 
The Chemistry of the Matter. 
Little has been done in America to solve the ques¬ 
tions as to the means of preserving manure, and the 
use of chemicals for that purpose. In Germany, how¬ 
ever, considerable attention has been given to this 
subject during the past few years, and a number of 
experiments have been made to determine the eco¬ 
nomic value of various preservative agents and their 
modes of action. From the data thus afforded it is 
evident that, judging from analyses of the fresh and 
of the preserved manure, kainit is as efficient a pre¬ 
servative of the nitrogen of the manure as plaster, 
and that when it is used there is usually considerably 
less loss of organic matter than where plaster is em¬ 
ployed. 
As to the action of plaster, as thc nitrogenous con¬ 
stituents of the manure ferment, ammonium carbon¬ 
ate is formed ; this compound is highly volatile under 
the conditions to which it is exposed in the manure 
heap ; when, however, it is brought into contact with 
the sulphate of lime, of which the plaster is chiefly 
made up, there is, in the presence of moisture, a 
mutual exchange of parts, resulting in the formation 
of the comparatively non-volatile sulphate of ammonia 
and carbonate of lime. In this way the danger of loss 
by evaporation and fire fanging is largely diminished. 
The fermentation of the manure is not, however, 
arrested : indeed the presence of carbonate of lime 
would promote rather than retard it; and so the loss 
of nitrogen is not wholly avoided, even supposing 
that all the ammonium carbonate formed were imme¬ 
diately converted iato the sulphate ; for during some 
of the fermentation processes which manure ordin¬ 
arily undergoes, both before and after its application 
to the soil, there is some liberation of nitrogen in an 
uncombined and gaseous condition. 
Now the mode of action on the part of kainit is un¬ 
doubtedly somewhat different, although the details 
are reached only by analogy. It is found that rotting 
is less complete, there is less loss of humus constit¬ 
uents, and the manure behaves in the soil more like 
fresh marure. That is to say, in addition to any pre¬ 
servative action owing to some double decomposition 
such as probably accounts for the efficacy of plaster, 
there is an actual diminution of fermentation. That 
there should be, will not seem at all strange when we 
consider what kainit is. The composition of its dry 
matter may be roughly expressed by saying that it is 
made up of one-third sulphate of potash, one-third 
common salt, and one-third a mixture of chloride and 
sulphate of magnesia. The common salt which we 
employ as a preservative for meats and fish, and even 
for bone fertilizers, undoubtedly acts in like manner 
upon the manure ; and experiments made to compare 
the activity of salt with that of the corresponding 
potash compound, show the preservation to have been 
greater when salt was used. The action of kainit is 
therefore very satisfactorily explained in part; but 
fermentation is not ordinarily arrested entirely; 
some decomposition occurs and some ammonia is 
formed, occasionally large quantities, so that some 
action similar to that occurring in the case of plaster 
ust be assumed to take place. The resultant com- 
ftkare not definitely known, but might be sul- 
■ t . ,^fcichloride of ammonia on the one hand, and 
; Y/-vL^Bltes of potash, soda and magnesia on the 
kainit, which has manurial value, be more economical 
than that of plaster ? ” Certainly, if potash is needed 
by the soil and crops more than carbonate of lime 
to a degree sufficient to make up the difference in the 
cost price of the two preservatives—a difference which 
is to-day not very great. However, there is another 
preservative which ought to be mentioned in this con¬ 
nection. German experiments have shown that low- 
grade superphosphates have a preservative effect, 
probably greater in ordinary cases than either plaster 
or kainit. So far as the effect upon fermentation is 
concerned, it is very similar to that of plaster, so that 
the loss of humus constituents from the manure while 
in the heap or in the stall is greater than when kainit 
is used; but the loss of gaseous nitrogen is, if the 
results of Dietzell and others are accepted, almost 
A New Engi.ish Reversible Plow. Fig 223. 
entirely avoided both while the manure is in the 
stable or yard, and after its application to the soil. 
Superphosphates are largely composed of sulphate of 
lime and have an action, therefore, which is, in some 
particulars, identical with that of plaster; there is 
the same decomposition to form sulphate of ammonia, 
etc.; but the prevention of the loss of free nitrogen is 
ascribed to a rather complex series of chemical 
changes in which the phosphoric acid plays the con¬ 
spicuous part. The total saving of nitrogen is ap¬ 
parently most perfectly accomplished by the super¬ 
phosphate. 
As to the economy of its use, this may be urged : in 
ordinary systems of farming the phosphoric acid of 
the crop is less largely restored in the manure than 
the potash is ; and general experience has shown that 
while potash is needed by the soil far oftener than has 
been supposed, phosphoric acid is more frequently the 
fertilizer ingredient conspicuously required. Where 
that is the case, the superphosphate has the double 
advantage of more completely preserving the manure 
and more directly contributing to it from without the 
substance needed for the restoration or maintenance 
of fertility of the farm. 
It must by no means be supposed that either of these 
substances will do away with the necessity for that 
care which manure must always have. These sub¬ 
stances, and the valuable fertilizer materials from 
them in the heap, are all very soluble in water, and 
are readily lost by leaching when the manure heap is 
improperly exposed to washing. wm frear. 
Pennsylvania Experiment Station. 
Half a Pound Per Head Each Day. 
Kainit will preserve manure as well as plaster, if 
not better, and its power to do so is largely due to the 
presence of chloride of magnesia, which absorbs or 
fixes the ammonia by changing volatile forms into the 
non-volatile ammonium chloride. The use of kainit is 
•^affective in preventing that kind of rotting which 
j loss of ammonia. Its use for the preser- 
observation of Dietzell, that although 
^fermentation and the consequent 
partially avoided while the 
when it is ap- 
foes on 
vation of manure is more economical than that of 
plaster if wastes from leaching are prevented, since 
the fertilizing constituent, potash, is quite as effective 
when used in this way as when used directly. Plaster 
costs about half as much as kainit, and furnishes only 
lime, a constituent which, if necessary, may be pro¬ 
cured more cheaply in other forms. Half a pound of 
kainit per day per horse or cow would be a sufficient 
quantity to use. [prof ] e. b voorhees. 
New Jersey Experiment Station. 
A NEW ENGLISH PLOW. 
The English papers are now advertising the plow 
shown at Fig. 223. It is evidently designed to take 
the place of a sulky or reversible plow. It is easy to 
see how it works. After one furrow across, the plow 
is turned around and the share then above turned 
under, thus throwing the next furrow into the pre¬ 
vious one. This makes a less cumbersome machine 
than the sulky and gives a lighter draft than the ordi¬ 
nary swivel plow. 
THE SILO FAR AHEAD. 
SILO WINS IN THE GREAT RACE. 
Dairymen owe a great deal to the experiment sta¬ 
tions. A station officer invented the Babcock milk 
tester and gave it to them, and much has been done 
by many stations to aid dairymen, especially by the 
Wisconsin and Vermont stations. The last report of 
the Vermont Station contains records of several valu¬ 
able experiments in dairying. The most important 
of these is a detailed account of an experiment in pre¬ 
serving the corn crop by four different methods. 
There are many farmers who would adopt the silo if 
they thought it would pay them to do so, but they 
are waiting for evidence that it is really a good thing. 
Now right here is just the kind of evidence which 
such men need, and it is wholly in favor of the silo. 
Corn stooked, husked and ground made the poorest 
showing, though there was a very slight gain, not 
worth taking into account when the stover was put 
into the silo after the ears had been husked. Many 
farmers pick the ears of corn and then husk them 
and get them ground, putting the stalks into the silo. 
So far as the last point is concerned, the experiment 
shows that it is utterly useless—is labor and expense 
wasted. The value of 50 cents an acre is not gained 
by doing it. Husking and grinding are laboi worse 
than wasted. In the East it costs about one-fourth of 
the value of the meal to get it husked and ground. 
Add to this the fact that over one-fourth of the feed¬ 
ing value is lost by this process, and we see that no 
Eastern dairyman can afford to feed hom^-grown 
corn meal. 
The corn fodder in this experiment was made into 
large 6tooks near the barn, the tops being bound 
tightly with a rope. When fed, it was carried into the 
barn, run through the cutter and fed. Thus prepared, 
its feeding value is between that of ensilage and the 
two forms of stover ; that is, calling ensilage 100, the 
husked and ground forms would be 80 and the corn 
fodder 90. But some things need to be thought of in 
connection with this way of handling corn fodder. 
To get such a good result, the fodder must be cut or 
considerable would be wasted. Tlr s has been my ex¬ 
perience and I think that of many others But just 
as good results can be obtained from uncut ensilage. 
Cutting what goes into the silo can increase the feed¬ 
ing value of corn in only one way ; when very large 
stalks are grown the cattle will eat them clean, I 
think; they may leave some when the ensilage corn 
is not run through a cutter. I prefer to plant mine 
closer and not have the stalks get so very large. Then, 
further, I cannot leave corn out of the silo without 
having rats and mice get into it. I must say that I 
never had any kind of success with corn fodder. It 
takes up a great deal more room than ensilage. Prof. 
Cooke stated last winter at the dairyman’s meeting that 
as corn fodder is ordinarily handled half the value is 
lost. 
There are thousands of small farms which ought to 
have silos, the owners of which are deterred from 
building by reason of the cost of the cutting apparatus 
and power to run it. No farmer need be deterred 
from building a silo by this consideration. A good 
silo will keep uncut just as well as cut corn. Within 
a week I heard a man who keeps 50 cows say, “What’s 
the use of cutting the corn, if it keeps just as well 
whole ?” And he went on to tell how green and nice 
his whole corn came out of the silo. I have found just 
two difficulties in the way of putting up whole ensi¬ 
lage. One is the difficulty of raising the heavy corn 
from the wagon over the top of the silo. This I have 
overcome by using a hay carrier and track with a trip 
hook and short slings. This enables me to take the 
whole corn from the wagon and place it in the silo by 
horse power. The other difficulty is that one cannot 
take a few inches off the top of the pit daily and the 
ensilage is more likely to spoil, unlessjthe silo is small 
