THAT MANURE QUESTION. 
o. s. BLISS. 
Too much dogmatism; great economic im¬ 
portance of the action of manures on soils 
and crops; surface manuring ; persistence 
of old beliefs; opinions of agricultural 
authorities; loss of fertility by evaporation; 
cold, and warm soils; the leaching of fer¬ 
tility: waste, of manure by plowing it in 
too deep. 
Mr. Hkn-ry Stewart, on page 656 of last 
year’s Rural, introducing a nearly two-col¬ 
umn article, says; “Mr. O. S. Rliss has, iu a 
late Rural, very ably argued that manure 
question from the side of surface application; 
out as I look at it from MO years’ use of manure 
—in some of which manure cost me $27 per 
car-load of 10 small t.ous—1 think his promises 
are very much at fault, and so misled him.'’ 
Professedly, his article Is a criticism upon 
my explanation, page 574. of the dificrent re¬ 
sults from applying an equal quantity of the 
same kind of manure— city stable manure — 
at different times aud under different condi¬ 
tions, as editorially described in the Rural 
of July 31st last, to equal parts of the samo 
Held, all of the previous and subsequent condi¬ 
tions being alike in both cases, except that the 
manure spread directly as drawn in February 
gave much better results iu each of the three 
crops since grown upon the field than that 
which was spread in April, just previous to 
plowing the whole field together. I have not 
the slightest objection to any just criticism 
upon any point which I can fairly be shown 
to havo made in this or any other case, for I 
have not yet reached that happy state of in¬ 
fallibility in which r am neither able nor will¬ 
ing to receive instruction and accept correc¬ 
tion. There is much yet to he learned upon 
the most economical methods of handling uud 
using manure, and I do not know of any other 
man except Mr. Stewart, who is so thorough¬ 
ly acquainted with natural laws as to be able 
to speak in such very positive terms as he 
upon the subject. But when a disputant de¬ 
liberately sets aside the question under discus¬ 
sion with an “ l do not believe it,'* or “1 think 
it at fault" and proceeds to discuss an entirely 
different one, in his effort to make an appear¬ 
ance of philauthropically correcting error 
it is not criticism, nor argument. 
The “premises" which Mr. Stewart thinks 
so much at fault as to bo entirely unworthy 
of any farther notice on his part, were clearly 
set forth iu the editorial question, and fully 
vouched for by the paper in its submission of 
them to the consideration of its readers in its 
own name aud behalf. They were entirely 
consistent with my own experience and ob¬ 
servation and with innumerable other re¬ 
ported experiences. This is oue of the most 
important economic questions of the ago. Its 
presentation to the consideration of the pub¬ 
lic under the present very unusual circum¬ 
stances seems to me to be providential. 
In regard to Mr. Stewart’s objections to sur¬ 
face manuring there is little to be said. The 
only real ob jection is loss of valuable elements 
by evaporation. This has always been the 
cry of every objector. To advocate surface 
manuring has always had the effect to brand 
the advocate as a “crank,” and men who prac¬ 
tice it have been slow to advocate it. The 
man does not live who is able to say as a mat¬ 
ter of knowledge how much or how little there 
may be of the loss, but an opinion inbred for 
generations and ages dominates over observa¬ 
tion aud fact, aud seems destined to hold sway 
till the millonium. But they who object to 
surface manuring on account of the supposed 
loss should remember that their interest, lies in 
the residue, and that they have an available 
means of measuring that, perhaps not—prob¬ 
ably not—in a single crop, but certainly iu a 
succession of them. 
Prof. 8. W. Johnson, Director of the Con¬ 
necticut Agricultural Experiment Station, 
answering an inquiry in regard to whether it 
is better to spread manure ns drawn or to 
drop it into heaps, says: “Manure from 
yard or stable rarely contains such an 
amount of volatile fertilizing matters fear- 
bornate of ammonia) as should deter from 
spreading it. broad-cast on the surface when 
most convenient. * * * Manure, when 
properly handled, need not suffer any waste 
from evaporation. A moderate ami regulat¬ 
ed heating of fresh manure, results in the 
formation of humic acid which secures the 
ammonia from loss by evaporation. This 
moderate heating it should have before haul¬ 
ing out, or else it should be hauled out in cold 
weather before it. beats at ull. The advantag¬ 
es of spreading manure from the wagon as it 
is drawn out are a saving of labor and an 
oven distribution of the soluble salts (ammo¬ 
nia, potash, phosphates, etc.,) in the soil by 
rain. If the mauure is heaped on the field 
aud gets a heavy rain before spreading, the 
ground under the heaps receives an undue 
share of the best part of the mauure. * * * 
As to spreading mauure on the ground in win¬ 
ter, the practice works well where the ground 
is level or not subject to surface wash, and 
where the soil is deep and reteutive (clay or 
good loam) or covered with grass or winter 
grain. On bare, light or leaeby lands there 
is likely to be too much loss by percolation be¬ 
fore the crops are ready to take up the fertil¬ 
izing matters.” 
The Director of the New York Experiment 
Station says: “I have not much question, 
that if I spread manure over an acre of land 
in the fall and let it lie there all winter I could 
replace the loss of ammonia by a few cents ex¬ 
pended iu a druggist’s store.” 
Prof. W. O. Atwater, in his circulars of in¬ 
struction to experimenters in the growing of 
crops with fertilizers alouc, referring to their 
application, says: “Iu illustration of this, re¬ 
member how well barn manure acts when ap¬ 
plied as a top-dressing long before the seed is 
put in.” 
Turning now to the other side of Mr. Stew¬ 
art's criticism, we find his battery turned 
upon my remark that “The manure in the 
heap had lost more or less by evaporation and 
fermentation, ami gained nothing from the 
atmosphere.” Instead of coming up squarely 
to the question aud discussing that same heap 
.of 11 loads of city stable manure, which must 
inevitably have been handled over three times 
at least before it became a heap in the field, 
he introduces a “heap in the yard during the 
two months from February to April.” discus¬ 
ses it at length, aud then says of it: “The heap 
of mauure will not lose anything by evapora¬ 
tion and fermentation, aud it icill gain some¬ 
thing from the atmosphere." 
That may be true of his unstirred heap of 
manure iu the yard, but it is not true of the 
heap of manure the editor described and I 
discussed. It is not even tame of any horse- 
stable manure which has been handled only 
sufficient to got it into the celler. I have hail 
40 hogs and pigs at a time in my own cellar 
upon such manure without being able to keep 
it cool enough to prevent loss. The only 
means I know of keeping such manure from 
loss is to spread it upon the ground. Accord¬ 
ing to the statement iu the case under consid¬ 
eration, the actual loss, in some way, from the 
11 loads, was more than the three bags of 
standard chemical fertilizer spread upon that 
half of the field was able to replace. I will 
not stickle over the question as to how it was 
lost, anil if it will help Mr. Stewart out of his 
dilemma I will admit, us I did in my former 
article, that a very considerable part of the 
loss resulted from plowing it down iuto the 
ground, where the crops were unable to ap¬ 
propriate it to their use. 
I do not care farther to discuss the effect 
of tillage of the laud into which mauure has 
been plowed i u answer to Mr. Stewart’s criti¬ 
cism upon my former remark. I would not 
depreciate the benefits of tillage: but the same 
amount of tillage before applying the manure 
is worth a great deal more than after, be¬ 
cause the soil becomes bettor fitted to receive 
and retain the fertilizing matters. The mau¬ 
ure should be well pulverized and thoroughly 
spread upon such a bed aud not a particle of 
it will bo lost. 
Mr. Stewart's criticism upon my allusion to 
mixing the manure with the “cold soil” is, 
perhaps, worthy of a school boy who has 
learned something of the heat of theearth.aud 
sees an opportunity to display his learning. 
But the adjective “cold” as applied by farm¬ 
ers to the soil is a comprehensive term, and 
refers more particularly to its condition for 
producing a crop. That, part of the field up¬ 
on which the manure was spread iu February 
was iu an open, friable condition, indicating 
a comparatively warm soil, while the other 
was close, heavy and clammy, or, as I called 
it, a cold soil. Who ever heard of a detec¬ 
tive's taking along a thermometer to test the 
character of a man suspected of “cold-blooded” 
villainy, though he had heretofore borne the 
reputation of being a “warm-hearted” philan¬ 
thropist / But, badinage aside. I beg to ask 
how much real heat there was in that particu¬ 
lar soil on that April day when the manure in 
question was plowed into it/ If it was not 
eohl iu fact it must have boou warmed by some 
other process than that described by my 
critic. 
Incidentally I remarked: “It (manure) is 
a good deal more apt to leach out of the cold, 
damp sub-soil than out of the more open per¬ 
meable surface soil.” Mr. Stewart pronounces 
this “a common error,” discusses at. length the 
theory of leaching from his point of view, in¬ 
cluding an account of an experiment under¬ 
taken to prove that soils do not leach, and 
sums up with the remark, “No, soils do not 
leach, unless the water is iu great excess, aud 
then the water escapes almost pure iuto the 
drains, carrying off only nitric acid, so far as 
is known—and not all of it—from the soil. 
No farmer need ever borrow trouble about the 
manure leaching out of the bottom of his soil.” 
I am sorry to say that there is not a single 
particle of evidence to sustain Mr. Stewart’s 
position. On the other hand, evidence that 
soils do leach is accumulating every day. 
It i§ found in infected wells and sub-earth 
waters generally, and in various other condi¬ 
tions of both earth and water. Of coimse,mat¬ 
ters earned into the earth in the process of 
leaching do not retain their original form or 
color, and are no longer tangible or in any 
manner responsible to the natural and unaided 
senses. That law quoted by Mr. Stewart, un¬ 
der which gases are diffused throughout the 
atmospheric space is equally operative in dif¬ 
fusing. infinitesimally, the soluble matters 
held in water whenever they have once es¬ 
caped the grasp of such solids as they have an 
afiiuity for. It follows as a matter of course, 
that any search for lost manure in the earth 
or in the waters under the earth is as fruitless 
as in the air which surrounds the earth. 
There is no soil that does not leach below the 
warm, retentive surface soil. Manure kept 
under cover on the most tenacious soils absorbs 
moisture by capillary action, aud insensibly 
wastes its best elements into the great sub¬ 
earth sea. I have attached to 1113 ' residence a 
barn, 30x45 feet, with a cobble-stone drain 
sunk into the hardpan all arouud under the 
foundations, effectually cutting off all out¬ 
side water. In this is an unfloored manure 
apartment into which the manure from a horse 
and cow goes every day iu the year and some¬ 
times that of other animals. No other water 
even gets into it, and yet at whatever season 
the manure is removed the earth below is al¬ 
ways saturated. To test the effect upon ma¬ 
uure I filled two barrels with mixed hen ma¬ 
nure, coal ashes and dry earth from the plat¬ 
form under my hen roosts. One barrel was 
without a bottom anil the other with. Both 
were covered loosely with the heads and 
about six inches of strawey horse manure 
tramped in, and both were set side by side on 
the ground in this apartment, where they re¬ 
mained about two years. Qu emptying them 
the manure in the one with a bottom was un¬ 
changed; in the other it was wet. discolored 
and apparently quite thoroughly leached. I 
bad no unfertilized soil upon which to test 
their relative mammal value, and did uot 
attempt it. I think I may safely say that uot 
one drop of water entered either of these bar¬ 
rels from above. It all came from below. I 
think T may as safely say that every particle 
of manure which ever gets iuto a saturated 
soil goes to waste, no matter how the water 
gets'there. It is now more than 20 years since 
this subject of the leaching of manure through 
soils popularly supposed to be proof against 
leachiug was brought to my attention by the 
greed of a tenant upon a farm in which I had 
a subsidiary interest. Like the sons of the 
Connecticut mail, he buried his treasure be- 
youd recovery and from SO loads of cow stable 
manure ho never realized any appreciable 
benefit. I have since seen a great many such 
cases ou different soils, and I have no doubt 
that milliousof loailsof valuable mauure have 
gone to waste in that way. If this too-long 
discussion shall have the effect to open men’s 
eyes to these channels of waste, I shall no 
longer regret, as I sometimes have, that I “put 
my foot into it.” 
FOREIGN CATALOGUES. 
James Carter & Co., 837 and 888 High 
Ilolborn, London, England.—A profusely il¬ 
lustrated catalogue of all kinds of seeds, with 
illumined covers and several colored plates. 
Applicants should address the firm as above. 
W ehh & Sons, Wordsley, Stourbridge, 
England.—A large, beautiful catalogue, with 
many illustrations uud colored plates, of farm, 
vegetable and flower seeds. Rural suhserib- 
bers may address the firm as above. 
Womans Wotrh. 
CONDUCTED BY EMILY LOUISE TABLIN'. 
THE SWEETEST FLOWER OF JUNE. 
Which is the sweetest flower of June? 
The roses all are blushing. 
And don't you see 
In the maple tree. 
The thrush his song Is hushing? 
O happy thrush, why break your tune? 
Von know which flower Is the pride of June. 
The lilacs arc lifting their purple heads 
From the green of 1 heir stately hedge. 
And the daisies white 
Are laughing for spite 
All over the meadow's edge; 
Aud the fox glove's bells are all a-time, 
Rut they're uot the sweetest flowers ol' June. 
The violets'shy hide under the grass. 
In a gown of the deepest blue. 
Like April skies 
And .lover's eyes. 
Aud everything good and true; 
And the scarlet poppies flame at noon, 
But they’re not the sweetest flowers of June. 
Oh, why do the roses droop their heads 
And why do the roses hide? 
And tell me, thrush. 
Why the roses blush— 
For they are the garden’s pride. 
O merry thrush, have you guessed so soon 
That the rose Is the sweetest flower of June? 
—Olive ST. Harris, fa Chicago Current. 
»»» 
OF INTEREST TO WOMEN. 
A QUAINT-LOOKINC3 fruit scissors is in the 
form of a silver storlc. The sharp bill cuts 
apart a cluster of grapes iu response to a slight 
pressure on his slender legs. 
The Art Interchange, in the course of some 
sensible remarks on the etiquette of mourn¬ 
ing. speaks strongly against the heavy crape 
veil being worn over the face. It is certainly 
destructive to the eye-sight, aud is doubtless 
responsible for some skin diseases, caused by 
the poisonous dye. Many people appear to 
wear mourning long after etiquette demands 
that it should bo laid aside, and in many cases 
it seems more due to fear of what people may 
say than to actual grief. Thus is the only way 
of accounting for the appearance of women 
in crape and bombazine at a place of public 
amusement; a thing not at all as uncommon 
as one may imagine. 
A Chicago woman has courage enough 
to battle in print for the much-maligned 
corset and bustle. She considers, both ar¬ 
ticles of comfort as well as fashion and 
most women, apart from the victims of tight 
lacing, will agree with her. There is no 
need for anyone to injure her spine by wear¬ 
ing a hot. weighty dress improver, but a light 
article of wire or the like prevents the heavy 
draperies of a winter gown from tiring the 
wearer by its support As for the corset, a 
Hottentot belle may go without and resemble 
the Venus fie Medici in bronze, but few women 
descended from generations of corset wearers 
can lav it aside without danger from rounded 
shoulders or curving spine. It is not the use, 
but the abuse of the corset that sensible people 
object to. As for masculine diatribes upon 
the subject, they can lie readily passed over, 
since they spring from the article of faith, 
deeply rooted in each masculine breast, that 
every woman who wears a corset laces more 
tightly than she ought. 
CONFESSIONS OF A COUNTRY GIRL, 
rv. 
Is there a lovelier scene, I wonder, than my 
mountaiu valley in midwinter? The brawl¬ 
ing river is stilled by a crystal covering; the 
rough mountain sides are softened by the 
snow, and the sky, clear and blue as in Jime, 
gives a warm look to the landscape that is 
flatly contradicted by our frosty fingers and 
roseate ears. 
But apart from landscape, midwinter has 
rather more disadvantages for the dwellers 
in the country thau in the city. 
The meu suffer a good deal iu attending to 
the stock and the like, but really, their incon¬ 
veniences are quite equaled by the wornen- 
kiud iu their domestic avocations. When 
they are cooking they are warm,—too warm, 
in fact—aud when they go to do chamber work 
iu fireless rooms thov suffer all the more by 
contrast. Making butter and cleaning vege¬ 
tables are very trying in cold weather, and, 
taken all round, most, country housekeepers 
are glad enough for spring-time, in spite of 
the additional work the season brings. 
The winter brings much additional eleanirg 
too; stoves bring their dust and ashes, and 
melted snow ruins our carpets, and greases 
our floors—truly, this is the “winter of our 
discontent.” 
Do you know what I really think the great¬ 
est disadvantage of the average farm-house 
during the winter? The want of proper facil¬ 
ities for bathing. Where there is no bath¬ 
room, and the bed-rooms are all unheated, 
one can scarce wonder at a family neglecting 
a regular bath, when the thermometer is 
coquetting with'zero. And this ueglect is not 
without its results, both to the health, aud— 
momentous matter to us girls—the complex¬ 
ion. 
The Rural lately gave excellent suggestions 
for a farm bath-room; would that we could 
all carry them out. Even where a bath-tub 
is au impossibility, we gain equal benefit from 
a good sponge-bath, though, of course, there 
would be the risk of cold if we attempt this in 
a fireless room during winter. 
I regret to say that I know a good many 
excellent people, who cannot be called actually 
dirty, who do not take so much as a sponge 
bath for six weeks or two months at a time 
during the cold weather. Now I don’t blame 
anyone for shivering at the prospect of an iev 
bath: I am one of the chilliest of mortals my 
self, and should lie chilled for horn’s if I took a 
really cold bath. But if not oftener, certain 1 3 ’ 
once a week w r e should cleanse ourselves by a 
more’elaborate process than a dry [rub, like 
Mr. Quilp. 
