1900 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER: 
399 
RAW GROUND PHOSPHATE AS FERTILIZER 
When and How to Use Superphosphate. 
We have been taught by most of our scientific men that 
phosphate rock must be "cut” or dissolved with acid be¬ 
fore our ordinary crops can make use of it. We can 
readily see, if it be true that any of our farm crops can 
do this dissolving for us, that we shall gain considerably 
in the economy of fertilizing. We would like to know 
what you think about the feasibility of using the raw 
floats upon any farm crops. Upon what farm crops can 
it safely be used? Does it really provide phosphoric acid 
for apple trees, and are there any green crops that can 
make use of them in such a way as to feed other crops 
which have not the ability to utilize it? For example, 
can we manure clover, cow peas, buckwheat or turnips 
with the raw rock, and then plow them under as manure 
for a crop like corn or potatoes? 
Chemistry demonstrates that phosphate of lime is 
an indispensable constituent of all agricultural plants, 
and exists in definite proportions in all. If plants 
cannot grow in the absence of this substance, which 
is true, and if it must be present in available forms, 
and in sufficient quantities for remunerative crops, 
which is also true, it becomes a question of the first 
magnitude how we are artificially to supply this re¬ 
quirement in the most economical manner. Nearly 
all soils contain phosphate of lime in chemical com¬ 
bination in the rock from which they were derived by 
disintegration, but in forms and in quantities that do 
not sufficiently respond to the action of the roots of 
plants through their decomposing action. The only 
mode of overcoming this condition would be to grind 
or in some way comminute the substance of the soil 
into a fine powder, and thus multiply immensely the 
surface upon which the roots of plants may act. This, 
however, is impracticable, from the cost involved, and 
we are compelled to look to some outside source for 
the phosphate of lime, which is demanded in much 
larger quantities than soils generally furnish. The 
oldest and most common source has been found in the 
bones of animals, which are largely made up of phos¬ 
phate of lime. All of this substance came originally 
from the rocks composing the soil being appropriated 
in ministering to the plant, which in 
turn entered the animal economy, and 
furnished the substance of the bony 
structure giving to the animal its 
mechanical support. If this bone be 
returned to the soil, it adds to the 
stock of phosphate of lime which the 
plant may avail itself of, but if the 
bones be whole, tnere is little more op¬ 
portunity for the plant than is afforded 
by the rocks. To overcome this diffi¬ 
culty the bones are ground into more 
or less fine particles, which vastly 
multiplies the surface available to root 
action. Machinery will not grind 
bones into a fine flour unless they are 
first deprived of their animal matters 
by fire, and this is a serious waste of 
nitrogenous material. The discovery 
of mineral phosphates, which may or 
may not be fosslliferous, has furnished 
a source of phosphate of lime that is 
at once reasonable in price, and, being 
free from animal matters, is readily 
ground into an impalpable powder 
called “floats,” because it is so fine 
that it floats, or is suspended in water, 
instead of falling at once to the bot¬ 
tom. This is as far as mechanical in¬ 
genuity has yet gone, or is likely to do. 
Is there anything further that science can suggest 
that will enable plant life to avail itself of the neces¬ 
sary phosphate of lime for its fullest needs? More 
than 50 years ago I was familiar with Liebig's advo¬ 
cacy of the mode of dissolving bone3 in sulphuric acid, 
which was expected to revolutionize agriculture, but 
although it has had very great influence, I do not 
think it has accomplished all that was originally ex¬ 
pected of it. The fact was not appreciated at that 
time, and is not very largely as yet, that when the 
phosphate of lime, as found in bones or otherwise, i3 
subjected to the action of sulphuric acid, the acid re¬ 
moves a part of the basic lime, and the remaining 
substance is, although soluble, no longer the phos¬ 
phate of lime that is plant food. It is not the tri-basic 
phosphate of lime that it was, and the only combina¬ 
tion of phosphoric acid and lime that is acceptable to 
plants. When the lime that has been removed from 
the phosphate by the sulphuric acid is restored, which 
can only be done by the addition of more free lime to 
the solution or in the soil, then it becomes food for 
plants. 
Is it then of no use to dissolve phosphates in acids? 
It has this advantage, that when the resulting solu¬ 
ble superphosphate finds the additional lime that it 
seeks, the resulting precipitate is in a finer condi¬ 
tion than anything that mechanical means can pro¬ 
duce. Until it does find that additional lime, I cannot 
believe that it is an available food for plants, but 
seems to be deleterious, and in some cases fatal to 
their growth. Chemists now give equal values to 
soluble and reverted phosphoric acid. Reverted acid 
is nothing but insoluble acid in fine condition. Solu¬ 
ble add is of no value, if not injurious, until reverted 
in the soil. If my propositions are clear I can give an 
intelligible answer to your questions about the prac¬ 
tical use of floats. I believe that preparation to be the 
cheapest and, for the price, the best form in which 
to apply phosphoric acid to any and all crops where 
it is feasible to mix it intimately with the soil by 
plowing and cultivation. I would never use super¬ 
phosphate of lime for cultivated crops, as being a 
waste of sulphuric acid and manipulation. If in any 
case I did use it, I should apply sufficient free lime 
to restore the superphosphate to the tri-basic form. 
If evenly sprea'd, one-half a 300-pound cask of dry- 
slaked or air-slaked lime per acre would ensure the 
reversion. 
I have to confess here that I am not just now taking 
my own medicine. I am using acid phosphate( dis¬ 
solved S. C. rock), and none of the raw floats. You 
have a right to ask why I do not follow my own pre¬ 
cepts. I might quote in justification the prevailing 
custom of the Christian world, but that would be no 
excuse for me, and I have a better one. I am not at 
present cultivating crops of any kind. My business is 
orcharding and small fruits, and all my fruits are 
either in grass or under a mulch. If I applied floats 
tney would remain on the surface more or less per¬ 
manently out of the reach of roots. If I apply solu¬ 
ble phosphates they leach down into the soil before 
they become reverted, and thus available. Hence 
this rule. All crops grown upon soil into which the 
fertilizer can be distributed mechanically would pref¬ 
erably be supplied with their phosphate of lime in 
the form of floats. All others in superphosphates fol¬ 
lowed by an application of lime. 
Massachusetts. [dr.] jabez fisher. 
ALL SORTS AND CONDITIONS. 
AN EXPERIENCE WITH HAY.—I live on a rented 
farm, and give the landlord half of everything. Last 
year we had 10 acres of clover and 40 acres of 
Timothy. I managed it so that I cut my clover in the 
forenoon and put it up in the afternoon in the barn. 
Several people told me it would spoil, but I never 
saw finer, greener hay in my life. The cattle would 
eat every bite I gave them; wintered 16 cattle and two 
horses on it. Of course, the Timothy had to be 
stacked out. I stacked it with a derrick, a great deal 
like the one you figured in The R. N.-Y., with the 
exception that mine does not require a man to turn 
it; a boy and horse put the hay on the stack. I have 
used it several years. My landlord never takes a 
farm paper, but depends upon his neighbors or towns¬ 
men for advice. I noticed several times in The R. 
N.-Y. last year the statement that there would be no 
hay in the East. 1 had my half of the hay baled, 
cost $1.75 a ton, and filled the driveway of the barn, 
leaving my wagon and buggy under a tree in the 
woods until Winter. I got $11.50 and $12 a ton for it, 
and some of it higher than that. My landlord sold 
his in August and September at $5.25, some for $6, and 
finally some for $7. Thanks for the rose, it never 
knew it had been moved. c. b. 
Indiana. 
OYSTER-SHELL LIME.—I notice an Inquiry about 
oyster-shell lime. Lime made of the shells is pure, 
and so far it is more valuable than the ordinary stone 
lime, which is apt to have from 25 to more per cent 
of magnesia in it, which not only reduces the value, 
but the magnesia is injurious to some degree. These 
shells are easily burned in heaps in 'this way. A 
foundation is made of any kind of waste wood, as old 
rails, rough timber, or other kinds which may be pro¬ 
cured at little cost. The shells are heaped on this 
base and leveled down, then more wood (small is 
best), and then more lime, and so on until a conical, 
rather low heap is made, which is covered with earth, 
just as is done in burning charcoal or common lime¬ 
stone in pits, as these heaps are called. It is best to 
cover the heaps with damp leaves or straw, or litter of 
some kind, to keep the earth covering from settling 
down among the shells as the fuel is slowly burned. 
In this way the shells are calcined in a short time, 
and the purest of lime is made. It is made in,.large 
quantities in this way along the shores of the South¬ 
ern States, where other kinds of lime are costly. 
There is no special attention needed, once the fire is 
started, except to keep the heap from settling down 
unevenly, and thus giving the fire an opportunity to 
burn out unequally and leave a great part of the shells 
unburned. Lime of this kind is the very best for 
plastering, as it sets more slowly than the mineral 
lime, on account of the common impurities in the or¬ 
dinary limestone, and so makes a firmer and more 
lasting plaster. H . 8> 
HARROWING OATS IN KANSAS. 
Last year we printed an article from one of our 
subscribers in British Columbia, who spoke of har¬ 
rowing wheat and oats. The harrowing was done 
when the oats were ,wo or throe inches high, and 
was saiu to increase the yield. Some of our readers 
in Maine have been asking us why this practice of 
harrowing small grain will not bo useful on eastern 
farms? Experiments have been tried at some of the 
eastern experiment stations, but on the whole, have 
not given encouraging results. In the West, and 
especially on the plains, north of Kansas, this plan 
of harrowing a Spring grain is often carried out. For 
example, at the Nebraska Experiment Station results 
for two years showed a gain of 7 V 2 bushels of oats per 
acre in 1898, and four bushels per acre in 1899. When 
asked for the cause of this increase, 
Prof. T. L. Lyon said that he attrib¬ 
utes it to the fact that stirring and 
loosening the soil largely prevented 
evaporation. In Nebraska the rate of 
evaporation from level surfaces fre¬ 
quently reaches half an inch of water 
in 24 hours. It is thus necessary to 
take every precaution to save moisture. 
With corn or potatoes this can be done 
by cultivating between the plants or 
rows. Small grain either broadcast or 
in drills may also be cultivated for the 
same purpose. He says that when the 
grain is young, the ground is severely- 
exposed to the action of the wind and 
sun, and thus loses large quantities of 
water. By cultivating or scratching 
the surface of the ground, this loss will 
be largely prevented, just as it is in the 
cornfield. He says the cultivation in 
the past has been confined to drilled 
oats, but this year they are harrowing 
both drilled and broadcast grain in 
order to see whether it will benefit the 
latter. Thus far, he says, the season 
has been very cool and wet, and he 
does not think there will be much dif¬ 
ference between the harrowed oats and 
those not harrowed n the drilled ground. The oats 
are harrowed at any time after they are well set, 
the sooner the better. Prof. Lyon does not know, of 
course, whether this harrowing would be of any bene¬ 
fit in the eastern States. The rate of evaporation is 
much less in the East than on the dry western plains, 
but in that locality certainly harrowing drilled oats 
is a profitable operation. 
Roses and Pigs.—I received the Ruby Queen rose all 
right. I got it planted and did not have quite enough 
lumber to fix it securely, and while 1 went to get more 
one of my little pigs got in and ate it. j. h. b. 
Signal, O. 
R. N.-Y.—That ought to be sweet pork. 
Nothing in Fish Culture. —I am confident that such a 
thing as profit cannot be secured by the propagation of 
Brook trout, provided, of course, that they be raised and 
taken according to law. The laws of Massachusetts, as 
well as of New York, prohibit the screening of brooks. 
Regarding the possibility of obtaining trout fry or finger- 
lings for stocking purposes, there is no difficulty especially 
in the matter, provided the object is to stock a pond or 
stream that is open to public fishing. Neither the State 
nor National commissions will stock private waters. 
Under the New York law, any waters in which fry or 
fingerlings are supplied immediately become open. Owners 
of private preserves therefore no longer go to those sources 
for replenishment of their waters, but, as a rule, depend ‘ 
on natural propagation. I doubt whether it would be 
possible for anyone to obtain supplies from private own¬ 
ers, as even if they would care to spare trout from their 
catches, no one would feel like paying what would be 
asked. On the whole, I think the idea impractical, as 
nothing like a supply could be obtained except by netting, 
which, of course, is illegal, c. r. s. 
Akron, O, 
STUDENTS WORKING IN THE SCHOOL NURSERY. Fig. 123. 
