THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
MARCH129 
1 98 
farm fertility. 
FERTILIZERS Oil WHEIT 
TO HELP THE CLOVER. 
What! When? How? Where? 
The following letter comes from an Ohio 
subscriber: 
“ How will it do to give the wheat a light 
dressing of fertilizer where one wishes 
to sow clover in the spring ? Would it 
be advisable to use a complete fer¬ 
tilizer or one very rich in nitrogen? 
Under what circumstances should 
either be used ? When should one sow 
—bejore or after seeding—and should 
the fertilizer be worked into the soil ? 
FROM PROF. I. P. ROBERTS. 
It would do splendidly: if the chief object 
is to get a good “ catch ” of clover, the 
fertilizer should contain a high per cent, of 
potash and a moderate amount of nitrogen, 
and, unless the secondary object is to bene¬ 
fit the wheat more than the clover, & small 
per cent, of phosphoric acid. Sow the fer¬ 
tilizers immediately, then seed. Do not 
harrow unless it will benefit the wheat, 
but roll as soon as the ground will permit. 
Ithaca, N. Y. 
FROM W. F. TABOR. 
If the previous crop was corn or potatoes, 
I would use a complete fertilizer, some¬ 
thing like the Mapes Complete Manures 
for light or heavy soils, or the Mapes Grass 
or grain spring top-dressing, as the charac¬ 
ter of the soil to which it was to be applied 
might indicate. I would sow the grass 
seed first, and the fertilizer afterward, just 
previous to a rain, if possible; if this could 
not be done, I would harrow lightly, if the 
ground was in proper condition to admit of 
a horse traveling over it. If the grass 
seed can be sown when the ground first 
dries in the spring, leaving the surface full 
of cracks, it will obtain sufficient covering 
during the first rainfall afterward. 
Poughkeepsie, N. Y. 
FROM W. H. BOWKER. 
I should say it would be an admirable 
plan to give the wheat a dressing of fer¬ 
tilizer where clover is to be sown, in order 
to give the former a good start and insure 
a better catch of the latter. Whether the 
dressing should be light or heavy would 
depend upon the soil; if rich, it may be a 
light dressing; but if it has been heavily 
cropped, it ought to have 400 or 500 pounds 
per acre. For wheat the fertilizer should 
be rich in nitrogen, but for clover not 
much nitrogen is required, as the clover 
plant is a nitrogen-gatherer from natural 
sources. We should always use a fertilizer 
for wheat or for clover when seeding, not 
only to supply the crop with plant food, 
but also to give it an early start and a good 
catch by supplying it with food which is 
quickly available and acceptable. The fer¬ 
tilizer may be sown at the time the seed is 
sown, or before, and may be harrowed into 
the soil or applied with a drill. 
Boston, Mass. 
FROM F. E. EMERY. 
Yes, on an ordinary field. In some cases 
I would not give it, as on an old pasture re¬ 
cently broken, or where there has been a 
good growth of clover the previous year. 
Where the land is rather poor a top-dress¬ 
ing of a complete fertilizer would be bene¬ 
ficial to the wheat and help the clover. A 
highly nitrogenous fertilizer would not be 
desirable from three points of view : 1, it 
might cause the wheat to run too much to 
straw; 2, by stimulating the growth it 
would help the present season’s crop to 
gather more of the available plant food 
than it otherwise could, thus leaving the 
field in poorer condition than it would have 
otherwise been in; observation on this 
point has, I think, misled many farmers 
into the assertion that nitrogen is not a 
plant food, but a stimulant which robs the 
soil; 3, the clover will not use the nitrogen, 
but will be injured by the withdrawal of 
more of the ash elements. If the soil is 
crusty or if it becomes hard and dry a good 
harrowing, either just before or after seed¬ 
ing Jand sowing the fertilizer, would be 
highly beneficial. I would do the sowing 
first and then harrow. The slight covering 
of the seed by harrowing would tend to 
save more of it from the birds, insure its 
germination and growth and by incorpo¬ 
rating the fertilizer somewhat with the 
soil, would help the crop to get more of it 
in case dry weather should follow. 
Geneva, N. Y. 
FROM M. MORSE. 
I have used fertilizers quite extensively, 
and on my land I find it safer to use com¬ 
plete fertilizers, though sometimes for 
special purposes I use mixtures which 
would not be considered well balanced. If 
the object in sowing a fertilizer on wheat 
this spring is to secure a better catch of 
clover, I should suppose a liberal supply of 
potash would be needed. I should expect 
the wheat would get the larger share of the 
nitrogen which the fertilizer might con¬ 
tain. If the wheat is fall-sown the fertili¬ 
zer could be worked into the soil only to a 
limited extent, with a drag harrow. I 
would do that, and then roll the field, hav¬ 
ing sown the clover seed and fertilizer be¬ 
fore using the harrow. If the wheat is to 
be sown this spring I would certainly work 
the fertilizer well in with a harrow. 
Medway, Mass. 
FROM D. C. LEWIS. 
I have never had occasion to apply any 
dressing of fertilizers to assist the growth 
of a clover crop. I would not expect to do 
such a thing. Why ? I expect so to treat 
my soil at the time of sowing wheat as to 
secure a good catch of clover, provided 
there is sufficient moisture through May 
and June. I have not failed to secure a 
good catch of clover under any circum¬ 
stances. Should I use my top-dressing, I 
would always use a fertilizer high in 
ammonia. As to the amount of phosphoric 
acid and potash; that with me would de¬ 
pend upon the amount of the several ele¬ 
ments supplied at the time of sowing the 
wheat. I would combine the three elements 
of plant food and apply them together 
broadcast, as my judgment might suggest. 
I would apply the fertilizer soon—how soon 
would depend upon the locality. I don’t 
think it would make any difference whether 
the fertilizer Was used before or after seed¬ 
ing if the application be not. deferred too 
long. If no Timothy was sowed last fall 
with the wheat, I would by all means har¬ 
row the wheat. It would benefit it, furnish¬ 
ing a better seed-bed and insure a better 
catch of clover. If Timothy was sowed last 
fall unless it was unusually abundant, I 
would hesitate to harrow. I do not believe 
the working in of the fertilizer by the har¬ 
row would be of any consequence. The 
frequent rains at this season would incor¬ 
porate the fertilizer with the soil in a satis¬ 
factory manner. 
Cranbury, N. J. 
FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS. 
What docs my soil need ? importance of 
the fertilizer question; an experiment 
showing the need of a complete fertili¬ 
zer ; potash needed on a Broome Coun ty, 
N. Y. farm; how this fact was deter¬ 
mined ; importance of this discovery. 
There is no question in which farmers, 
especially those of the Middle Atlantic and 
New England States, are more interested 
than that of the use of chemical fertilizers, 
yet is there any on which they are less in¬ 
formed ? With all the opportunities we 
have for securing information on this 
matter, it appears to me remarkable that 
there should be such general ignorance with 
regard to it. We all know that there are 
only three constituents which we pay for 
in chemical fertilizers, namely, ammonia, 
phosphoric acid and potash: whatever 
else is contained in them is furnished 
us without cost. 
Is it not easy for every intelligent farmer 
to learn what his soil demands in order to 
produce maximum crops ? I am no chemist 
and yet I believe I can learn what my soil 
demands and that, too, without any 
analysis of it. I believe an analysis 
would not prove anything of practical 
use; it certainly would indicate the quan¬ 
tity of plant food existing in the soil at 
any reasonable depth; but it would not 
prove how much of such plant food might 
be available. While there might be an 
abundance of plant food to produce many 
fine crops, yet the crops might be poor 
because such plant food was not available. 
I believe the needs of the soil may be as¬ 
certained by actual experiments, performed 
by each farmer for himself. Some years 
since a neighbor and myself made such an 
experiment on a wheat crop. The experi¬ 
mental plot was four widths of the drill 
wide and the field included 22 acres. An 
application was made over the entire field 
at the rate of 400 pounds of fertilizer per 
acre, and outside of the experimental plot 
a fertilizer of high standard rich in nitro¬ 
gen and potash was used. The other kind 
was an ordinary low-grade superphosphate 
high in phosphoric acid and low in nitro¬ 
gen and potash. On the experimental 
plot, in one instance we used a very solu¬ 
ble fertilizer, representing the three ele¬ 
ments of plant food ; and on the other tests 
fertilizers of the same soluble character 
with one element dropped in each instance. 
During the fall the growth did not look so 
favorable where the ammonia had been 
dropped ; but as growth went on and har¬ 
vest approached the difference grew less 
and less until at harvest time the eye could 
not detect any difference between the crops 
on the experimental plot and the rest of the 
field, the yield on all oeing about 25 bushels 
per acre. What does such an experiment 
teach ? It appears to me that the lesson is 
a very simple one, and that only one con¬ 
clusion can be drawn from it—that there 
was no deficiency in any element of plant 
food in that soil, and that we might draw 
upon it for one or two crops—perhaps for 
more—without any diminution in the 
yield. This lesson taught me that the only 
safe wav of keeping that field in a proper 
producing condition was to apply to it a fair 
proportion of all the elements of plant 
food. We often hear farmers say they have 
used such and such fertilizers, perhaps low 
in ammonia and potash or in phosphoric 
acid, alongside of a fertilizer higher in 
ammonia and potash, and that the cheaper 
sort was just as valuable as the higher 
grade which cost more. With the above 
experiment as a guide, is that a reasonable 
conclusion ? D. c. LEWIS. 
Middlesex County, N. J. 
POTASH NEEDED HERE. 
The subject of fertilizers for our land is 
getting to be of very great importance. 
My farm is a sandy loam which has been 
under cultivation for over 70 years. Not 
only do I believe but I know from actual 
experiment that my farm and all old farms 
near it need a fertilizer containing a large 
amount of potash. In 1879 I procured sev¬ 
eral ingredients put up in separate bags— 
potash in one, phosphoric acid in another, 
and some form of nitrogen in a third. 
There were about 10 pounds in each of these 
bags, and there was still another bag in 
which the three ingredients were mixed. 
This contained about 30 pounds, so that 
there were about 60 pounds in all. I did 
not get the goods till late in the season. I 
tried them on sowed corn, using one-half of 
each bag. The corn and fertilizer were 
sown broadcast. I first sowed a small plot 
with the potash, and then a piece of the 
same size with phosphoric acid; next I 
sowed the nitrogen. Then I sowed, next to 
these, a plot as large as the three from the 
bag containing the mixture of the three in¬ 
gredients. The result was as follows: 
Where the potash had been sown the corn 
showed a very rank growth, was six feet 
high and of a good, healthy coloi\ Where 
the phosphoric acid had been put, the com 
grew to about 2 % feet in hight, and the 
leaves were of a reddish color. Where the 
nitrogen had been applied the corn was not 
so tall as where the phosphoric acid had 
been used, but it was of nearly the same 
color; lastly, when the three were put to¬ 
gether the corn grew to a hight of about 
four feet and was of a somewhat reddish 
appearance. Where I had used the potash 
the corn was far better than where I had 
applied either the phosphoric acid or nitro¬ 
gen, and better than where the three had 
been applied together. 
On the first of September of the same 
year, when I sowed my wheat, I sowed the 
remainder of the three bags on that crop in 
the same manner as I had sown the rest on 
the corn. By way of experiment I also 
sowed, on different portions of the same 
field side by side, 20 bushels of leached 
ashes at the rate of 100 bushels to the acre, 
20 bushels of unleached ashes at the same 
rate, 100 pounds of superphosphate at the 
rate of 600 pounds to the acre, and 100 
pounds of bone meal at the same rate. 
Where I had put the potash, the unleached 
ashes and the leached ashes, the straw of 
the wheat was very large, and the ears 
were well filled; where I had applied the 
superphosphates I could see a gain, but it 
was not to be compared with that where 
the potash and ashes had been used. I 
could see no gain in the straw from the ap¬ 
plication of the bone, but I thought the 
berries were better than on any other por¬ 
tion of the piece. No person could tell 
where the phosphoric acid and nitrogen had 
been applied. 
The next season where the corn had been 
planted I sowed oats, and where the potash 
had been applied the year before, the oats 
grew as large again as where the other in¬ 
gredients had been used. The grass seed 
caught well, and there was not a particle 
of sorrel; while on the rest of the piece 
sorrel was in abundance, and for four or 
five years there was a marked difference in 
the grass where I had used the potash and 
ashes. Whenever we seed a piece to grass, 
the next season we are sure of a piece of 
sorrel, and after that we have fair grass. 
From my experience I know that our old 
farms stand in need of more potash than 
anything else, and in buying fertilizers I 
seek to get the kinds which contain the 
most potash. 
We have to feed our land if we do not wish 
to lose our labor. Nowadays it will not 
pay a farmer to plow, harrow, furnish seed 
and harvest a piece of grain without using 
a fertilizer of some kind. Manure is good 
so far as it goes : but I believe that we 
should cover more land with manure, and 
then use superphosphate with it. In sowing 
grass-seed we are always sure of a good 
seeding in ordinary seasons when the land 
has been top-dressed with manure, and a 
fertilizer will give a better crop. Last 
season I put half a ton of fertilizer on one 
acre of fodder-corn ; 600 pounds were sown 
broadcast, and 400 pounds were used in the 
drill. The cost was $15, and I obtained the 
best growth of corn that I ever had. I think 
I got my money back on the fodder. Far¬ 
mers do not use fertilizers enough to the 
acre: most men sow from 100 to 200 pounds 
to the acre of a fertilizer that costs from $16 
to $30 per ton, making the cost of the fer¬ 
tilizer per acre from $1.30 to $3. They 
could hardly draw five loads of manure for 
that money, if they had the manure in the 
yard, and five loads could be hardly seen 
if scattered evenly over an acre. All kinds 
of farm produce are with us very low, and 
there is no way of making a profit except 
by raising better crops, so as to get more 
money, and we cannot do this unless we 
feed our land liberally with the best fertil¬ 
izer. c. M. LUSK. 
Broome County, N. Y. 
farm Copies. 
AN EARTH-CLOSET. 
T. B. TERRI'. 
Twenty years ago, when the writer 
moved on to his farm, he found one of the 
ordinary old-fashioned privies on the place. 
It was in full view of every one passing by 
in the road or fields. If the contents of the 
vault, or hole in the ground beneath, had 
not leached into the well, which was but a 
few feet distant, it certainly was no fault 
of previous owners. As a matter of fact, 
there had been much sickness on the place 
for years back. The soil was dry, and I 
could see no reason for this except that 
the filth from this vault and the slops 
thrown out around the well had probably 
rendered the drinking-water unfit for use. 
We shut up the well for the time being, 
and went 50 rods to a spring for all the 
water we used, cleaned up the premises 
and kept them so, and have always enjoyed 
good health. 
The privy vault was abolished forever. 
I selected a spot in one of the back corners 
of the door-yard for the earth-closet, put¬ 
ting up a cheap building until I could 
afford a better one. But I soon got some 
evergreen trees aud set them out in such a 
way that when grown they would hide the 
building from sight. The tree which shades 
the building was also started. The walk 
shown in the picture, Figure 61, leads to the 
kitchen door. Not a glimpse of the build¬ 
ing can be got from any point in the road, 
as it is surrounded by a solid mass of ever¬ 
greens, except on the one end which can be 
seen only from the rear of the house. The 
effect of this mass of evergreens all around 
under the tree is quite pretty. It certainly 
is more suggestive of civilization and a 
moderate degree of refinement than the 
thousands of farm privies which one sees 
in passing through the country, that stand 
out all bare and alone, with no attempt to 
hide them. 
A year or two ago I put up a new build¬ 
ing, and furnished it in a very simple way 
that gives us much satisfaction. In the 
