434 
FARMERS’ CLUB-DISCUSSION. 
Young Men for the Farm. 
E. E. S., South Greece, N. Y.—In the 
Rural New-Yorker of June 14, I see C. 
L. W., of Peru, Ill., gives his reason for 
staying on the farm, in answer to J. M. 
Drew’s inquiry, “Why do Boys Stay on the 
Farm ? ” Now I am a boy yet myself and 
want to tell J. M. Drew that boys that are 
brought up on the farm as they should he, 
and taught to respect it, and who are not 
made such slaves as were pictured in a late 
RURAL cartoon, are willing to be farmers, 
and like the business. Another reason why 
boys are so down on farming is that they 
hear their parents complaining so much 
and of course are discouraged. I could 
give several reasons why boys are down on 
farming. One of the principal of these is 
outside influences. By that I mean stories 
they are told when out with the boys, as 
pictured in the cartoon referred to, where 
“ James is talking it over with the hoys.” I 
want to caution the farmer about home in¬ 
fluences also. He should try to furnish the 
boy with enough amusement at home, so 
that he will not have to go to the village 
for it. Give him good reading matter, and, 
if he likes music, let him have it; it will he 
cheaper than using tobacco or drinking. 
One reason too often overlooked why boys 
get uneasy, is allowing them to be tempted 
by hired help. I well remember the first 
time I was sick of farming. I had been 
working with the hired man, one who had 
been hired for a few days in hoeing. He 
was one of those men who had traveled a 
good deal and had seen the world. I asked 
all the questions I could think of, and he 
told his adventures and enough lies to 
make any boy sick of the farm. I think 
the hired help has more influence on our 
farmer boys than their parents dream of, 
and when the hired man gets mad at any¬ 
thing he generally expresses his opinion of 
farming and of the farmer to the boy—at 
least it has been so in my case. I know 
boys who have bragged about the stories 
their hired men could tell. Now farmers, 
is this right ? Are not your boys better 
than hired help ? If so, try to have them 
realize where these stories come from ; and 
use them as a parent should, not as the 
Rural has pictured their treatment; for I 
will admit that boys are rather prone to 
complain. Just as you would not dream of 
putting a colt in a horse’s place, so should 
you act with the boy; he is not yet a man 
and should not be required to do a man’s 
work. I agree with C. L. W. in allowing 
the boy to raise a calf or colt, or have a 
patch of land to work. I think he learns a 
lesson; when he does raise anything, he 
learns to take an interest in it and sees the 
responsibility of having something to care 
for ; at least it was so in my case. I have 
been out among strangers for myself, but 
was glad to get back on the old farm. 
Now my father is dead and I have the en¬ 
tire charge of the farm and I must say, 
with thankfulness, that he prepared me for 
such a responsibility by giving me a little 
land to work w.hile a lad, and in other 
ways. 
H. S. W., Onondaga County, N.Y.—As 
I read the R. N.-Y. from week to week, 
striving to obtain knowledge and under¬ 
standing of the great problems of agricul¬ 
ture, I am especially interested in all that 
relates to farmers’ sons who remain on the 
farm to follow in their fathers’ footsteps. 
As I told the Rural some time ago, I 
can hardly tell how I came to remain on 
the farm, as from my early boyhood I 
had an intense desire to lead a mercantile 
life; but being an only son, with a desire 
to be a help to my farmer father, I re¬ 
mained at home on the farm, to be looked 
upon as a “ hayseed ” by the city chaps, 
but with a strong determination not to be 
considered a “ wayback” in the matter of 
agricultural pursuits. Is it any wonder 
that farmers’ sons leave home to engage in 
occupations other than that of their 
fathers ? I say no ! It is nothing to be 
wondered at. What is there (especially in 
these days of agricultural depression) to 
tempt the boys to remain on the farm ? 
Every boy who stays on the farm sees all 
his boyhood friends, schoolmates and even 
acquaintances leave home to seek their for¬ 
tunes in the city. He hears of one or 
two of them who may have obtained good 
positions, with salaries much beyond what 
he can earn on the farm. But of the major¬ 
ity who fall by the way-side, or who earn 
barely enough to keep them from “ hand t* 
mouth ” he hears nothing. People never 
mention them. It is only the favored out* 
who are reported in the country homes. 
What wonder, then, that the country boy 
looks with envy and longing at his brother 
in the city, who wears better clothes every 
THE RURAL N 
day than he can wear on Sunday, 
has soft hands and very often patronizing 
airs, and who would scarcely speak to his 
old schoolmate should the latter call at his 
place of business. How does all this make 
the country boy feel ? He says to himself: 
“I am just as capable as he, with just as 
good an education, and I think the good 
clothes will fit me as well; in fact, I don’t 
like to farm any way, never did, and lam 
going to the city to work.” He speaks to 
father about it, and the father who wishes 
his boy to remain on the farm, makes a 
mistake right here, for he says : “ No, you 
stay here on the farm, I can’t get along 
without you. You would look nice in the 
city I This is the place for you.” And the 
boy stays ? Not much. He goes at once, 
and 10 chances to one if the father had said 
“Go and try it, and if you do not like it, 
come back,” the boy would never have gone 
at all. There is such a difference in fathers. 
Yes, and as much difference in sons. Some 
boys (not all farmers’ sons either) can be 
interested in nothing under the sun. They 
work because they are compelled to and are 
no help to themselves or others, and in such 
cases we can’t make something from noth¬ 
ing. Now let all of us who have escaped 
the allurements of city life, (and city at¬ 
tractions are legion) as we plow and sow, 
even though we have not gathered a boun¬ 
tiful harvest for the past two or three years, 
make ourselves worthy of our occupation. 
It is surely worthy of us. With good 
health, good appetites, and plenty of good 
honest labor, we may say: 
Let sailors sing the windy deco, 
Let soldiers praise their armor; 
Rut in my heart this toast I’ll keep, 
“The Independent Farmer!” 
Even though we may not be especially de¬ 
lighted with farming, let us give it more 
study, do our work better, read the R. N.-Y. 
every w r eek to become more familiar with 
our profession, and I am sure that in this 
case “familiarity will uot breed con¬ 
tempt.” 
Let all of us farmers’ sons who remain on 
the farm, make preparations to have our 
pictures in the Rural in a few years as 
representative farmers from our respective 
States. 
What Ails The Geneva Experiment 
Station ? 
G. E. J., Geneva, N. Y.—The report is 
current here to-day that Prof. Ladd has re¬ 
signed the position of Chemist at the Ex¬ 
periment Station and is going away. Now 
I happen to know that he has been simply 
forced out of this place by the Director, and 
as a farmer deeply interested in the success 
of the Station I would like to know what ft 
is coming to. When the present Director 
assumed the position, we had one of the 
strongest equipped stations in this country. 
With Messrs. Goff, Ladd & Beckwith, all 
strong men, the station was doing capital 
work; but, first, Mr. Goff left, then Beck¬ 
with and now Ladd, and what is left ? It is 
useless for the Director or Board to say that 
these men all left of their own accord. We 
of Geneva know better; we know that each 
of them was doing splendid work, and they 
were all deeply engaged in it, and would 
have been glad to stay, only their place was 
made so hot for them that they were forced 
to get out. We further know that the prin¬ 
cipal part of the work done by this station 
was accomplished by these men and we are 
extremely sorry that they should have left, 
and that the station should be petering out 
as it is surely doing. As I go by almost 
daily and see the Director overseeing a lot 
of laborers graveling the roads or in some 
similar unimportant work, I am almost 
convinced of the truth of what I have heard 
said was a remark of the Director to one 
of these laborers, that “ it was of more im¬ 
portance to make a big show than to do 
scientific work.” I have carefully examined 
the last annual report and have been sur¬ 
prised to see how very little the State had 
received from the Director of the station 
for the money which had been paid to him 
in salary and perquisites. I am very sorry 
to find fault with the station, but from the 
way things are going on there I can’t keep 
still any longer. I just think that unless 
we can have it reorganized and something 
done, the sooner it is abandoned the 
better. 
Remarks.— During the past few months 
the Rural New-Yorker has received a 
great many complaints regarding the 
management of the Geneva Station. These 
complaints come from intelligent and con¬ 
servative men, who firmly believe that the 
reputation of the station is being injured 
by the present management. The R. N.-Y. 
desires to be fair to all. It would not 
notice the ordinary anonymous growl of 
some hypercritical personage whose dig- 
EW-YORKER. 
nity had been ruffled, or the revengeful 
malice of some disappointed official. It 
would never attack a public institution or 
a public man on the basis of mere hearsay 
evidence. To use the powerful weapons 
at its command without a just cause 
would be unmanly—unfair. With these 
introductory remarks, the R. N.-Y. calls 
the attention of the New York farmers to 
the state of affairs existing at the Geneva 
Station. We demand an investigation on 
the part of the Board of Directors, and 
would suggest the following topics as per¬ 
tinent to the discussion: 
1. How many bulletins have been Issued by 
the station since December 1, 1887 ? Who 
wrote those bulletins, and who received 
credit for them ? 
2. What has become of the poultry de¬ 
partment at the station ? Is there any in¬ 
come from the sale of eggs, fowls or butter? 
If there is, who receives it ? 
8. Has the Director originated any exper¬ 
iments ? How many engagements to de¬ 
liver addresses has he made, and how many 
of these engagements has he kept? How 
many horses are kept for the benefit of the 
Director and his friends ? What propor¬ 
tion of his time does the Director spend in 
town ? 
4. What disposal is made of the milk, 
butter,fruit, vegetables, etc., etc., produced 
on the farm ? What evidence has the 
Director given in his bulletins or speeches 
of his ability to conduct such an institution ? 
Does he spend a good share of his time in 
doing work that a good overseer could do 
to better advantage ? 
Let us know about these things, gentle¬ 
men. 
ON THE MOST PROFITABLE USE 
OF COMMERCIAL MANURES. 
Prof Paul Wagner, director of the Ag¬ 
ricultural Experiment Station, at Darm¬ 
stadt, Germany, is the author of a pam¬ 
phlet on the above subject, which has been 
translated by Prof. Charles Wellington, 
and issued in English by the Experiment 
Station of the Massachusetts Agricultural 
College. We make abstracts from such 
portions as will be likely to interest our 
readers most: 
“ Commercial fertilizers enable the farm¬ 
er who cultivates extensively to make the 
most of his wide acres for the storing of 
atmospheric nitrogen. Phosphates and 
potash salts give to lupine, clover, vetches, 
pease, serradella, etc., the power to with¬ 
draw from the atmosphere great quantities 
of nitrogen, thus enriching husbandry with 
the most valuable of all fertilizers. They 
also enable them to increase the food cap¬ 
ital, and to gradually transform the exten¬ 
sive production into an intensive one, 
thereby increasing both the value of the 
land and the revenue. 
Very often it has appeared that soils 
which, according to the results of chemical 
analysis, are rich in phosphoric acid, are, 
so far as the plants are concerned, very 
poor in this constituent. Soils whose total 
content of phosphoric acid is relatively 
slight, are not always, by any means, in 
need of phosphate manuring. 
The belief in the necessity of accurately 
measuring the quantities of phosphoric 
acid and potash required by each cultivated 
plant is incorrect and irrational. The in¬ 
telligent farmer, practicing intensive culti¬ 
vation, long ago discovered the correct 
method of procedure. He places in t^ie soil 
a surplus of phosphoric acid and potash; 
and this I hold to be entirely right. Nitro¬ 
gen should be measured out to the plant as 
accurately as possible, but not phosphoric 
acid and potash. How much phosphoric 
acid is needed in a particular case,—i. e., 
for a particular plant on a particular soil, 
—in order to produce the greatest possible 
yield, cannot be closely calculated. The 
one soil is rich in potash, the other poor; 
the one rich in phosphoric acid, the other 
poor. The one crop needs much easily 
soluble potash or phosphoric acid, the 
other little. The one soil yields the phos¬ 
phoric acid, applied in easily soluble form, 
directly; the other renders it less soluble, 
and demands a relatively heavier manuring 
to produce an equal result. The one soil 
has never or very rarely received phos¬ 
phates, the other large quantities almost 
yearly; and it is possible that the latter 
possesses a store equal to the demand for 
several years. How can the farmer find 
his way through all those difficulties ? He 
JULY 5 
cannot. Nothing remains but to apply an 
excess of both food constituents; and in 
this there is indeed no danger, for potash 
and phosphoric acid are substances which 
the soil binds up and preserves for later 
crops, in case the one immediately follow¬ 
ing demands them only partially or not at 
all. With nitrogen it is quite different, 
Nitrogen is not bound up by the soil; it re¬ 
mains freely movable. The residual from 
a crop would be in danger, during the win¬ 
ter months, of being washed into the sub¬ 
soil, and lost. 
Now let the plants thirst for weeks at a 
time. No phosphoric acid is assimilated, 
nothing is elaborated. If rain comes and 
then warm weather, the plants must, if a 
maximum harvest is to be had, retrieve 
what has been lost, and within the next 
week elaborate as much as they should 
have done in two or three weeks’ time. 
For this two or three-fold daily production 
they require a two or three-fold quantity of 
phosphoric acid ; and this they can get only 
when there is in store a corresponding sur¬ 
plus, a supply from which, during a few 
days, the plants can draw more than under 
normal circumstances is necessary. 
The necessary surplus of phosphoric acid 
must not be permitted to become a super¬ 
fluity. This is also to be said concerning 
potash ; but naturally rich potash soils are 
far more abundant than those rich in phos¬ 
phoric acid, and with the potash supply of 
the soil more caution is necessary. Potash 
is indeed absorbed by the pulverized soil, 
but it becomes soluble again more easily 
than phosphoric acid ; and many domestic 
plants are very sensitive to strong potash 
manuring. More attention is therefore to 
be given to potash manuring than to that 
of phosphoric acid, and care must be taken 
to avoid a too great surplus of potash salts 
in the soil. 
Manurings of 18, 31 and 45 pounds of 
nitrogen per acre were given various crops. 
Barley, rye, oats, wheat, buckwheat, car¬ 
rots, potatoes, beets, flax, rape, grass and 
spurrey furnished considerably increased 
yields, and the latter stood in exact relation 
to the increased manuring; while with 
pease, red clover, lupines, vetches and lu¬ 
cerne, no increase of yield was obtained. 
Let the following figures serve as illustra¬ 
tion. For more convenient reading, I have 
placed the yield obtained with barley, 
without nitrogen manuring, at 100, and 
have reckoned the other yields to corres¬ 
pond : 
Nitroukn ArruKi) in 
Pounds per Acre. 
None. 
18. 
31. 
45. 
Yield. 
Yield. 
Yield. 
Obtained. 
Calculated. 
Obtained. 
Calculated. 
Obtained. 
Calculated. 
Rarley. 
ICO 
161 
167 
220 
218 
272 
268 
Spurrey. 
111 
176 
172 
•2'4 
215 
254 
258 
Wheat,. 
13S 
212 
211 
270 
266 
816 
821 
Flax. 
115 
205 
203 
245 
247 
29! 
291 
Pease. 
935 
93S 
961 
983 
Lucerne. 
976 
9S3 
1000 
... 
994 
.... 
Concerning nitrogen manuring proper, 
therefore, we have to discuss the question 
only with reference to the so-called nitrogen 
consumers; and I now ask, With how 
much nitrogen shall we manure, in order 
to attain an increased yield giving the ' 
greatest possible net gain? Here the 
answer is essentially different from that in 
the case of phosphoric acid and potash 
manuring. I state it thus: Soluble nitro¬ 
gen is not to be offered to the plants in 
surplus, but is to be measured out to them 
as nearly as possible in needed quantities. 
If we assume that vegetation is governed 
by plant foods, then nitrogen is the real 
dictator in the matter of growth, with all 
plants requiring nitrogenous manure,— 
that is, all nitrogen consumers. The nour¬ 
ishment of these plants, the application of 
food in proper quantity,—indeed, the entire 
art of manuring, is dependent on a rational 
and exact application of nitrogen. The 
farmer applies all other plant foods in sur¬ 
plus. but nitrogen he deals out to the plants 
as he gives rations to his animals ; and in 
this way regulates their productive activ¬ 
ity, and gives them the power to realize the 
full benefit of circumstances favorable to 
vegetation, such as qualities of soil, cli¬ 
mate, weather, be they continuous or inter¬ 
mittent. 
We had assumed the task of raising the 
yield of a wheat field by 2,000 pounds of 
grain, and had observed that this required 
the crop to consume about 20 pounds phos¬ 
phoric acid, 30 pounds potash, 60 pounds 
nitrogen, more than was before necessary 
for the production of superficial substance 
(straw and grain). Further reflection led 
us to the conclusion that an exact caloula- 
