1911. 
ARGUMENTS FOR GROUND LIMESTONE 
Part II. 
Burnt lime by its causticity may 
injure some tender plant growths, while 
seeds will sprout and grow in pure lime 
carbonate. So that the carbonate can be 
applied at any time of year or any con¬ 
dition of crop; can even be mixed with 
commercial fertilizer or manure to great 
advantage. For in addition to being fa¬ 
vorable to both nitrogen and potash, as 
stated in Bulletin 46 of Rhode Island, 
lime increases the availability of phos¬ 
phoric acid. Bulletin 110 of Illinois rec¬ 
ommends the use of carbonate of lime 
along with raw phosphate rock, to make 
the latter available. It may not always 
be convenient to await the proper time 
to apply burnt lime with least detriment. 
The carbonate is also less disagreeable 
to handle than the burnt lime when ap¬ 
plying to the soil. Fresh water shell 
marl is found in large deposits practi¬ 
cally pure lime carbonate, because of the 
method of its formation, quite different 
from salt water shell marl, wholly from 
large shells and invariably with a small 
percentage of lime carbonate. 
Our State geological reports are in¬ 
teresting regarding marl. That of Mas¬ 
sachusetts (the author being then Presi¬ 
dent of Amherst), says: “I pledge that 
our fresh water shell marls are precisely 
similar to those that have accomplished 
such great benefits in Europe, and they 
may improve the agriculture of our en¬ 
tire State, if the present generation does 
not realize this, future ones will.” The 
New York report says: “Our fresh 
water shell marls will not subordinate in 
fertilizer effect to any other form of lime, 
and if used judiciously will return mil¬ 
lions of dollars to the pockets of our 
farmers.” The new Virginia Bulletin 
No. 187 quotes the authentic Pennsylva¬ 
nia Station tests where the carbonate 
gave $5.77 in crop yield more per acre 
than the unlimed, and burnt lime $4.21 
per acre less than the latter, a differ¬ 
ence of $10 per acre in favor of the 
carbonate. But this test was made on a 
limestone soil; had the soil been a light 
one, acid and deficient in humus, the 
unlimed would have made a poorer 
showing, and also the carbonate would 
have shown more favorably over the 
burnt form. Consequently judged by re¬ 
sults a ton of non-magnesian, finely pow¬ 
dered carbonate of lime, such as found 
in fresh water shell marl and some 
ground limestones is worth more to the 
farmer than a ton of burnt lime—not¬ 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
withstanding contrary statements in 
some of our State bulletins. If a soil is 
deficient in humus, and this is to be in¬ 
creased by growing legumes, to obtain 
which lime is necessary, why use the 
burnt form to deplete the scanty organic 
matter further, when the carbonate would 
both avoid such depletion and also be 
more favorable to the growth of the 
legumes. Bulletin 398, U. S. Depart¬ 
ment of Agriculture, May, 1910, “Com¬ 
mercial Fertilizers in Middle Atlantic 
States,” says when a soil is deficient in 
humus full benefits from use of com¬ 
mercial fertilizer are not obtainable, and 
if the farmers of eastern Virginia and 
eastern North Carolina will get all their 
nitrogen by growing the clover class of 
crops, as some are doing, they will save 
$8,000,000 a year in fertilizer bills and 
besides raise one-quarter better crops. 
Our consular service having been placed 
at my service in investigating the lime 
question, I found that the great agricul¬ 
tural improvements accomplished in 
Europe, where entire sections have been 
changed from an infertile condition to 
become the finest agricultural land in the 
world, has been made so by the use of 
calcareous marl and chalk, the latter a 
soft carbonate of lime, and not by the 
use of burnt lime. And I maintain that 
the renewal of fertility to our impover¬ 
ished land along the Atlantic Coast will 
be brought about economically only by 
the use of carbonate of lime, following 
the experience of the older civilization of 
Europe. The real worth of lime in agri¬ 
culture depends on soil conditions, 
whether the crop is a lime favoring one 
and if there has been a drought; under 
some of these circumstances the benefits 
from the use of carbonate of lime may 
far exceed that of use of high-grade fer¬ 
tilizer. Sooner or later lime must be 
used on all our land to maintain fertility. 
FRANKLIN NOBLE. 
R- N.-Y.—Let it be understood that 
Mr. Noble is referring to limestone, marl 
or shells crushed or ground without be¬ 
ing burned. This is carbonate of lime, 
while the burnt lime is the carbonate 
burned instead of being ground. With 
a few exceptions the carbonate will take 
the place of the burnt lime. On a very 
sour soil the burnt lime would give quick¬ 
er action. In warm climates where green 
crops are plowed under to provide hu¬ 
mus we should prefer burnt lime since 
these crops would be likely to sour the 
soil and a quick acting lime would be 
needed to sweeten it. In buying lime it 
is safe to consider one form as good as 
the other pound for pound. Thus, if 
ground limestone cost $4 per ton and the 
analysis guaranteed 55 per cent of lime, 
it would cost a little more than one-third 
of a cent per pound. Burnt lime usually 
averages about 75 per cent of lime, which 
means 1,500 pounds to the ton. At the 
same price per pound the burnt lime 
should be worth a little over $5.50. 
THAT GREAT POTATO CROP. 
IF. P. 8., Roodhouse, III .—In reading the 
article on pages 1133-34, “A Crop of Po¬ 
tatoes,” by C. I. Hunt, Livingston Co.. 
N. Y., could you tell me where he procured 
his seed for the four acres, 40 bushels for 
$6.40? 
■I. II. W., (No Address). —C. I. Hunt, on 
page 1134, certainly can grow potatoes 
cheap. It costs me $18 an acre to grow 
simple sowed corn to feed the cows in 
the Fall. it costs me from $35 to $40 
an acre to grow potatoes, depending on 
how troublesome weeds are. Mr. Hunt 
made no charge for the use of land, no 
charge for spraying, not even for fighting 
bugs, no charge for pulling weeds, and he 
certainly dug them cheaply, $5 an acre. It 
costs me an average of $10 an acre. He 
made no reduction for small, scabby, worm- 
eaten or otherwise unmerchantable tubers, 
and he figured a profit that is better than 
a gold mine in Alaska or a membership in 
the meat trust. If I could grow potatoes 
for a trifle over eight cents per bushel, I 
would grow them for cow feed and to 
winter the horses on. 
Ans. —Since my article on potato 
raising appeared in The R. N.-Y. I have 
been asked by different readers for more 
information. J. B. W. says that I made 
no charge for the use of the land. Why 
should I ? The land is here, and if not 
used will grow up in weeds. It is my 
capital, or you might say- my bank. A 
banker would not charge any expense 
against any sum he had to loan, simply 
the cost of loaning or handling the 
money. At the end of the year, when 
inventory is taken, is the time to figure; 
the interest on the value of the whole 
farm should be taken into account. In 
figuring the net income from a cow, for 
instance, it would be proper to figure a 
sum for the depreciation of the animal 
because her life of usefulness is limited. 
Not so with a farm. It will last forever, 
and if properly used, will grow better 
year by year. I know this does not co¬ 
incide with the general opinion on the 
subject, but I believe it is the right con¬ 
clusion. “No charge for spraying, or 
even fighting bugs.” There has not been 
a pound of poison or spraying material 
used on our potatoes for some years, 
/for the good reason that we plant the 
kinds that are practically bucr and blitrht 
proof. Our potato tops are as green as 
ever when the frost comes, and the only 
objection to the kinds is that they are a 
little too late for this section, but as 
long as we can secure such crops of fine 
quality potatoes we are satisfied to let 
well enough alone. “No charge for 
pulling weeds.” Bless you, man, the 
time to pull weeds is when they are 
small, and you can pull them by the mil¬ 
lion with a good weeder, which should 
be started very soon after the planting 
is done. The proper use of the weeder 
and the wings on the cultivator at the 
right time will destroy the weeds so that 
there will be very few left for pulling. 
Not an hour was spent in our field 
either pulling or hoeing, and a man 
could carry off in one arm all the weeds 
that were here at digging time. 
“And he certainly dug them cheaply.” 
It has never cost us more than $5 an acre 
to get them dug, picked up and placed on 
the wagon. Some of our young boys 
have made a business of digging at that 
price and have made over $3 per day 
at it. “He made no reduction for small, 
scabby, wormeaten or otherwise un¬ 
merchantable potatoes.” There is no 
need for so doing. There are no small 
ones, never have been, no wormeaten 
ones, because there are no worms, land 
that is kept busy will not get wormy. 
There is no scab, because if there is any 
show of scab on our seed stock it soon 
gets ducked in a formalin solution to 
free it from all scab germs. “If I 
could grow potatoes for eight cents a 
bushel 1 d grow them for the cows and 
horses.” It seems to me that that would 
be poor economy, because land that will 
grow 190 bushels of potatoes to the 
acre should grow 20 tons of well eared 
corn for the silo. In 190 bushels of po¬ 
tatoes there are 2,013 pounds of dry mat¬ 
ter to feed. In twenty tons of good silage 
there are 10,400 pounds with double the 
amount of protein of that in the pota¬ 
toes. W. P. S. of Illinois asks where I 
found seed at 16 cents per bushel. I 
simply charged up the price at which 
potatoes sold for at planting time. Three 
kinds were planted, Twentieth Century, 
Silver King and Pan American. The 
first two seem blight-proof. While there 
was a sign of blight on the Pan Amer¬ 
ican there was not enough to pay to 
spray. I have no potatoes to sell, no in¬ 
terest in any seed firm. My only in¬ 
terest is in producing the largest crop 
with the least work and expense and the 
maximum net profit. c. i. hTnt. 
T.ivinP'Stnn C'n V V 
Now About Clean Food 
Another Splendid Opportunity to 
Bring' Out F acts 
When the “Weekly” which sued us for libel 
(because we publicly denounced them for an 
editorial attack on our claims) was searching 
for some "weak spot,” they thought best to send 
a N. Y. Atty. to Battle Creek, summoned 25 of 
our workmen and took their sworn statements 
before a Commissioner. 
Did we object? No. On the contrary, we 
helped all we could, for the opportunity was too 
good to be lost. 
Geo. Haines testified he inspected the wheat 
and barley, also floors and every part of the 
factories to know things were kept clean. That 
every 30 minutes a sample of the products was 
taken and inspected to keep the food up to stand¬ 
ard and keep out any impurities, also that it is 
the duty of every man in the factories to see 
that anything not right is immediately reported. 
Has been with the Co. 10 years. 
Edward Young testified had been with Co. 15 
years. Inspector, he and his men examined every 
sack and car of wheat and barley to see they 
were up to standard and rejected many cars. 
IT. E. Burt, Supt., testified has been with Co. 
over 13 years. Bought only the best grain ob¬ 
tainable. That the Co. kept a corps of men who 
do nothing but keep things clean, bright and 
polished. 
Testified that no ingredient went into Grape- 
•Vits and Postum except those printed in the 
advertising. No possibility of any foreign things 
getting into the foods as most of the machinery 
is kept closed. Asked if the factory is open to 
the public, said “yes” and “it took from two to 
three guides constantly to show visitors through 
the works. Said none of the processes were 
carried on behind closed doors. 
At this point attys. for the “Weekly” tried to 
show the water used was from some outside 
source. Testified the water came from Co.’s own 
artesian wells and was pure. 
He testified the workmen were first-class, high- 
grade and inspected by the Co.’s physician to be 
sure they were all in proper physical condition; 
also testified that state reports showed that Co. 
pays better wages than the average and he 
thought higher than any in the state. 
F. B. Martin, Asst. Supt., testified Grape-Nuts 
made of Wheat, Barley, Yeast and Water. Any¬ 
thing else? “No, sir.” Postum made of Wheat, 
Wheat Bran and New Orleans Molasses. State¬ 
ments made on his experience of about 10 years 
with Co. 
Testified bakers are required to wear fresh 
white suits changed every other day. Said had 
never known of any of the products being sent 
out that were below the high standard of in¬ 
spection. Asked if any one connected with the 
Postum Co. had instructed him how to testify. 
Said, “No, sir.” 
Horace Brown testified has been with Co. 9 
years. Worked in Grape-Nuts bake shop. Testi¬ 
fied the whole of the flour is composed of Wheat 
and Barley. Attys. tried to confuse him, but he 
insisted that any casual visitor could see that 
nothing else went into the flour. Said machinery 
and floors always kept clean. 
So these men were examined by the “Weekly” 
lawyers hoping to find at least one who would 
say that some under-grade grain was put in or 
some unclean condition was found somewhere. 
But it was no use. 
Each and every man testified to the purity and 
cleanliness. 
As a sample, take the testimony of Luther W. 
Mayo. 
Testified been with the Company about 10 years. 
Now working in the bakery department mak¬ 
ing Grape-Nuts. Testified that the ovens and 
floors are kept clean and the raw products as 
they go in are kept clean. Also that the wearing 
apparel of the employes has to be changed three 
times a week. 
Q. Do you use Postum or Grape-Nuts your¬ 
self at all? 
A. Yes, I use them at home. 
Q. If from your knowledge of the factory 
which you have gained in your ten years at the 
factory you believed that they were dirty or 
impure in any way, would you use them? 
A. I do not think I would. No. 
Asked if any one on behalf of the Company 
had asked him to testify in any particular manner. 
Stated “No.” 
All these sworn depositions were carefully ex¬ 
cluded from the testimony at the trial, for’ they 
wouldn’t sound well for the “Weekly.” 
Think of the fact that every man swore to 
the purity and cleanliness so that the Atty. for 
the Weekly” was forced to say in open court 
that the food was pure and good. 
What a disappointment for the “Weekly!” 
But the testimony showed: 
All of the grain used in Grape-Nuts. Postum 
and Post Toasties is the highest standard pos¬ 
sible to obtain. 
All parts of the factory are kept scrupulously 
clean. 
None of the workmen had been told how to 
testify. 
Most of them have been from 10 to 15 years 
with the Co. and use the products on their tables 
at home. 
Why do their families use the product, Grape- 
Nuts, Postum and Post Toasties, that they, them¬ 
selves, make? 
There’s a Reason ” 
Postum Cereal Co., Ltd. 
Battle Creek, Mich. 
