186 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
whenever a substance which has little or no fertilizing 
power, is in this way manufactured into good manure, 
it is done at the expense of some powerful fertilizer 
which is distributed by the mixture, and consequently, 
loses just as much of its efficacy as the other gains. 
Thus, although this process serves to dilute and extend 
manures which are too powerful or too expensive, it 
absolutely supplies none.” 
The author goes on still further to explain, that the 
principal advantages of composts, are the dilution of 
manures which are too strong when used by themselves. 
Thus, among other substances, he mentions 11 caustic 
lime,” the object in using which, he thinks can be much 
better attained by mixing and diffusing it through some 
other substance, “ such as saw-dust, sand, barn-ma¬ 
nure ,” &e. 
Now the inference from the above remarks is, that 
ordinary composts are unprofitable—that no effect is 
produced that would not take place if the substances 
were applied separately, and that, consequently, the la¬ 
bor of forming the compound is lost. 
It strikes me that Dr. R.’s reasoning is not entirely 
sound, and that his conclusions are not wholly reconci¬ 
lable with facts. It is not strictly true that the same 
effect is always produced by the use of substances ap¬ 
plied separately, that would follow from their combina¬ 
tion. For instance, peat, in its natural state, frequent¬ 
ly contains an acid which is prejudicial to vegetation, 
a^d its fertilizing properties are locked up, as it were, 
until they are liberated by the action of some substance 
which causes a decomposition. Hence it has been 
found highly useful to mix with peat, alkalies of some 
kind, by which the acid is destroyed, and the peat 
brought into a soluble condition. Potash and ashes are 
used for this purpose; the ammonia of animal manure, 
urine, and all animal matters, produce a similar effect. 
Thus, Doctor Dana, in his Muck Manual , states that— 
11 the power of alkaline action is alone wanting, to 
make peat good cow dung,” and that—“ by the addi¬ 
tion of alkali to peat, it is put into the same state 
which ammonia gives to dung.” 
Here, then, is one example of the advantage of com¬ 
bining or mixing substances to be used as manure. But 
it may be asked—•“ Why will not the same effect be 
produced, if the peat and the alkalies are both spread, 
separately, on the same land ?” For the obvious rea¬ 
son that they are not brought sufficiently, and for a pro¬ 
per length of time, into contact. The alkalies being 
spread over a larger surface, and exposed to the air and 
rains, are soon dissolved and carried into the soil below 
the peat. 
But there are other advantages in mixing different 
substances in a manure-heap. The farmer should en¬ 
deavor to save all the excrements, of his animals, both 
solid and fluid, as well as all other substances which 
are capable of enriching his land. The readiest way 
of saving urine, is to retain it by means of some ab¬ 
sorbent-such as charcoal-dust, peat, loam, straw or 
other vegetable rubbish. 
Again, if it were true that substances ultimately pro¬ 
duced the same effect when applied to the soil by them¬ 
selves, as when combined, there is still, in many cases, 
a convenience in composting. It is inconvenient to 
use corn-stalks, and other litter in their crude state. If 
applied to the surface, they do not readily rot, and they 
interfere with cultivation by obstructing the operation 
of the implements used. If buried beneath the surface, 
—which is not always readily effected,—they some¬ 
times cause the soil to be dry and huffy. There is no 
way that these matters can be used to so good advan¬ 
tage as by mixing them with animal manure, and satu¬ 
rating them with urine. By this means, the ammonia 
soon brings on a decomposition, by which the fibrous 
tructure is cut down and they are brought into a com¬ 
JUNE, 
minuted state, fit to be used as circumstances require. 
But we may cite other authority in favor of composts. 
J. Prideaux, an agricultural chemist of considerable 
distinction, advises to mix in the manure heap—“peat, 
sods, turf-parings, ditch and pond scourings, way soil, 
humus soil in whatever form, and ashes of all kinds. 
All liquids in which vegetable or animal matters have 
been soaked or boiled; and all that contain fertilizing 
materials, as soap suds, dish-washings, pot-liquor, &c. 
“ We must remember,” he adds, “ that vegetable mat 
ters work sour, and that animal substances generate 
ammonia, which neutralizes the acid, and is fixed by it, 
so that in due proportion they correct each other. 
Urine gives most ammonia.” 
One word, before closing, in regard to mixing “eaus 
tic lime ” with “ barn manure,” recommended by Dr. 
Rodgers, as one of the means of “ diluting ” the lime. 
This is a kind of compost that I am not in favor of. I 
had supposed, if any thing has been established by che¬ 
mical investigation, that caustic lime should not be 
mixed with animal manures. Thus Prof. Johnston says, 
guano should not be mixed with quick-lime—“ because 
the quick lime sets free the ammonia contained in the 
guano, and causes it to escape into the air.” He ob¬ 
serves, also, that “ quick lime will, in the same way, 
drive off the ammonia contained in liquid manure, and 
in horse or farm-yard dung.” Farmers who have 
bought poudrette that has been compounded with fresh 
lime, have often complained of itsdnefficacy. 
T. Sedgwick, a writer in the English Agricultural 
Gazette, says—“ The employment of lime with dung, 
is a most baneful practice, as it renders the ammonia 
caustic and volatile, to the greatest degree, and causes 
the loss of the most energetic portion of the dung 
When lands require lime, it should be applied separately, 
and avoid as much as possible, its contact with the dung.” 
The effect of mixing lime with animal manure, may 
be explained as follows:—Lime-stone contains nearly 
half its weight of carbonic acid. In the process of 
burning, the carbonic acid is driven off; but the lime 
has a constant tendency to return to its original condition 
by the re-absorption of the property it had lost. Ani¬ 
mal manure contains ammonia, combined with carbonic 
acid. When fresh lime is added, it attracts the carbon¬ 
ic acid, which, uniting with the lime, sets the ammonia 
free, and it escapes. A. B. 
Cost of producing Wool. 
Eds. Cultivator —I commenced with the first num 
ber of The Cultivator, in 1834, and have been its con¬ 
stant reader ever since, and think I have been amply 
compensated for the time and expense devoted to it. I 
have been a farmer for over twenty years, and I yet feel 
a much greater need of being instructed myself, than of an 
ability to be an instructor of others in the great and 
important business of agriculture, to which I have de¬ 
voted so many, and purpose to devote all the remaining 
years of my life. Yet I shall venture to give an opin 
ion upon the subject of the value of the wool-growing 
business in this country, and in doing so, shall venture 
to differ from Mr. Randall and others, who may perhaps 
have had more experience in the business than myself. 
Mr. Randall estimates the nett profit of wool-grow¬ 
ing at 27 per cent. Others have placed it as high as 
one hundred and upwards. Mr. Pettibone, in some ve¬ 
ry sensible remarks published in your April No., puts 
the profits at six per cent., and yet, if I can understand 
his figures,he estimates that he had succeeded in clearing 
a much greater profit than that stated by Mr. Randall. 
In the face of all these authorities, I shall venture to 
say, that for some years past, wool-growing has been 
a losing business to the farmers. We have in this 
country, the facilities for supplying the world with 
wool, and yet we do not supply a quantity sufficient for 
