1 May, 1900.] QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL, 405 
| For the chemical analysis, the air-dried fine earth is used, and at first the 
hoisture, still retained by the soil, and given off by drying for several hours at 
|412 degrees Fahr., isdetermined. Here, again, we find a considerable difference, 
some of the soils containing still over LU per cent. of moisture (Nos 1, 3, 4, 11 
4014, &c.), and others less than 1 per cent. (Nos. 9 and 35). 
The water contained in soil, besides moisture, is called combined water, 
ind is chemically bound to some of the mineral substances, and only driven off 
ithigh temperatures. The quantity of humus is determined by direct deter- 
Mination of the amount of carbonic acid produced by moist combustion of the 
ganic matters in the soil with the help of a strongly oxidising agent (bichro- 
‘mate of potash and sulphuric acid), and multiplying the result by “471. 
Another important constituent of the soils—the nitrogen—is given in 
Percentage of total nitrogen, directly determined by Kjeldahl’s method. 
__ For the determination of the mmeral matters, a weighed quantity of the soil 
is boiled for two hours with hydrochloric acid of 1+L specific gravity 5 the insoluble 
|hatter, after drying and burning, is weighed as insoluble in HCl; and in the 
‘olution, in aliquot parts, the other important constituents of plant food— 
Phosphoric acid, lime, potash—are determined. 
: Having given a short description of the methods employed in the analysis 
| of soils, we will now study the results of some of the analyses given :— 
Taking, first, the soils of the Hermitage State Farm, near Warwick, which 
are alluvial soils, of partly volcanic origin, all the creeks being surrounded by 
asaltic country, we find them, on the whole, excellent agricultural lands, with 
good physical conditions, and containing an ample amount of plant foods. The 
| Stbsoils Nos. 6 and 8 are rather heavy (low capillarity), and would be improved 
y subsoiling or drainage. The sample of soiland subsoil (Nos. 3 and 4) from 
|2 so-called salty patch owes its sterility to poor physical condition (very low 
| peilarity j and too high an amount of chlorine contained in both soil and 
| Subsoil. 
| The samples of soils and subsoils from the Gindie State Farm show a very 
| Steat variation, according to the locality, where the samples were taken. The 
| 0il No. 9, with the subsoil No. 10, alt rough rather poor in humus, nitrogen, 
| ‘the, and potash, is, on account of its good physical condition, eminently suit- 
able for an orchard or vineyard. The soils Nos. 11 and 13 are good agricultural 
| tnd, high in plant foods, except nitrogen. The physical condition is not too 
| £00d, the lands are inclined to be slushy when wet, and would be improved by 
eep cultivation, sub-drainage, and green manuring. 
The soils from the Westbrook State Farm are of distinctly volcanic origin, 
ind continually improved by the decomposition of the volcanic tufa and basaltic 
| Stones found in the subsoil, and of which a separate absolute analysis is given. 
| Lo show how only parts of the mineral matters are soluble in hydrochloric acid, 
| the finely powdered tufa and basalt were also treated exactly like soils, and the 
\tesult recorded in the second column. The analyses of soil and subsoil of 
Samples Nos. 17 and 18 indicate an exceptionally good agricultural land. 
_ The samples of soil from Biggenden State Farm show again a very great 
difference. The soil of the cultivation paddock (sample No. 21) 1s good 
| ®ericultural land, very rich in humus, fair in nitrogen and phosphoric acid, poor 
| potash, and containing hardly sufficient lime for the high percentage of 
| Magnesia. The soil of the grazing paddock (sample No. 28) is poor in every- 
ing except potash. 
_ The soils and subsoils from Redland Bay vepresent a large portion of our 
| districts with red volcanic soils. The soils are exceedingly deep and extremely 
| Porous. They are rather poor in phosphoric acid andlime. The humus, principally 
Nthe sample of virgin scrub soil, is very high, being the highest of all the 
‘alyses given. The difference between soil and subsoil is, as might be 
| ®xpected, very slight, as no distinct line ot demarcation between soil and 
| %ubsoil can be detected. In such cases, it is quite sufficient to take the sample 
}°f soil alone fora depth of about 12 inches to be analysed. 
pl 
