434: QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. [1 Junz, 1902. 
Society, who applied two samples of a ground phosphate to aturnip crop. One 
of the samples, ground to the standard degree of fineness, produced a crop of 18 
tons per acre, while another sample, of which about 50 per cent. only had been 
ground to the same fineness of division, gave a crop of only 15 tons. The value 
of the three extra tons in the one case would amount to more than the whole 
cost of the manure. In the case of bone meal there was no fixed standard of 
grinding, but, as it could not be reduced to such a fine state of division, its 
condition should be judged sufficiently well by sight and sample. lt was 
important that the finest ground sample should be preferred to that which was 
coarsely ground and in large pieces. It was not enough, however, that the 
manure should be purchased with a guaranteed analysis. It was necessary to 
see that the analysis was correctly expressed, but unfortunately this was by no 
means always the case, and he fancied it was also the case that they were not 
always quite clearly understood. He imagined that some merchants expressed 
the analysis in a misleading fashion, because they were people capable of bein 
misled, and they would not express analysis in these forms unless they found it 
juseful to do so. It was therefore very necessary that farmers should them- 
selves be able to understand what the analysis ought to express, and this was 
by no means difficult to do. If they would look at the analysis which he had ~ 
written on the blackboard it might seem at first sight as if it were somewhat 
unintelligible, but after all there were only three or four words on it which 
were easily remembered, and which would enable any farmer to determine for 
himself what was the value of any manure ‘The first of these was ammonia, 
and in all analysis the percentage of ammonia was clearly stated. The next 
was soluble or dissolved phosphate, or tricalcic phosphate rendered soluble, and 
this is also always expressed clearly enough. Insoluble or undissolved 
phosphates were also usually expressed accurately, but these had no value in 
superphosphates or in most compound manures, but were only to be valued in 
bone manure or that which represents bone material in basic slag. But some- 
times the phosphates were described in misleading fashion. For example, he 
saw in one catalogue of manures a turnip manure which was said to contain 26 
per cent. total phosphates. This was misleading. An analysis ought to 
distinguish between a soluble and an insoluble phosphate, and an 
insoluble phosphate in such a case had probably no value. A guarantee in 
every case ought to distinguish and to guarantee the percentage soluble. 
In basic slag the guarantee was one of phosphoric acid, or phosphoric 
acid calculated into its equivalent of insoluble or tricalcic phosphate. In 
regard to the remaining important ingredient in manures—namely, potash— 
this was very often expressed in misleading terms in manure catalogues. 
For example some manure catalogues guaranteed “potash equal to 5 
to 6 per cent sulphate of potash.’ Now, potash formed only about 
54 per cent. of sulphate of potash, and the above statement, there- 
fore, guaranteed only a little over 2} per cent. of potash. Why, therefore, 
was that not stated? It was misleading, and trading on ignorance, to express 
potash in the catalogued figures of sulphate of potash. Other manure 
catalogues used the term “ potash salts.” Now, this might mean any percentage 
of potash, but no doubt, as a rule, it meant very little, and a guarantee of 
potash salts should never be accepted. Other analysts in catalogues used the 
term ‘alkaline salts.” This was a still worse expression, for alkaline of salt 
might contain no potash at all. Every buyer should insist in the case of manure 
containing potash in having a guarantee of the exact percentage of pure potash, 
and should accept no other guarantee. Manure firms of a high reputation, as 
most of them deservedly are, should cease from using these other expressions 
which were only fitted to mislead farmers. His next suggestion was that 
manures should be bought at market prices. It might seem superfluous and 
unnecessary to give such advice. He supposed there was no farmer in the 
audience ale would not be ashamed to go into the auction mart and pay 5s. 
a head for sheep, or £2 per head for cattle, more than the ordinary market 
price, and it might be assumed that the same judgment and discretion would be 
