604 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER, 
December  23,  1897. 
house,  and  the  other  in  a  warm  one,  both  fully  exposed  to  the  light  in 
an  airy  position.  Summer  and  Winter  Savory,  the  former  an  annual, 
are  of  easy  culture,  and  call  for  no  special  remark  beyond  ll.A't  they, 
particularly  the  latter,  must  be  regarded  as  essentials. — Herbalist. 
(To  be  concluded.) 
CHEMISTRY  IN  THE  GARDEN. 
{Continued  from  page  522.) 
We  saw  by  Bousingault’s  experiments  that  Sunflowers  could  be 
grown  successfully  in  pure  sand  in  Avhich  a  small  quantity  of  plants’ 
ashes  were  mixed,  the  same  being  watered  with  weak  solutions  of 
nitrate  of  potash.  Seeing  that  these  substances  contain  all  the 
elements  of  plant  food,  it  would  be  interesting  to  inquire  of  what 
they  are  composed,  for  this  ought  to  teach  as  what  ingredients  plants 
take  from  the  soil  as  food.  Bousingault  obtained  the  plants’  ashes  he 
used  in  his  experiments  by  burning  hay.  We  have  before  us  the 
composition  of  the  ashes  of  hay ;  but  before  giving  them  to  our 
readers  we  wish  to  draw  their  attention  to  the  following  facts.  The 
plants  experimented  with  grew  as  well  in  the  sand,  plants’  ashes,  and 
nitrate  of  potash  as  they  would  have  done  had  they  been  growing  in 
ordinary  fertile  soil.  This  being  so,  the  latter  ought  to  contain  the 
same  ingredients  as  the  former.  We  apply  farmyard  manure  to  soils 
to  maintain  or  increase  their  fertility,  or,  in  other  words,  to  supply 
those  substances  which  are  removed  by  growing  crops.  If  the  plants’ 
ashes  and  nitrate  of  potash  contain  all  the  constituents  which  are 
needed  for  the  growth  and  development  of  plants  we  shall  expect  to 
find  the  same  ingredients  in  a  fertile  soil,  and  also  in  farmyard 
manure.  If  we  do  this  we  ought  to  be  satisfied  as  to  the  nature  of 
the  food  of  crops. 
We  will  now  give  the  chemical  analysis  of  nitrate  of  potash,  plants’ 
ashes,  a  fertile  soil,  and  farmyard  manure. 
100  LBS.  OF  EACH  SUBSTANCE  TAKEN. 
Nitrate 
Plants’ 
Fertile 
Farmyard 
Constituents. 
of  potash. 
ashes. 
soil. 
manure. 
Nitrogen  . 
134  lbs. 
none 
4  ozs. 
8  ozs. 
Potash  . 
45  lbs. 
31^  lbs. 
6  ozs. 
10  ozs. 
Soda...  . 
— 
3  lbs. 
4J  ozs. 
1  oz. 
Lime  . 
— 
10|  lbs. 
4j  lbs. 
12  ozs. 
Magnesia  . 
— 
7  lbs. 
2|  ozs. 
2  ozs. 
Phosphoric  acid 
— 
11  lbs. 
2  ozs. 
5  ozs. 
Sulphuric  acid 
— 
3  lbs. 
3  ozs. 
1  oz. 
Chlorine  . 
— 
7  lbs. 
2  ozs. 
1  oz. 
Silica . 
— 
27  lbs. 
68  lbs. 
4  ozs. 
Iron . 
— 
traces. 
5  lbs. 
traces. 
Oxygen  . 
4U  lbs. 
— 
— 
— 
Carbonaceous  matter 
— 
— 
6  lbs. 
17i  lbs. 
Silicates  of  alumina 
— 
15  lbs. 
W  ater  . 
— 
— 
— 
80  lbs. 
100  lbs. 
100  lbs. 
100  lbs. 
100  lbs. 
Looking  carefully  at  the  above  analyses  we  note  maiiy  things  of 
importance.  First  of  all  we  find  that  nitrate  of  potash  contains  only 
nitrogen,  potash,  and  oxygen.  When  the  plants  growing  in  sand 
were  watered  with  a  solution  of  this  substance,  it  only  supplied  them 
with  the  three  ingredients  just  named.  The  reason  they  failed  to 
grow,  therefore,  was  because  they  had  not  all  the  food  they  required 
.applied  to  them.  The  analysis  of  plants’  ashes  shows  that  they 
contain  many  of  the  elements  of  plant  food,  but  no  nitrogen.  We 
know  from  what  has  already  been  said  that  the  plants  in  the  sand  and 
plants’  ashes  refused  to  grow  only  when  watered  with  nitrate  of  potash. 
Here,  then,  we  have  the  whole  case  clearly  explained  to  us,  and 
are  now  able  to  see  the  names  of  all  the  substances  needed  by  crops 
as  food. 
Further  consideration  of  the  above  tables  shows  us  that  the  very 
same  substances  are  present  in  the  fertile  soil  as  supplied  by  nitrate  of 
potash  and  plants’  ashes ;  but  you  will  also  note  the  small  amount  of 
plant  food  in  the  former  case  as  compared  with  the  latter.  In  100  lbs. 
of  fertile  soil  we  find  68  lbs.  of  silica  and  15  lbs.  of  silicates  of  alumina. 
These  substances  are  present  to  dilute,  as  it  were,  the  plant  food  present 
in  the  soil.  We  know  how  useless  it  would  be  to  try  to  grow  plants 
in  wood  ashes  or  nitrate  of  potash.  Bousingault  knew  the  same  thing, 
and  therefore  diluted  his  plant  food  with  sand,  thereby  making  it  in  all 
respects  like  a  fertile  soil,  the  only  difference  being  he  had  control  (?) 
of  the  plant  food.  Farmyard  manure  is  very  similar  in  composition 
in  many  respects  to  a  fertile  soil,  but  here  again  we  find  the  food 
constituents  diluted  with  water  and  carbonaceous  matter.  The  latter, 
however,  by  its  decay  gives  off  many  acids,  which  renders  the  medium 
per  se  undesirable  for  plants’  roots;  nevertheless,  we  all  know,  as 
practical  gardeners,  that  good  farmyard  manure  is  the  best,  cheapest, 
and  safest  of  all  the  substances  we  can  apply  to  soils  to  make  them 
fertile.— W.  Dyke. 
(To  be  continued.) 
National  Chrysanthemum  Society. 
On  Monday  evening  last  the  General  Committee  of  this  Society 
held  a  meeting  at  Anderton’s  Hotel,  Fleet  Street,  Mr.  T.  W.  Sanders 
occupying  the  chair.  After  the  usual  preliminaries  had  been  disposed 
of  it  was  resolved  that  the  proposed  meetings  of  the  Floral  Committee 
for  next  season,  which  had  been  fixed  for  November  28th  and  December 
12th,  should  not  be  held. 
Letters  were  read  from  Mr.  G.  S.  Addison  and  Mr.  J.  W.  Moorman 
resigning  their  positions  on  the  Committees  of  which  they  were  members  ; 
the  former,  on  account  of  pressure  of  local  municipal  work,  was  accepted, 
but  the  latter  was  requested  to  reconsider  the  matter. 
The  report  of  the  Schedule  Sub-Committee  was  then  presented,  a  class 
being  proposed  for  twelve  vases  of  specimen  blooms  Japanese,  distinct,  with 
five  blooms  each,  each  bloom  standing  1  foot  above  the  top  of  the  vase. 
The  prizes  proposed  are  £20,  £15,  £10,  and  £5.  There  was  much  dis¬ 
cussion  on  this  innovation  both  pro  and  con,  the  principal  speakers  being 
^Messrs.  E.  Beckett,  Gleeson,  Waterer,  Bevan,  Mease,  Lyne  and  Lees.  It 
was  also  announced  that  the  Royal  Aquarium  Co.,  in  commemoration 
of  next  year’s  show  being  the  twenty-first  held  by  the  N.C.S.  at  the 
Aquarium,  had  decided  to  offer  a  special  sum  of  £30  for  prizes  in  the 
class  for  twenty-four  Japs,  distinct  — viz.,  £8  and  a  gold  medal  for  the 
first,  £6  for  the  second,  £5  third,  £4  fourth,  and  £2  fifth. 
The  election  ol  judges  then  followed.  For  the  September  show  they 
are  Messrs.  W.  Higgs  and  W.  Wells  ;  October,  Messrs.  Langdon  and 
Cutbush  ;  November  show — plants,  Messrs.  Prickett  and  Reeve  ;  incurved 
blooms,  Messrs.  Geo.  Gordon  and  C.  Orchard  ;  Japanese,  Messrs. 
E.  Beckett,  E.  Molyneux,  T.  Bevan,  and  C.  Gibson  ;  table  decorations, 
Mr.  J.  Hudson  and  Miss  Pemberton  ;  fruit,  Messrs.  Owen  Thomas  and 
J.  Roberts  ;  vegetables,  Messrs.  J.  Willard  and  W.  Fife.  Those  appointed 
for  the  December  show  were  Messrs.  R.  Kenyon  and  P.  Waterer.  New 
members  were  elected,  and  the  Dundee  Chrysanthemum  Society  admitted 
into  affiliation.  The  Secretary  stated  that  since  the  1st  January  the 
following  additions  to  the  list  of  membership  had  been  made  Fourteen 
Fellows,  114  ordinary  members,  and  eleven  societies.  The  meeting  was  a 
busy  one,  and  broke  up  somewhat  later  than  usual. 
The  Bondage  of  the  N.C.S. 
The  Secretary  of  the  N.C.S.  warmly  accuses  me  (page  580)  of 
“  rashly  rushing  into  print.”  I  am  certainly  no  more  precipitate  in  this 
instance  than  himself,  for  our  first  letters  on  the  subject  appeared 
simultaneously  in  your  issue  for  December  9th,  and  in  the  last  issue 
a  second  letter  from  him  appears,  so  that  at  the  present  time  he  has 
written  two  letters  to  my  one. 
(Quotations  from  the  Society's  audited  balance  sheet  (which  is  the 
property  of  every  subscriber)  should  require  no  “  verifying,”  and  I 
challenge  Mr.  Dean  to  disprove  by  actual  printed  facts  that  I  have  been 
guilty  of  any  “imperfect”  or  “  erroneous ”  statement.  The  quotations  I 
gave  are  the  exact  amounts  appearing  in  the  printed  balance  sheet  for 
the  past  year,  and  Mr.  Dean’s  figures  are  nowhere  to  be  found  in  that 
balance  sheet. 
jMr.  Dean  admits  that  the  £50  he  places  in  his  letter  to  the  credit  of 
the  N.C.S.  for  the  September  show  “  is  not  credited  to  the  Society’s 
funds.”  That  being  so,  what  right  has  Mr.  Dean  to  infer  that  my 
statement  is  wrong,  and  to  himself  add  as  an  asset  an  amount  which  is  not 
given  to  or  allowed  to  benefit  the  N.C.S.  ?  The  N.C.S.  has  nothing  to  do 
with  an  arrangement  made  for  the  benefit  of  any  other  organisation 
by  its  directorate  as  between  themselves  and  an  acrobat,  or  the 
owner  of  a  performing  donkey.  My  bump  of  “  observation  ”  may 
indeed  be  but  “  superficial.”  Nevertheless  I  can  assure  Mr.  Dean  that  I 
am  not  without  some  knowledge  and  trained  experience  of  the  many 
little  details  and  necessary  incidental  expenses  attending  the  holding  of 
an  exhibition  of  some  magnitude. 
But  in  whatever  light  my  observations  may  appear  to  the  Secretary,  I 
have  still  the  boldness  to  question  the  unreliableness  of  the  amount  given 
by  him  in  his  “  low  estimate  ”  as  indicating  the  indirect  advantages 
rendered  by  the  Royal  Aquarium  towards  the  N.C.S.  Anyone  can  add  a 
rough  system  of  figures  together  so  as  to  make  a  balance  appear  on  either 
side  as  may  be  desired. 
Has  Mr.  Dean  no  precise  data  to  work  upon  in  order  to  determine  the 
amount  which  he  puts  as  the  “  cost  of  the  four  exhibitions  to  the  Royal 
Aquarium  Society  ?  ”  His  letter  suggests  that  he  has  not,  or  surely  we 
should  have  had  the  facts.  An  argument  founded  on  an  “estimate,”  and 
this  estimate,  for  all  he  has  shown,  based  on  an  inference,  cannot  rest  on 
a  very  firm  foundation,  and  yet  he  says  that  “  he  has  placed  the  cost  of 
each  show  at  considerably  less  than  that  which  would  have  to  be  borne 
by  the  N.C.S.,  did  they  have  to  defray  the  whole  amount.”  To  say  that 
it  costs  the  Aquarium  authorities  £75  for  management  expenses  for  each 
September  exhibition,  beyond  what  is  charged  to  and  paid  by  the  N.C.S. 
to  award  only  £20  7s.  6d.  in  prizes  for  Chrysanthemums,  is  beyond  my 
conmrehension. 
The  fact  is,  the  Committee  know  little  or  nothing  of  the  workings  of 
