Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

THE SOUTHERN WORLD, FEBRUARY 1,1882, 3 ENNILAOE EXPERIMENT AT THE IN* TERNATIONAL COTTON EXPOSI TION, ATLANTA, OA. IU Probable Inflaenee on Stoefc-feedinf In the South. The farmers of the cotton States owe a debt of gratitude to the management of the International Cotton Exposition for the public spirit which they displayed in con ducting, for the information of the thous ands of farmers who visited the Exposition, a practical experiment in the preservation of green food in silos. Two silos were con structed under the immediate direction of Dr. J. M. Hailey, of Billerica Mass, tliegr$at apostle of ensilage in this country. One was intended to represent a model silo, liuving walls of brick, and botli sides and walls hav ing a good coating of Howard’s hydraulic cement. The other wos constructed on the cheapest possible plan, liuving the walls of clay only cemented. Each silo had a capacity of twenty-five tons, but only about twenty tons were put into each. Quite a variety of forage was used in these silos, including fodder-<orn, sorghum, pea- vines and sweet potato vines, all of which ■were found in an excellent state of preserva tion when one of the silos was opened dur ing the cattle show early in November. Notwithstanding the fact that fully one week was occupied in filling this silo, and tiic further fact that some of the forage lay in bulk until considerable heat had been generated before it was cut, the preservation was entirely satisfactory, and the ensilage was eaten with avidity by cattle, horses and mules. Notwithstanding the fact that the silo was opened during the stock show, there was but one exhibitor who would venture to feed the ensilage to ids stock, and he only ven tured to give it to one animal that was not very highly prized. After the stock exhibit the ensilage stood unused, and was making a false impression upon the public mind, when, despairing of a proper illus tration of the utility of the experiment on the part of the management, and seeing no little skepticism manifested as to the fitness of the ensilage for feeding cattle, the writer ottered to send his own cattle to be fed on the ensilage to prove its value and the suc cess of the experiment. These cattle were weighed when put into the stalls, where they remained six weeks, during which time they had nothing but ensilage, except during the first few days, when a little corn meal was used to introduce them gradually to their novel diet. The cattle ate the ensilage at once and grew more fond of it daily. A cow that was tine beef when the trial began, gained, during the time, (six weeks) thirty pounds, and a heifer five pounds. The heifer was butchered a few days after she wastajeen off of the ensilage, and afforded os delicious beef as was ever eaten. The unusual mild ness of the winter was very favorable to the feeding of ensilage, which is so full of the diluted juices of the plants that the cattle fed upon it rarely drank water although a small quantity of salt was sprinkled over each feed. After it was deraonstrted that the “stuff” would not “kill cattle,” there would have been no difficulty In filling all the stalls. We regret that the management did not carry out the original design of conducting accurate experiments by feeding the ensil age alone and in combination with other feed stuff. Enough has been established, however, to demonstrate the complete suc cess of the plan of preserving green forage in silos for winter feeding. The forage was all cut to one-fourth inch lengths by a Telegraph cutter, driven by a Bookwulter engine—all furnished gratuit ously for use on the occasion by Messrs. Mark W. Johnson & Co., of Atlanta. The work was beautifully done and the finely cut forage, os it fell into the silo, seemed only to need vinegar, pepper, and salt, to make a savory salad. If our stock-breeders will consult their best interests, they will plant a fewncres of highly enriched land in forage corn and peas and store up ensilage in abundant supply for their stock. It is not necessary for the successful pres ervation of the forage that the silos be un derground. Mr. Garrett, of North Caroli na, who has been raising ensilage for two years, told us that he had abandoned the underground pits and now uses a close room in his barn above ground on account of the greater convenience of feeding. There is neither mystery or difficulty con nected with the storage of ensilage—the principle is an old and very simple one and its practical application most easy and nat ural, It will pay a family to put up ensilage if only one cow is kept. Analysis or Fertilisers.—Circular No. 91. The system of inspection and analysis of fertilizers, inaugurated and supervised by the Department of Agriculture of Georgia, under the laws of this State, hus been pro ductive of great bcnef.ts to both manufac turers and consumers of fertilizers—not alone in Georgia, but in otherStates. Under the operation of this system the quality of the goods mode and sold to the farmers has been brought to a high and uniform standard of excellence,—ns shown, not only by the chemical anuiysis, but by actual soil tests,— that could hardly have been attained with out some such system. Since the establish ment of the Department of Agriculture, the Commissioners have been exceptionally fortunate in securing the services of chemists of unquestioned ability and established reputation, and whose accuracy has not been successfully impeached. So high is the estimate of the vuluc of these official analy ses, by dealers in fertilizers and farmers in Alabama and Mississippi, who have come to a knowledge of their publication, that they now rely most implicitly on the information thus obtained, und the Commissioner is constantly receiving applications for circu lars containing "analyses of fertilizers.” Wlmt a tribute in prnise of the Georgia Leg islature for devising such a system ! Our object, however, is to call attention to Circular Number 24, recently issued from the Department, containing “Analyses and Commercial Valucsof Fertilizers, Inspected, Analyzed and Admitted to sale to January 4th, 1882.” This is the first circular of the season, and contains the analyses of upwards of eighty brands of fertilizers. It will be observed that the Commissioner has ad vanced the valuation of ammonia from 18 to 25 cents per pound, and reduced that of potash from 8 to G cents per pound. The effect of this change has been to increase the “relative commercial value” of ammoniated fertilizers of any given standard, to the amount of $1.40 for each unit or one per cent, of ammonia, or an average increase in each brand of ammoniated goods of about four dollar* per ton. Unless this change of valuation be noted, farmers are liable to erroneously conclude that the fertilizers in spected and analyzed so far are of much bet ter quality than heretofore. Let us see how this is as a matter of fact. In the table be low are given the average analyses of all the brands inspected during the season of 1880-1, and of those in Circular 24—classified as shown: AMMONIATED SUPERPHOSPHATES. SEASON vailable Phos. Acid. 1 d 4'S 6 a l ommer- cial Value. < < Ps o 1880-1 10 30 2 53 1 45 $40 14 1881-2 10 35 2 80 1 48 41 05 ACID PHOSPHATES OR DISSOLVED BONES. SEASON Available Phos. Acid. d 4'S a a < Potash. Commer cial Value. 1880-1 1881-2 12 00 12 10 1 30 0 04 $33 00 31 53 In the above table, for convenience of comparison, the commercial values for the season of 1880-1, as well as those of the pres ent season, are calculated upon the basis of the elementary valuations of the latter. We thus see that the ammoniated superphos phates of the present seasou have a commer cial value of only $1.51 greater than the same class of last season. This is evidently owing to the increase of .05 per cent, of available phosphoric acid, .27 per cent, of ammonia, and .03 per cent, of potosb. But the average value of this class for last season, at the elementary prices then ruling, was only $30.70—as appears from Circulur No. 18 of that season—a difference (apparent only) in favor of the present season of $4.85. The cautious farmer will make a note of this in buying his fertilizers for the coming crop. On the contrary, the analyses of acid phosphates or dissolved bones, shows a deci ded falling off in quality, the average value of those analyzed being only $31.53 against $33.00 for last season—calculating as before —the available acid being .44 per cent, and the potash .30 pc* cent, less than lost season. We call the attention of farmers to these points that they may be prepared to answer any arguments in favor of any considerable increase in the prices demanded for ferti lizers. The price of cotton next season will proba bly be sufficient to justify dealers in selling at but a small advance on last year’s prices. A PatenS Fertiliser Which Anybody May Use. In December lost the United States Circuit Court, Baltimore, in the cose of Boykin and Carmen against K. J. Baker <& Co., which was argued before the court several weeks ago, Judge Morris tiled his opinion in favor of the defendants. The action was for al leged infringement of a patent for the manufacture of fertilizers held by the com plainants, from the manufacture and sale of which they would have derived large profits, had not the defendants and others infringed upon tlieir patent. The court held that the only difference between the formula patented by complainants from the old Liebig formula was the substitution of dissolved bone and ground plaster for ground bone and calcined pluster, ami that the patent was invulid for want of novelty or" any patentable discovery. A large interest was involved in the result of this suit. The patent in question is No. 200,077, dated July 10, 1878, and it describes the making of the fertilizer us follows: Tliis invention relates to a combination of chemicals to be used in connection with dry peat or muck and unleached ashes, or with any refuse matter having fertilizing properties, to form a fertilizing compound; and it consists in combining dissolved bone, ground plaster, nitrate of soda, sulphute of soda, and sulphate of ammonia, in propor tions substantially ns follows: Dissolved bone, three bushels; ground plaster, three bushels; nitrate of soda, forty pounds, sulphate of soda, forty pounds; and sulphate of ammonia, thirty-three pounds. This mixture is incorporated with, suy, twenty bushels of dry |>eat or muck, and three bushels of unleaehed ashes. The manner of preparing a fertilizing comi>ound from the above ingredients is as follows: The peat or muck and ushes, if such matter is used as the base of the mix ture, are first thoroughly mixed with the dissolved bone, ami the nitrutc of soda, sulphate of soda, and sulphate of ammonia, after being dissolved in water, added thereto. The ingredients are next incor porated witli the ground plaster, after which tile compound is allowed to stand for, suy, thirty or forty days, when it becomes ready for use. Cotton Heed OH va. Lord. From tlic New Orleans Picayune. It is reported that a revolution will soon be effected in the consumption of lard by pure refined cotton seed oil taking its place. This article is now selling in large lots for export at about 40 cents per gallon, and is being rapidly taken up for consumption in the Southern States and in Europe, and we aro informed by good authority that over 3,000 tierces have been taken from Tennes see and Arkansas oil refineries by the trade in provisions, to be used as a substitute for lard in the interior and in the vicinity of the refineries. It is also reported that large quantities have been taken here by the local and interior trade, hence it is not improba ble that if the movements in this product have assumed the proportions reported, its consumption instead of lard may reach con siderable magnitude by next scuson. There are two kinds of cotton seed oil- crude and refined. The oil is used in the manufacture of soap, by painters und for lubricating purposes. Its great use, how ever, heretofore as a substitute or adulterant for olive oil, whose place it is rapidly sup plying, and recently os described above, it is being used in place of lard. It is nearly impossible to detect good cotton seed oil from the best brands of olive by taste, smell or any other process. This the olive grow ers of Italy have been unwillingly compelled to acknowledge. The usual adulteration of the olive oil is by mixing 25 per cent, of it with 75 per cent, of cotton seed oil, a fine table oil being the result. Often the cotton seed oil receives only a very small amount of some other oil to give it “a ttavor.” How much of the product of the cotton seed passes into olive oil and is eaten with relish and delight by the epicures it is impossible to say, but that the greatest portion is so eaten is shown by the countries to which New Orleans exports this product. Of 0,000,000 gallons, shipped during 1870-80, 88 per cent, was ex|iorted on orders from Europe to tho Mediterranean and French ports, and one-half of this to Italy. This is more than the entire olive oil production of France and one-fifth of that of Italy itself. As the United States im ports only one-tenth this amount of ollJe(?) oil, it is evident that not only the people of this country, but the experienced epicures of Europe as well, make their salads with tho products of the cotton seed. Some oil, also, goes West, where it figures as olive oil, without the intervention of a voyage across tho Atlantic, but at least two-thirds of the entire product of the country (15,000,000 gallons) is exported to Europe. It is thought that in time the prejudice now existing against cotton seed oil will be overcome, and our people, like those of Europe, take to cooking their food in oil, as the Hebrews do, instead of using lard. The Folljr of Fnrmlnff too Much Land. Ht. Louis Journal of Agriculture, Many sermons have been preached to farmers upon this fruitful topic. Books have been written to show the good sense of having “smull farms well tilled.” One man entitled his book “Ten Acres Enough, ” and still another, we believe, “Five Acres Too Much.” But if one will travel through many of the funning regions of the West he cannot fail to see that most farmers are trying to till too much land. Many corn fields arc thickly matted with weeds and foxtail grass, while that “nuisance of nui sances,” the cockleburr, is literally “taking” whole fields. Where such a state of things exist it is too true that the owner is “scut tling it" over too much land! But we in tend no sermonizing over this subject at this time, but merely to give the experi ence of one of the solid farmers of Iowu in in keeping “Five Cows on Five Acres.” The writer, Mr. S. G. Davenmore, a most | intelligent gentleman, of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, relates his experience in the last Iowa Homestead. I have live acres, about two and three- fourths in pasture, mostly blue grass. I liavea strip fourteen rods long and four rods wide, that consist of timothy and clo ver, which I cut twice, and sometimes three times a season. As soon as it will do to cut I feed it regularly to the cows twice eacli day, and it lusts until tho corn is ready to use. There is u strip fourteen rods long and ten rods wide, which I plant with sweet corn for fodder. I made a dropper that I attach to u two-horse planter, which makes the stalks about two inches apart in the row. I plant at three different times, so as to have it early and late. About the first of July I commence to thin it out, leaving a stalk about once in a foot. By the time I get over, the piece that is left is nearly cared out. Then I commence cutting it up clean. When I get itlialf cut up I plow tho ground and sow winter rye. I sow the bal ance as soon as the com is off. This makes good pasture late in the fall and early in the spring. We feed our cow six quarts of corn meal and bran, mixed equal parts by weight, er.cli day. This is the way 1 summer five cows on five acres, nnd have done so for three years past. I have four Jersey cows and ono Guernsey. I have raised five calves and huve made 1,300 pounds of butter each year, after using cream and milk for a fam ily of four during that time. I manure the ground high, and that is wlmt mukes good crops, Tho first planting of corn this sea son is about eight feet high, and the lust about two and one-half feet, and growing at the rate of four inches daily. The Castor OH Bean. A pamphlet issued by a Now York tallow and soup manufacturing concern gives the following brief instructions regarding tho plautingand cultivation of the castor bean, that may be suggestive to growers of the plant in its appropriate latitude: “Almost any soil that will produce Indian corn will answer for the custor beau, but a sandy loam is preferable. The soil should be deep. This crop docs not thrive in heavy, wet soils. The ground should bo well plowed, und harrowed three or four times. The seeds should be planted five or six teet apart ouch way. Between the sixth and sev enth rows the distance should be eight feet, toadiuita light curt or slide, in harvesting the crop. Hot water, a little below the boil ing temperature, should be ppured over tho beans twenty-four hours before planting, and they should remain soaking in this wa ter twenty-four hours. They germinate much quicker by using hot water. Eight or ten seed should be droppep in each hill und covered to the depth of about two inches. The beans should be planted as soon as all danger of frost Is past, or about the time cotton is planted. Cultivate shal low, keep the weeds down and the surface well pulverized. One stock in a hill is suf ficient, but do not thin out until the cut worm season is passed. When the pods be gin to turn brown it is time to harvest cas tor oil beuns. They should be spread out in the hot sun, on hard, clean surface, allow ing twelve or fifteen feet for the beans to tty when the pods pop. A temporary plank fence around the drying yard la best,”-* [Prairie Farmer,