The eastern clarion. [volume] (Paulding, Miss.) 1837-1863, 1859-08-17

4 comparison Of these columns, show
first, that pine straw contains notable
quantities of H the ingredients required
hy crops generally. Second. that the rel
alive proportions between these ngrcdi-
cnts approach more to those existing be-
tween same in cotton lint than in corn.
Assuming. therefore. that in cropping
with cotton. aVJa hr E,5t, and in the case
OF corn. aNJst he gram is returned to the
soil that nothing. therefore hut the ash
e. contained in these articles has been per-
manently withdrawn, we shall find that
pine straw is capable Of sustaining the pro-
ducing power Of soil for cotton. for any
length Of time, with respect to all but two
ingredients, easily supplied otherwise, viz
] CEior'asand S,i, or thcingredients ofcom-
mon salt.
Asto the quantity required for the res
titution of what the cotton that has been
harvested has Withdrawn from the soil, we
may base the calculation on the most
prominent Ingredient of the cotton ash
potash. FIVE multiply the per ccntage ot
potash yielded by the pine straw by about
| q. we shall obtain the per centace of tn,
cotton ash and multiplying the amounts
Of al the other ingredients 10y the sam,
factor. we shall bring those Of all but tn,
two above mentioned. up to the amount
required by cotton lint in the case o
lime and magncsla considerably beyond
II the pine straw. therefore. yielded n,
greater per ccntage OF ashes than cottoi
lint. We should have to apply to the ~oi
$50 lbs. Of the former to replace the drain
caused Wy loO pounds Of cotton. But ia
straw Yields more than twice the amour
Of ashes that the same weight Of cotto
lint would. and making ia" calculation
We shall find about % pound, instead q
4 the above $50 or in other words. i ya
r-'rH ~ ne saI 1N n. -1f'aa sfr't 1Hissaf 70
YOU always ought to do and wish to su
4, tain is producing power as it was, then yo
4 ought % return To the soil for every ~
. pound bale Of cotton YOU have raised Their
ON, from l3-liuO weight Of pine straw, an
a few u to p pound, OF common salt.
With respect To corn, we find that d
= proportion Of Phosporic Acid contained
+ pine straw j. too small 20 supply perm
y nently the demand of a corn crop, mle
= a very large quantity were used. In th
I. case, the addition Of ground bones. sup,
- phosphate Of lime, or Columbian guar
b, would supply the deficiency.
/" The above calculation holds true wi
a reference to u,s'I.aiay the producing 20
u er, when none but the necessary drain
e the nutritivc ingredients of the soil Is
~ lowed. But in any case, the correct q
4 plication Of pine straw to land must b,
nc valuable Improvement In thi, respe
n it Is nearly equal to wheat or rye stra
~ and whatsoever holds good in regard to t
-, application Of these, is generally true
*. pine straw also.
il The great differences ofopinion exist
wv between practical farmers rs to the eff
an cy Of pine straw, are owing. no doubt,
IN. difference in the manner Of applicati
Ter Some say they have experienced no eft
~, at all, or even a deterioration; while q
ny ers praise its effects exceedingly. Av
fr generally prevailing impression Is that
contains too much sand. and hence, ma
the land very light and the Georgia
'eS grocs even relate that when heap Of =
pa, straw decays, a heap Of sand remains
lal it, place.
The soils to which the long leaf !
20" straw is likely to be applied, are gener
very light and sandy in themselves,
az tanning 10 to % per cent. of sand
"' pine straw ashes contain only 6 per c,
Of silica or sand, as the analysis shows
"'' is plain, therefore, that 50 far rs the mi
al ingredients are concerned, the appl
, ton Of pine straw cannot make those .
- lighter.
But it is very true, that il to u soil