Bradford reporter. [volume] (Towanda, Pa.) 1844-1884, 1865-04-06
PERMANENT MANURES NOT THE MOST
VALUABLE.

y correspondent of the Canada Farmer
askcs the editor of that paper the following
questions:
|. What is the proper quantity of sup
erphosphate to appl y to the acre
, What is the proper way to apply it
to turnips?
3. Is superphosphate of lime merely a
Stlmulant, or is it permanent manure
4. Is bone-dust permanent manure, and
If both these manures are permanent, which
of the two is most so?
To the first question the editor correctly
replies, that from 200 lbs to 400 lbs is gen
orally recommended
Ia answer to the second he says, "Care
should be taken to incorporate the super
phosphate with the soil, as it is so conCen-
trated a nature that it ought not to come
into direct contact with plant roots" We
have used superphosphate for many years,
and never knew of its injuring the roots of
plants. 1t differs in this respect from Per-
uvian guano. The English farmers drill in
the superphosphate with the turnip seed,
and find that it so stimulates the Young
plants that they are soon out of the reach
of the Fly" We believe that turnip cul-
ture will never become as general as is de-
sirabie till we use superphosphate, and hare
drlH to Solc 1t on the ridges ,Cith the Seed.-
AS the Canadian farmers raise so many
turnips, we hope that drills will be intro
duced, if they have not been already. Thev
are very common in Englond 1t is point
Of great Importance. Superphosphate drill
ed in with the seed 1UW double the cr0a) of
tmwips
In reply to the third question, the editor
of the Canada Farmer says "Superpb0s-
phate is a permanent manure in a compar-
atlve sense If really good, and its effects
VIII be observed for many years after its
application
In reply to the fourth question, he says ::
Bone-dust is permanent manure also. but
we cannot say which will last the longest.
Our impression is that superphosphate will
act the more quickly of the two but wheth-
er the bone-dust will out-last it. is a point
we are unable to determine.n
Now the fact is that tsuperphosphate, "if
realty good," IS not permanent manure
The better the superphOsphate the less per-
manent 1t is. And this, strange as it may
appear to some, is true of all manures =
Think moment Why do you pay more
Tor bone-dust than for rough bones The
latter will last twice as long as the former
What the gardners term "spifmanure, "(that
can be cut with spade,) is by no means
as permanent as the coarse, litterv. infer
mented manure from which it is obtained
And yet the former is considered the most
valuable. 1t is so in al cases Hairwool
horn, and hide contain as much nitrogen as
the best Peruvian guano, but being much
more permanent, are not considered half as
valuable
Why is this Why are coarse, inch bones
50 much cheaper than fine bone-dust E? The
answer is plain. The fine bone-dust decom-
poses more rapidly and produces a greater
effect, but Of course will not last as long
If it could be ground as fine as flour it
would act still quicker and produce a bet
ter result-or what is the same thing,
tess quantity would be needed to produce a
given effect
30 of superphosphate of lime. This ma
hufe Is simply bones made soluble by sui
phuric acid. Of course, being soluble. it
acts quicker than bones, and is CONSEQUENT.
ly less permanent Two hundred pounds of
bone-dust treated with 100 pounds of sul-
phuric acid-in other word superphospbate
will have greater effect on an acre Of tur.