The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1866-1891, 1871-03-09
AGRICULTURAL.
Commercial Fertilizers.

EDITORS SSOUTHERNER :-Sllall we
use commercial fertilizers is the
question which is now aglta-
tin5 the minds of many ofour far
mers. Many have been almost.
ruined by the last years opera
tions, and are not interested per-
sonally on the question, because
they have nothing with which to
purchase fertilizers, but there are
some who still think that the ques>
tion needs an answer. For the last
two or three years, our farmers
have had "guano on the brain. p
Some planters tried the plan of
fertilizing extensively, Just after
the war, and were suceessful-that
is they made money. Whether
the money making was due to the
fact that they used fertilizers, or
that cotton brought very high
price, is a question which | do not
propose to answer here At any
rate this success, in the extensive
use of fertilizers, led the planters
generally to- believe tbat'it was the
only way to make anything, and 30
theyfollowed suit: But theywent
too far. They saw that some who
had largely used fertilizers had
made money, and from this fact,
very enormously lagrely argued
that tho cause of this prosperity
was the use of fertilizers. This
success may have been the result
of several other antecedents, but
these were never thought Of As
I have said before, it may have
been the result of the high price
ofthe cotton, rather than the use
of fertilizers; or, 1t may have been
the result of improved cultivation,
and of various others. Neverthe-
less, thousands were influenced to
90 into guano heavy; and, | regret
to say, many eame out light, so
far as pocket is concerned. The
year 1860 brought many losses to
the farming world, and many warn.
ings were given by the press and
by individuals against implicit faith
in guano. But, Notwithstanding,
all this I suppose that larger
quantity Of commercial manure,
was used last year than during
1865 and 1869 put together. There
are hundreds of farmers completely
ruined, and a great many others,
whose losses are heavier perhaps
than all the grains Of their crops
since the war ,s-.
Now the cry is, down with
commercial manures. ~ l have
heard that little guano will be
used in Southwest Georgia, and
that in other parts of the State,
there will be much less used than
IN 1870. Now another question
comes up. Was it the extensive
use of4ertilizers that sbroughtus
the question upon which, I propose
to give some of my views.
It is, perhaps, needless to re.
mark, that our planters have gone
from one extreme to another. Two
or three years ago they believed
that prosperous farming was the
result of IA large use of CONNER
eial manure; now, they as strongly
believe that last years failures
may be traced to the same cause.
Of course one of the two opinions
EUsr be wrong; and perhaps BOTH
are wrong. The latter is my own
belief. / do not think that the
prosperity which attended the
farming ola few, soon after the
late war, was due to guano; nor do
I believe that the ruin which 1870
brought due entirely to the same
cause. There is a golden medi-
ocrity which is in this case-and
might say in all others-all right.
Good Fertilizers are great aidsto
the farmer, but not everything.
Here is the mistake that most peo.
pie have made. They have put
100 much importance upon manure
in the formation of both of these,
10 my mind, erroneous opinions. In
in some instances it is necessary
to use manure, but not more neces-
sary than it is to cultivate well.
High cultivation is very necessary
but it will accomplish but little in
some cases, without the aid of1ma>
nure. To make crop, you must
have some fertility in your land.
You certainly can'tget out of the
soil what is not there, and hence,
when you haven't got the necessa-
ry plant-food, you must supply it.
But it will do little good to supply
the fertilizer, without SO cultiva
ting the soil that the plants will
get the benefit of this supply. In 9TH
er words, the two must 60 togethy
er. They are as ,inseparable as
science and art, as theory and
practice.
Tn order to make a good crop,