Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1872-12-06
20 ! GTI Tx = 7
.s4sbfi66b far1ln Il 20

.a7ebliGt@ Tarnt. Il 60
s : s5a1 : s s1Ss93s rr9: 92Ss 14~1S~ -
sssSass = Lime andsPlasters : 20 ss,,.ass
"a 50 long , time, and 50 much intel
-llgents obserY alton p, guided. by ,the best
light that science offers us, how little do
we knoW Of the way our soils are improv-
ed by lime and plaster. We, do as that
eminently practical person did with his
muck, who 'said,I II puts it on the land,
and Iaets'the land and muck settle it.
Only the faith in these improyers is not so
general asHitsshould- be, and we fail to get
,theigbod Of them because we donot IN
derstand them. There is nothing, howev-
er, to hinder the making of careful expe-
riments, which would determine the value
.efiboth lime and plaster for every locality,
and it is the part of plain prudence to as
certain the fitness for our own use of a.
gents that have been so eminently useful
to Others. haA s9itss r 5s1rg7 IN.
The opinion of these fertilizers express
ed, by So intelligent an observer as Mr.
Greeley, in his late address at Baltimore,
will attract unusual notice. So far as our
own observation and experience go we
agrse9ylth him entirely in his compare
tive estimate of lime and plaster. The
common form of lime has been assumed
too, Generally, we think, to. be the only
sure foundation for lasting. amendment
of the soil, and only the cost of sufficient
dressing has restrained many from the use
OF 1t who have no assurance of its value
for them beyond the fact that it has pro-
we'd valuable to others. Mr.. Greeley has
nd such opinion of lime, but on the other
hand seems to deprecate it unduly. We
cannot assent to his low estimate of its
value, while we have in mind large sec
tions of our own State that owed their
long continued productiveness almost ex-
clusively to the judicious use of lime.
Let us allow its full share of merit for
such lands, while we reserve our judgment
oft elsewhere till duly tried. -.....
-, That plaster or gypsum is more gener-
ally valuable we agree with Mr.. Greeley
and with him urge feer use where it can
be had SO, cheaply as in Maryland, wher-
ever it is not known by experiment to be
useless. Certainly where it acts at all we
have no fertilizer that compares with it in
valuable results for the same cost. It is
the more valuable, too, that it is not SO
much M direct money profit that it serves
as in the production of what still further
benefits the land-clover and kindred
growths.
Yet Utmost of our crops, we may find
in it this direct profit if we would use it
Cen, tobacco, potatoes, cabbages, and IN
deed almost all, except the small grain
crops, are benefited largely. An expert
enced potato grower says he would assoon
dispense with any other manure or fertili-
yer as plaster, and that, it is without ex-
ception, and as a matter ofcourse, applied
to every CROP We know that no tobacco
grower in Southern Maryland- how itmay
be elsewhere we cannot SAYS willing to
dispense with the small application to the
bud after wedding, some sow broadcast
whileSpreparing the land, and some again
make second application as the growth
advances. On corn it is used very com
mon1ggwith the! seed in preparation fol
planting, and sometimes with great adj
vantage afterait gets some two or more feet
of growth. I'D -
But while Mr.. Greeley has little opinion
of the use Of lime generally, he acknow1-
edges it may be seryiceable on lands hav-
ing an excess Of acid, as indicated by the
growth of sorrel and other acrid plants
N6do not quote his words, having mislaid
the copy of his address.
1t surprises us, we confess, that so wide
awake a1sobserverand reader, not to say
writer, on farming, should utter such a
Thought at this day: Thirty years ago it
was common enough, and tits well known
I ~. 4 l,o1l 10 ~ Il,
late eminent agricultural writer, Mr.. Ed
mund Ruhin, of Virginia. But even he,
we are credibly informed, yielded finally
to the force of evidence, and abandoned
his belief in the necessity of lime for the
improvement of lands growing sorrel and
other acid plants. sS
The palpable proof that lies against this
theory is heiwell known fact that thou
sands of acres Of Just such land have been
Improved to the point of yielding thirty
bushels of wheat and fifty of corn to the
acre, without the use. of lime, or of any
other impEover than clover, and the very
light sprinkling ofplaster necessary for its
growth. IF these acid plants indicated a
deficiency of hme, it is not possible that
such crops could grow, and continue to
grow upon them through long series of
gears, for such is the fact, under favora-
Bile circumstances. -
ssIt may be quite true that sorref will dis
appear from some lands under lime treat
ment, should that happen to be what the
soil needs, and generally Improvement re-
suits. The same result takes place with
whatever Improves the soil, and brings in
amoEefwholesome, natural growth. But
assserrel lis no indication of the deficiency
ofIme in the soil, it can of course be no
guide, in itsapplication. :"
The truth about the acid is, that it is
not perhaps in the soil at all, but that the
several plants elaborate each8its own
Cor. Md. aFdrpen- 81
.ssLoss Of Wheat by Drying.
We gave our readers year ago the re-
saitssof series ofexperiments with corn,
showing that the average loss In weight
by drying from the first Of winter to the
end of the following summer, was about
enc Fifth, and that taking all chances for
loss, including interest. it would generally
bebetter for farmers Gf they selIat alp to
sen unshelled corn from the field at seven
ty-fve cents per bushe1, than. the following
August or September at one dollar pei