The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1874-05-07
99nbersql1 yntelltgtntet+
A Remedy for the Cotton Worm.

1872 suggested that the Paris Green mixture
which was doing such good work in preserving
our potato fields against the attacks of the
Colorado Potato Beetle, might prove equally
efficient against the ravages of the insect which
takes the place Of this potato enemy in the
cotton fields of the country. Having no op-
portunity to experiment on the Cotton Worm,
(Anomys rylina, Say) tried the effect OF the
mixture on several closely allied worms winch
occur in Missouri, and especially on the fal
Army worm, (Prodenia autuaonatas, Rlley} IN
each case with the most satisfactory results.
Feeling thus we'll assured that the remedy
wonld work benefcially as an antidote to the
Cotton Worm, and might prove of untold value
to the people of the South, took occasion to
read an essay on that insect at an agricultural
meeting in Indianapolis, the last of May, 1873.
This means of appealing to the cotton grow
ers of the country had the desired effect. The
essay, giving directions for the proper use Of
the poison, together with the natural history
of the worm, was published either entire or in
abstract in large number of agricultural jour
mails which circulate in the South. The RENE
:dy was, in consequence, very thoroughly tried
and generally used, its merits being so fully
discussed that I received over 100 articles on
the subject which a Southern editor kindly
clipped for me from his exchanges. Later in
important points as to the effect of the Paris
Green on the Cotton Worm and the best mode
of using it, the Department of Agriculture
conceived the idea of sending out circular to
its cotton-growing correspondents. This circu-
lar, with numerous answers, many of which
are so indefinite in point of detail as to be of
no value, or to convey wrong impressions, and
all of which lack signature and date, was pub
lished in the Monthly Report for November
and December, 1873. The general conclusions
which Mr.. Glover deduces from them cores
pond, however, not only to the mass of testi,
mony elected by my own correspondence, and
the experience had of this insecticide in the
more Northern States.
The remedy has proved most satisfactory
wherever properly and intellgently used. e.,
busted in proportion of one part of pure green
to 20 or 25 parts of -four; or sprinkled in pro-
portion of one tablespoonful of the green to a
common bucketful of water. Improved meth
ods of applying the poison have been devised,
and contrivances for the more efectual and
more safe busting of plants, and machines for
springling by horsepower, where the solution
is employed, have been patented. The liquid
has the advantage over the powder il that
there is less danger from injury in its use, and
that, on large scale, it may be applied by
three disadvantages 1st The green is not
soluble, for though it quickly gives green
tint to the water, when stirred, it soon settles
to the bottom unless kept in suspense by con-
tinued stirring or agitation. ID. It settles in
spots on the leaves, the natural tendency of the
water in finding its level being to carry and
concentrate it wherever drop finds rest and
evaporates Sd. Too much is wasted on the
ground in sprinkling. I have therefore found
It much more convenient on small scale to
use; the powder, where it can be obtained ready
mixed by machinery. Applied when the dew
is on the plants, it will adhere more uniformly,
and it obviates the necessity of carrying about
so much water. But whether used in water or
as powder the -four will prove desirable
addition, since it renders the green more adhe-
adhesive quality in the liquid may also be OBJ
tanned by tdissolving dextrine or gum arabic or
glue in the waterfall, however, much more
expensive than -four. Reports from those who
have used the remedy for the Cotton Worm
put the cost of the material at from IS cents
to 81 per acre, for each application-two ap-
plications and sometimes more, being necessa-
ry to save the crop. This remedy will, from
the different habit of the insect, not prove of
any great value against the Boll-worm. Its
use should be abandoned, except for extreme
reasons, after the bolls open so as to prevent
any injury that might follow ginning of the
poisoned cotton.
Although aware of the fact that sundry pat
ents had been taken out by persons in the more
Northern States for Paris Green in combina-
ton with other ingredients, to kill potato
beetles, was not aware that anything of the
sort had been done in the South till received
from 8 Mr.. Royal, of Texas, letter, accom-
panied with several circulars, containing refer
ences, etc., and saying that he had patented s.
compound and was introducing it in all the
cotton States. The patent is numbered 112,7
and the ingredients of this right royal mixture
are Paris Green, -four of elm or gum arabic,
common -four, and powdered rosin. Mr.. Royal
tells us that "it takes from Is to 20 pounds of
the material to an acre of cotton from four to
i've feet high for the first application. For the
second application upon the new growth, about
soue-third only of this quantity is required"
It is to be regretted that patents can be OBJ
tanned at all for remedies of this nature after
they have become generally known, and right
fully belong to the public. When the discov-
erer of such a remedy does not see fit to patent
whatever speculative right he may possess
fortunately, in this case, the patentees cannot
interfere with the public rights, and it is to be
hoped that no planter, either of potatoes or
cotton, will be induced, by flaming circulars
and threats to pay even one cent per 1000
acres, much less the demanded $50 per 100
acres, for the privilege of using these patented
mixtures. The very fact that so many patents
have been granted for the same purpose, all
the mixtures having Paris Green as base,
shows clearly that the patent covers only the
particular combination. By ringing the chan
ges on the different proportions of the several
ingredients, a thousand of these patented rem
edies may be obtained and any one who di-
verges but fraction from the particular pat
ented combination ceases to infringe upon it.
It will therefore be utterly impossible for the
rnent without proof that precisely the same
ingredients and combinations as patented were
..sol axd To 1xot rnch nroof will I talro Il ha