Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1881-07-06
Oyer-Manuring,

Over-Manuring.
This is sin of which few American
farmers are guilty. Yet judgment should
be exercised in that, as in all other matters
connected with farming. A correspondent
of the New York Tribune objects to what
he calls "this wicked waste" and especially
against the prize-lists which encourage the
boys and young men to practice it with
view to enormous crops for the sake of
money premium. AS one who, referring to
similar offers in other states, asked some
eighteen months ago if no man of wealth in
Vermont could be found to encourage the
boys by an offer of prizes,-to which our
good Governor Smith so promptly re-
sponded,-we should be sorry to think any
considerable harm had resulted by encour-
aging wastefulness We believe that cost
as well as product should be kept in view in
these trials. An account of cost should ac-
company the returns in each case, even
though it were not to enter into the adjudg-
ment of awards. But it is by no means a
useless experiment to see how far high
manuring can be pushed with increase of
yield, even though at money loss Un-
questionably point can be reached with
every crop at which any further application
of manure fails proftably to increase the
product or even to increase it at all. Over
manuring may in some cases diminish the
yield, and in Others may prevent any.
Wheat, or other small grain, may by ex-
cessive application of stable dung be him
dered from forming any grain. Corn will
bear very heavy manuring, yet it can be
over-manured so as to lessen the crop of
grain materially. An excessive use Of any
chemical fertilizer in au active form, such
as an acid phosphate, caustic potash, or
strong ammoniacal material will utterly de-
stroy either the seed or the young growing
plant. These facts the young farmer ought
to know, and perhaps there is no surer way
to learn them than to realize them by ex-
pertinent. When such experiments are
made, as they usually are, on small plats of
ground, the gain in knowledge will more
than offset the loss, even of all the crop.
Not only is loss possible by over-manur-
ing, but also by disproportionate manuring.
Each crop has what Professor Vile calls its
"dominant," that is, kind Of plant food
which it wants in greater proportion than
any other. Potatoes, clover, beans and peas
want liberal allowance of potash. Grasses
and cereal grains demand full feed of nj
trogen. Turnips are especially hungry for
phosphoric acid. These facts should be un-
derstnnd by avory farmer who wishes tn
manure without waste. Clover asks but
very little if any nitrogen applied to it as
manure. Give it plenty of potash and some
phosphoric acid and it will forage for itself
as regards its nitrogenous food. Corn re-
quires some nitrogen, but nothing like tn e
quantity demanded by wheat. The good
commercial phosphates, containing from two
to three per cent of nitrogen, are (in con-
nection with ashes Or some other potash
fertilizer on light soils) first rate corn fertil
izers, and most farmers have already found
that out. They are of much less value for
grass and wheat. For these Peruvian Guano
or fish fertilizer with its ten per cent OF
nitrogen, is better suited. The ammoniated
phosphates are also excellent for turnips, be-
cause they supply phosphoric acid freely
with enough nitrogen. A commercial fertil
izer generally has too little nitrogen and too
little potash to be profitable as the only fer
tilzer for potatoes, but when a moderate
coat of stable manure is applied broadcast
with commercial phosphate in the hill OF
drill, good yield of potatoes can be reason
ably expected. These points ought all to
be understood, in order to proportion oul
plant foot to the needs Of the crop. Tc
really understand them farmers must study
the nature of all fertilizing material and
the feeding habits of plants,-that is, agri
cultural chemistry and vegetable physiology
They ought to learn at least hoo to study
these subjects in the common schools,-tc
learn that there are such branches of knowl
edge,-and be well enough taught in the
| English language to know how to read under
standingly books that teach them. An &C
quaintance with literary English alone leaves
scholar entirely helpless to understand sci
entifc English. They are two widely sepa
rated branches of the language, or of any
language. We can read any French treatise
on natural science, but require dictionary
at our elbow all the time if we try to read q
French novel, or any other work of pure
literature in that language. And it may
be just so with English. A boy or CIR
who has learned literary English only il
school or college (and it is about the only
English taught there) is call at sea" il
books of practical knowledge. This is :
thing that must be reformed before the in
dustrial population can become well in
formed in their business. They must learr
the language OF that business, which is be
coming day-by-day more assimilated to the
language of natural science.