Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1883-06-22

Potato mnnurc....... 3.i4 bUO ooi
Professor johnson, therefore, justly con-
cludos that 1T is quite as rational to use
corn manure on potato land or potato ma
nure' for the tobacco crop, as any other way.
Tho whole thing is q humbug, and it is good
thing to keep humbug5 out of the state, es-
pecially when it is done so easily Watch-
man.
We have never known the fertilizer law
objected to for the reason given by the
Waterman. In fact It does not keep out Of
the state the fancy brands-if they may be so
called-to which the agricultural editor Of the
Watchman refers. The company manufact
urng the brands which he objects to as hav-
ing fancy, catchpenny Names and which he
assumes are kept out of the state by the IL
cense fee, is one of the few concerns that now,
under the operation of the law, have the OK.
elusive sale of fertilizers in this state just
what is meant by the "wholo thing being
humbug which it is good thing to keep out
of the state when It can be done so easily, Is
not very clear Is the whole business of
manufacturing and selling commercial fertili-
zers humbug? If so, it is q very useful
humbug increasing the value of the products
of agriculture millions of dollars II it is
meant that special fertilizers, or fertilizers
for special crops, are necessarily a humbug
we are sure he would find no support for such
a view in the teachings of Prof. johnson,
whom he quotes. Prof. Johnson's remark
which is quoted, must have been made in ref
erence to the fertilizers which he fou nd TO be
essentially alike though one was called
corn manure one tobacco manure, and an.
other potato manure
As different plants take from the soil vide
ly different proportions of phosphoric acid
and potash it is evident that an unvarying pro.
portion Of each OF these parts in a fertilizer
cannot be equally good for all crops In an
article on the Science and Practice Of Ma
nurng," I. II. Hoskins, in the report Of the
Vermont Board of Agriculture for 1874, says;
''The first knowledge we must Acquire (sup
posing we are experienced in all the ordinary
manual operations of the farm, } is of the u.
eral requirements of all cultivated crops for
their successful growth and next, the picul.
lar requirements of each individual crop We
must know what Prof. Vile calls the domi.
nant of each crop; that is, that particular cl
ement of plant food which that crop requires
above others, understanding that the other
clements must also be supplied in due proper
ton. Without this knowledge, special ferti-
lizers will be useless to US, except by acct.
dent, and we shall not know how to make up
compost for any crop"
Has the agricultural editor of the Watch.
man less faith in fertilizers for special crops
than he had when he wrote that article Ac.
cording to Prof. Wolff, 1000 pounds of air
dried tobacco contains 81 pounds of potash,
while the same quantity of the stalks and
leaves of corn contain only nine pounds of
potash yet the corn removes from the soil
more phosphoric acid than the tobacco. Re
poated analyses show that crop of wheat re.
moves from the soil nearly as much phos.
phoric acid as potash, while crop of pota
toes takes three times as much potash as phoj-
phoric acid. Nitrogen is also taken in vary
ing proportion by different crops
We do not believe with the Waterman that
''the whole thing is q humbug, " though some
of the brands now licensed in this state may
be so as far as the name is concerned. The
company manufacturing the special fertilizers
which DR.. Hoskins calls humbugs is not the
only company licensed and selling fertilizers
in Vermont under misleading names. Only
ten companies, however, as we learn from a
communication from state treasurer Du Bots,
have complied with the law so far as to give
the required bonds and pay the license fees.
Thus the practical effect of the license fec is
what we expected-diminishing competition,
giving few large companies monopoly of
the business, and tending to keep up the
prices of fertilizers.