The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1886-03-04
Chemists anu Fertilizers.

b
Shepard in answer to inquiries addressed
to him by gentleman largely interested
In fertilizers, throws much light'on the
subject of the chemical analysis of fer
tilizers now attracting SO much attention
LABORATORY ron ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY,
6S MEETING STREET,
CHARLESTON, S. c. February 2G. }
Dear Sir: To your questions of thi.
date / would reply as follows:
First. "Is it in human power to mix
fertilizers either by hand or by machinery
using either the wet or dry process, ant
produce goods that will be uniform il
composition as to every ounce, or such
quantities as are taken for the actual
analytical operations ?"
/ answer, mo"
| Second. "Is it possible for the mos
skillful chemist living to obtain the same
percentages throughout from one, two OF
dozen analyses of samples drawn even
from a single ton of the average CONNER
cial fertilizers?"
| / answer, "No."
Third. "Is il not fair, just and honest
to offset deficiency in one constituent
by the excess in others. provided such
deficiency is reasonable in the nature o
things and not beyond the range of vari
alton embraced in the preceding ques
tious, Ii. e., due allowance being made
for the inaccuracies of manufacture,
sampling and analysis and the average
quality of the fertilizer is up to the man
ufacturer's guarantee 2"
I answer, "Yes."
Fourth. "Does not the fact that where
the deficiency is slight and the CONNER
cial value of the fertilizer is greater than
the guarantee prove that the manufactu'
rer has given more valuable article
than he guaranteed 2"
/ answer. "Yes."
Fifth. 'Under the conditions given in
question fourth, and in view of the ac'
Inowledged DEFICIENCIES of manufacture,
sampling and analysis, is there any proof
of desire on the par; Of the manufac.
turer to furnish an inferior article, or any
proof that any considerable quantity Of
the article corresponded exactly with the
results of the single analysis ?"
answer, "No."
Sixth. "Do you not think the interest
OF both manufacturer and farmer requires
that the different States adopt uniform
laws relative to branding, analysis and
the sale of fertilizers? For at present
fertilizers branded in conformity with the
South Carolina law, if shipped into
Georgia, have been by some of the Coun.
tv iildpes decided to be in violation oil
the Georgia law precluding recovery for
value at law on the part of the vendor
and the same as to Alabama, each State
requiring a different style Of branding y
/ answer, eyes"
To these questions and answers would
I add a few remarks of my own. II
seems to me that the great difficulty at
present lies in the insufticiency of funds
allowed in these South Atlantic States to
their official chemical laboratories
Would they only grant more money fol
labor and supplies, then the number Of
official analyses might be very greatly
multiplied, not only to the enhanced
protection of the farmer, but also to the
safety of the manufacturer. In that
case the publication of q number oi
analyses of the same fertilizer might
show that the deficiency of single
constituent below the guarantee was the
result of the causes to which your ques
tions point.
AS matters now stand, with no help
allowed him, our State chemist is faith
fully endeavoring to accomplish as much
as he can as to the number Of his analy
ses, and certainly there is no question as
to their accuracy, so far as each sample
is concerned.
Yours, very truly and respectfully,
CHARLES U. SHEPARD, Jr.