Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-05-11
TEXAS FARM AND FIELD.
The Sugar Beet in Nebraska-It Might be
Made an Important Crop for Texas.
Broom CORRECTION Seed oil-Mors Light
Needed-A Fine Grape Region, and
Going to Grass.
The surnr Beat for Texas.


For the Gazette.
The latest issue of the New Orleani
Sugar Bowl tells OF the arrival, pei
steamer Ocean, of a large consignment
of French sugar machinery for the Ok
nard Beet Sugar Co., of Grand Island
Nebraska. 1t is only a second oonsign-
snent for the same plant, one hundred
carloads of machinery having already
been sent out. 1t is to be one OF the
largest plants of the kind in the world /,
costing an immense amount of money.
Those people who have ventured IN so
gigantic an enterprise must be able to
possess themselves with strong faith in
the success OF sugar beet culture for Ne
brRska. They feel sure of being able to
make grand thing of the industry, and
the probability is that they will succeed
10 the full extent of their expectations.
II so, then what is there TO prevent Texas
from doing likewise. Texas possesses
every natural advantage favoriug the
sugar beet that Is possessed by Nebraska,
with much still more favorable that Ne
brsska does not possess.
Il is possible that every character of
soil existing in Texas might not be first
class for the sugar beet crop, as our
heaviest, waxey soils, for instance. All
root crops do best on an open or porous
soil, but we have that kind of soil in
abundance IN our posstoak landslide
very best of soil, evidently, for the sugar
beet.
In writing on the subject of the sugar
beet industry in Nebraska and Califor-
MIA, the editor of the Prairie Farmer
says there are advantages existing now
that did not exist a decade ago, when
there were sugar beet failures in this
country. Within the time named great
advance hss been made in Europe by
which a much larger outcome of sugar is
realized than formerly. There is no
reason why manufacturers In the United
States may not profit by all this.
To give the reader some idea of the
profits TO be expected from the sugar
beet industry, published statement ex-
hibiting California transactions is drawn
upon as follows:
f. Therwatoher planted ten acres in
beets; the product was 154 tons, the cost
of planting, harvesting and hauling to
market, distance OF three miles, was
S544; the price received for the product
was S97a; the net profit was 1929; the net
profit per acre, S42. SO. W. N. German
planted i've acres; his distance from the
market was mile and half; his outlay
for planting, harvesting and hauling was
$3.50; he received $50 for his pro-
duct; net profit, S22s; profit per
acre, SCI. j. B. Hudson planted
ten acres; distance from market,
one mne; product, eco tons; cost Of
planting, harvesting and hauling, S6l4;
he received SlSOe for his produces net
profit, S692; profit per acre, 500. 7.
Mitchell planted six acres; distance from
market, one mile: product, IA tons;
cost of produce. SSl2; he received for
his crop S62l; net profit, $500; profit per
acre, $5I.eo. A. F. Richardson planted
eleven sores; distance from market two
miles; produce, ITO tons; cost of har-
vesting. hauling and planting, $3.50; he
sold his crop for S92l; net profit, 1855;
profit per acre. S35.
The profits on these crops, continues
the Prairie Farmer, are largely in excess
OF oriinSsy farr ropa, while they COM
pare fsvofablY Y ! the Droets Der acre