The Marietta journal. [volume] (Marietta, Ga.) 1866-1909, 1895-06-13

awhile until the roosgalls or tubercles
have an opportunity to form, and the
mlcroorganlsms begin to get in their
work, when the plant at once COM
mences TO change color, and again
grows vigorously to maturity, even
where the sand is sterilized by heat
of 3lS degrees +. In this treatment no
attempt is made to exc .ude the bacteria.
Where the apparatus is so arranged as
to prevent their access, the plant droops
and dies.
The fact being thus established that
the legumes are capable of deriving
| their supply of nitrogen from the air,
four. fifths of which consists of this
element, chemically uncombined, it
should materially encourage the agri.
culturist. With some $4,000 tons of
pure nitrogen resting on every acre of
his farm, never diminishing or chang
| ing, and renewable as fast as used, he
has thus presented ready to hand, a
supply so exhaustless that the Gillian
nltre beds sink into utter insignificance
beside it, He need no longer dread the
ultimate exhaustion of his pitiful sub
soil reservoir, but rest calmly in the
! faith that as long as the heavens en-
dure, his chief and costliest element of
| fertility is secure
Nor is this all Formerly it was sun.
posed that by far the greater portion of
the manurial legumes, especially Of the
coWpea, was contained in the vines.
and only a relatively small proportion
remained in the roots and stubble, 1t
was hence deemed necessary to return
the vines directly to the land in order
to secure maximum benefit, their val
ne as feeding stuff being thereby lost.
This misconception, however, has
now been quite effectually corrected by
observations and experiments conduct
ed by both the Connecticut lStorrs) ex-
pertinent station aud the Georgia ex.
pertinent station. The former station
has shown that much larger proper,
ton of nitrogen than was at first sup.
posed is contained in the roots and
stubble, and that the vines may be us.
for forage with economy, provided the
stubble is plowed under.
K
This being the case, the mission of
the cowpea broadens. and its value and
Importance increase proportionally.
That it stands today at the head of all
soil renovators-at least for the south
is beyond question. Its prominence
over clover and other legumes is due
mainly to the fact that it will grow
and thrive on the poorest soils, which
clover will not do. When land at the
south will grow clover successfully it
doesn't need renovation; it is the worn
out, thin, CALLED land, Of course, that
most requires manuring, Clover would
undoubtedly build up such land if it
could be induced to grow there, but it
will not grow there. Cowpeas will.
l. The best disposition of a crop of
cowpeaS is to convert the vines into
hay COR ensilage.)
2. The next best is to permit the
peas to ripen and gather Tor pasture
them
8. Moving the vines and permitting
them to lie on the surface and blowing
under in November was decidedly bet.
ter than turning the vines under in
August
4. Turning the vines under green
gave the poorest economical results.
<
!. 1t is money thrown away to apply
any form of heterogeneous fertilizer to
the cowpea. 1t is possible, however,
that very light top dressing of nitrate
of soda may prove an exception If sea-
sonably applied at the period of sus.
pended growth.
2. The use of potash salts in lar ge
quantities is Improbable, and even in
\ small quantities will not pay in the
oak and hickory region of the south.
On other than oak and hickory lands
small doses may prove profitable in
conjunction with acid phosphate, and
the longer the land has been in cultiva.
ton, the greater becomes this proba.
! bility, even in the oak and hickory
( belt.
3. Heavy applications of any form or
combination of fertilizers are unprotit-
able
4. The moderate use of uncombined
phosphates appears still to return the
| best results from an economical stand.
point.
s. AS between superphosphate (acid
| phosphate) and Florida soft phosphate
! {unacidulated ground rock results in.
! dictate decided preference for the for
mer, SO far as the growth of vines is
concerned.
6. There is less difference observable
between the two in the formation of
peas, though superphosphate still ap.
pears to be preferable.
7. The finely pulverized condition of
soft phosphate is great objection to
its use, rendering 1t extremely difficnl:
to handle without loss.
s. There is not a sufficient difference
in price between the two forms of phos-
phate to render soft phosphate at pres-
ent an active competitor to acid phos-
phate, unless the ascerthined results
were more emphatic in its favor. Their
| comparative availability must be, for
the present, considered an open ques-
ton, to be definitely settled only by
farther experimentation.
9. The quantity Of acid phosphate
which may be safely depended upon
| differs, of course, with thS character of
the land. The better the soil in its
mechanical composition as we'll as in
its chemical contents) the greater the
amount that may be pEoAtably used. A
range of from 200 to 400 pounds per
acre will probably cover all coMingen-
| cies.
/. The earliest cowpea, and hence
the variety best adapted to high lati-
1