The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1895-08-05
cation BIight-some Reflections.

Yleigeville. Ga. will receive immediate
N Gisntion.
cation BIfght-SOme Reflections.
- From various sections of the country
ames reports of the injuring effects of
n vqbt in cotton. Such of our readers
l. have made careful observation as to
~ period of its first appearance. the
M.ature Of its attacks and its Partially for
n srtan soil, and the conditions Of wea-
Loo preceding its appearance. should
#rrite US. giving all the particulars posi-
- We Judge from the various state
2aents made by correspondents of the
Xaiy papers during the past week that
some localities in this state have suf-
N tered seriously already and from some
n subscriber in the sections worse infest-
al We would like to have an intelligent de-
s,ripti1n of the disease. From accounts
we take IT to be n unusual form of blight
lfering altogether from the blight usu-
lily denominated rust" common disor-
81 ier peculiar to worn soils when Excess
siva dry weather follows a sudden and
.lpd growth of foliage when denied
reasonable amount of sunlight, in other
words "muggy weather" growth.
If this blight, which has impressed some
farmers al being different from anything
they have yet observed should prove a
lew ailment. IL is desirable that the fact
Be known at orce so that it can be prompt
s. ly studied and investigated. 1t may be
that in this case especially it will be nee
essary to resort to apply a fungicide early
20 the season next June or early july AZ
We would insure the crop from repetiti-
ton Of the evil.
Surely a multiplication of foes beset our
/ ence "<ingly" plant. Every year or two
70
i successful growth presents Itself for con-
4 sideration. IT. very recent years We may
name among them the root rot, the MeXi-
. can boll-weevil and the present blight
If it should prove to be n new form. The
question arises, is cotton doomed?
Is or is not the hand of Providence
pointing unmistakably to the fact that
the future happiness and prosperity of the
southern farmer Is to he won Independent
Of cotton. or nearly so? Certainly 1t
would be well for us If we construed the
question afiirmatively and govern our
Il selves accordingly. For ourselves. We are
not 10Th to admit that in the sudden and
almost wonderful distribution ef that
roval grass from Bermuda along with
4 eonstantly increasing impediments to the
easy and profitable cultivation OF cotton
We see the hand of Providence clearly d.
racting the policy of the future. Does
any one else see II that way? OVerproduc-
ton mas wrought us very great eNli. 1t
may in the end work out great good. In
the affairs of every day life, if we find
hat our hint is rejected, we resort to
words whose import is not to be mIsin
,erpreted. Fortunate is he who takes
hint in time. And the southern former
Who duly took the hint that nature gave
some years ago is the one who leads
the van now of self-supporting, fairly
4 prosperous farming. He is the one who
4 mas the pastures and the hay and the
stock.
To many nature must speak more plain
y. More authoritatiVely though it may
he fraught with much temporary distress
and dissatisfaction. A new policy must
he enforced by something more than
hint. We repeat, overproduction. of ana
constantly increasing enemies of cotton
Will finally enforce the lesson in somewhat
the manner of sledge-hammer blows Ma
Uue as well say God, may see mt for
The needs of some to render the growing
Of cotton almost, if not quite impossible
We are not qualified or disposed to
preach" but we cannot avoid a little
m9raliziug on the practical question.
The great novelist bordering in moral
mood over the great battle of Waterloo
saw in the results of that bloody June
day only the hand of God. The great
French captain saw victory almost with
In his grasp S evening grew on apace,
Uul before the twilight nad QarkeHeu INTO
night he read his doom and prepared him
self for the inevitable. 1t was not Wei
hngton nor Butcher, says Victo Hugo,
Who turned the tide or gave the finish
ing stroke to that terrible and. decisive
contest. But il was God above who in
the first moment turned apparent victory
Tor Napoleon into victory for liberty and
progress. 1t may be so. We have no in
eIinaton to question it, Something has a
nand in these great changes, condition
and operations. Why not credit it to the
Cod of nature? Some will prefer the sin
gle term nature. So did we once, but we
prefer the three word term now. 1t is
oppressive, it is more correct. We most
heartily believe that the God of nature,
IN the interest of his creatures, who are
partly blind and partly hard headed have
IaHed to read Alright the lessen he would
give or accept the hint thrown out
VIII at no distant day render the growing
Oh cotton an impossibiity. If the price
GOES not deter one from further extern
SVe cultivation of it, the combined infiu-
ences of rust, blight, cut worms, cater
pHars, ball worms, Mexican ball weavil,
Ioot rot nematode, etc, will. The God
u nature can multiply the impediments
"Hen necessary to his purpose.