The herald., 1896-12-26

used the complete fertilizer. Where the
nitrate of soda alone was used the fruit
was both coarse and puffy, and those
from the manured plot were inferior.
Fair samples of the fruit were selected
for analysis, and ore lot of samples was
taken by DR.. Woodbridge to Los Ange
les, and another lot sent by express to
Prof. Hilgard at Berkeley, with the re-
quest that he would analyze it. Most
unfortunately these oranges were deliv-
cred at his house. and his servants, sup
posing that some one had sent him a
present, opened the box and rearranged
the fruit on the table according to their
own ideas of decoration. The samples
were thus inexplicably mixed up ami
could not be used Prof. Hilgard at
once wrote me for other samples, but I
had in the meantime picked all the fruit,
except some on some Australian trees,
and, therefore, the best I could do was
to send him samples of the Australian
navels. Perhaps the readers Of the
Rural Californian will remember the
outcome. Dr. Woodbrdges analysis did
not agree with Prof Hilgard's analysis.
and the matter ended in an unfortunate
newspaper controversy of little benefit
to the orange growers. l would refer
you to the last published report Of the
California Experiment stations. at page
l13, for full report Of Prof. Hilgard's 9
analysis and his comments thereon.
You will notice that he found some re-
suits that were not easily explained, and
to quote his words he says in summing
up: "There Is. then, If vigorously inter-
preted, such a mass of contradictions
that we hesitate to attribute much
weight to the whole SERIES"
l continued these experiments on the
test plots for one more season, and last
May sent to Prof. Hilgard samples of
the fruit. He has been making a very
complete analysis of these samples, and
has written me several letters as to the
results, but his determinations are not
in all respects complete as yet. He has
had to contend with the same puzzling
and contradictory results as last season,
and has procured samples Of soil from
some of the different plots in order to
anaNze the soil, to see If that would
afford the explanation. 1 think it does
so. In one case sent him two samples
of soil from the same plot; it was the
plot which was not fertilized at ALL I
rows of trees in the plot, and the other
sample from the other row. Prof. Hill
CARDS analysis of these two
samples of soil showed one of
them to be rich in phosphor;c
acid and the other to be rich in
potash. This plot had not been fertilized
at all. but fianking the plot on one side
was the plot fertilized with phosphoric
acid and nitrogen, and fanking it on the
other side was the plot fertilized with
potash and nitrogen. Here. then, to my
mind. Is the explanation of the whole
difficulty. These S-year-old trees, large
and vigorous, have been sending out
their roots into adjacent plots and help
ing themselves to what they found there;
not content with remaining at home on
their respective plots, they have all prob
ably been acting in the same manner,
and have been drawing nutriment from
the adjacent plots. No wonder, then,
Prof. Hilgard finds the results very con-
Trajectory. Moral-If you undertake a
series of test plots, have them entirely
separated from each other, instead of
beng adjacent and only two rows to a
plot, as per DR.. Woodridge's plan. Sec
ond-Instead of choosing the best soil
you can find. as we did, which was prob
ably already pretty well supplied with
plant food, choose a sandy or gravelly
soil, which will respond to what is given
it without being Influenced by plant food
already there In abundance.
I have tested most of the manufac-
tured chemical fertilizers that have been
offered here within the last few years,
and I think they all possess merit in
varying degree. I used one fertilizer on
a small block Of trees, which set the
trees to growing vigorously. and then
they quit growing and began to go back,
and soon We're looking decidedly bad,
with even some dead wood in the tree.
I call that fertilizer too f1ashy, too much
stimulant and not enough food
1 tried another experiment at the re-
quest of a, fertilizer man, and put a ton
or two of his goods last October on some
trees on very light, gravelly soil, that
had not been doing well. The effect was
peculiar. and I will not attempt to ex-
plain it, but simply state the result.
The trees put out no new growth until
the following spring; then they sudden
ly sprang into blossom long before any of
my other orange trees were ready to
bloom. I never saw such q profusion of
bloom on any orange trees. They looked
like beautiful Towering shrubs, but 1
think it is literally true that those trees
did not set six oranges and hold them.
However this result may have been
brought about. I would make only this
comment: That in all probability Octo-
ber is not good time to fertilize orange
trees. If you ask me here when think
is the best time to apply fertilizer,
would say, about six weeks before the
time that they usually blossom in the
spring. and then make another applica-
/ have used still other commercial
fertilizers Immediately adjoining the
rows of large eucalyptus trees on the
Richards orchard, and find that is is per-
fectly practicable to make orange trees
grow and flourish and bear fruit under
those conditions, but, of course, fertilizer
must be supplied in larger quantities
than elsewhere, and it must be of good
quality.
If we fertilize, it is because we have
faith that it will produce some effect,
and I believe we all ought to have a
reason for the faith that Is In us. When
a fertilizer man comes along and offers
us fertilizer, we ought to be able to de-
termine, from the analysis. whether 1t is
the fertilizer we want or not. If he says
that the fertilizer analyzes 2ia per cent
nitrogen. per cent phosphoric acid and
~ per cent potash, we ought to know
right away whether that is a good fer
tilizer or not. We also ought to know
whether that fertilizer is worth $50 a
ton or not. If he offers, say, at $40 a ton,
a fertilizer that will analyze 4 per cent
nitrogen, 10 per cent phosphoric acid and
8 per cent potash, we ought to be able
to determine whether or not that fertil-
iZer is cheaper at $40 a ton than the one
1 first mention is at $50 a ton.
An important item is whether the in
gradients shown by the analysis are
really in a soluble and available form or
not. Nitrogen and potash usually are,
think; but phosphoric acid often is not
An experiment will come in we'll here:
] was sent last year, with the compli-
ments of the agent, 1c0 pounds of what
is known as Stag phosphate. This is a
by-product in the manufacture of steel,