The Somerset reporter., 1898-03-17
Should the United States Pro
duce its Sugar?

(4Sereta,y OF Agyieahnre James Wilson
IN the MavcA Fornm.)
Efforts are being made in the United
States to extend the growth Of sugar pre-
ducing plants by ascertaining-though
scientifically conducted research at State
experiment stations and by private enter
prise, under the direction of the Federal
and the State governments-where such
plants will flourish best, to the end that
we may as nation become independent
of other countries in this regard. =. and
distribute among our people the immense
sum of money that is now sent abroad to
pay for sweetening materials. =. This
subject should be discussed from the
standpoint of the farmer rather than from
that of the political economist. The far
mers OF our country produce from the
soil grains, cotton, tobacco, vegetables,
fruits, horses, cattle, hogs, sheep, various
animal products, and the like; and if we
can ada to our farm systems any crop
that yields any article of common use, Is
not exhaustive of plant-food, and whose
by product is valuable in making meat
and dairy products it will find favor
with producers. There are very few
crops, or manufactures of them, of which
this can be said as of sugar. beets. The
grains are we'll known oil-robbers. They
carry from the soil nitrogen, potash, phos-
phoric acid, lime, magnesia, and the other
elements of plant food. Meats take away
comparatively little plant-food from the
soil, compared with their money value.
The cotton plant is not exhaustive if the
stalks are plowed under and the seed is
returned to the soil, either directly or
through the instrumentality of domestic
animals. The oil of the cotton-seed may
be sold without taking any plant-food
from the farm, as it comes from the
atmosphere through the leaves of the plant.
Butter is also harmless I'M this respect,
and does not jmpoverish the land on
which the cow grazes. Sugar is as harm
less as oil and butter: it comes from the
carbonic dioxide Of the atmosphere. If
the sugar. beet is hauled to the factory and
the pulp taken back the farm, no plant.
food is lost to the soil.
The writer grew beets by the acre for
stock feed from 1891 to 1896 at the Agri-
cultural College, and found the enterprise
profitable for that purpose alone. All
domestic animals aie benefited by daily
ra,ions of roots in winter when they have
no access TO pasture: the young animal,
the breeding animal, and the fattening
animals alike find them grateful. After
the sugar is extracted, the pulp contains
all the plant food furnished by the soil,
and is substantially as valuable as a fod-
der for domestic animals as the beet is
before the sugar is extracted. The fodder
Of our rations are nearly all too carbon
aceous, and require mixtures of nitrogen
Gus By-products to make them suitable for
animal growth or milk production. Here,
then, we have plant that aside from the
sugar it contains, makes valuable food
for our domestic animals, and is capable
of successful cultivation in many Of our
States. 1t fits into our farm systems con-
veniently because its planting season Is
earlier and its harvest time later than that
Of corn, and not only serves double
purpose as An animal nutrient, but holds
out the liveliest hopes that its adoption
will keep at home one million dollars
through the value Of its sugar content
alone.