The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1902-02-04
FARM RIGHTS AND stsECRET PROCEssEs'
OF MAKING HOMEMADE FER
TTITZERS.

PROGRESSIVE FARMER readers will
recall our comment of two weeks
ago on the "seoret process fertilizer
scheme, then reported from Laurin-
burg. Copied in the Charlotte Oh
server, it elicited the letter from
Mr.. R. L. Evans, which DIR. Kilgore
Incorporates in his article published
herewith. We expected to reply TO
Mr.. Evans, but DR.. Kilgore covers
the ground SO thoroughly that no
further comment is needed. And so
widespread are the operations of these
'ssecret process men, and inquiries
regarding the value of their ''farm
rights have reached Is from SO
many counties that we gladly sur
render a part of our editorial space
to DIR. Kilgore's article, q agricul.
tura1 pages having gone TO press be-
fore it's arrival. DIR. Kilgore writes :
THE STATE CHEMIST OPINION.
RALEIGH, N. c., Feb. 1, 1902.
Mr.. G Fl. Poe, Editor PROGRESSIVE
FARMER, City.
"DEAR SIR About a year ago you
published an article from me on the
subject, "Lipps' Manual of Secret
Processes for the Manufacture of
Homemade Fertilizers" and it was
also sent out in the Bulletin Oahu
airy, 1909 of the Department of Ag'
riculture. Recently the matter has
come up again and my attention has
been called to the following letter,
published in the Charlotte Observer !:
"NoT A HUMBUG.
''Lipps' Fertilizer Formula is a Paten-
ted Process and Has Received High
Endorsement from Good Farmers.
ITO the Editor of The Observer:
E'In you issue of January 9th you
gave an article from THE PROGRESS
sIvE FARMER commenting on your
Laurinburg correspondents refer
ence to a new process of fertilizing.'
THE PROGRESSIVE FARMER calls it a
'humbug,' a fraud which it has
noticed before. I suppose it has
reference to the Lips formula.
Now I would like to know if THE
PROGRESSIVE FARMER knows what
this secret process is and does it
know that said formula is patented?
I hardly think the United States
Patent Office would patent a fraud
a humbug. Would the Patent Office
give out a patent On anything that
did not show merit? This formula
is not a secret process. It only claims
the protection that is given any
patentee. Some of the best farmers
in Richmond county tried it last
year and I think nearly every man
who used it gave testimony to it's
worth. Some say it gave better re-
suits than the high grade goods of
commerce. These men would not
recommend a fraud. The farmer, it
is true, is easily duped, but when
he sees a thing he is generally on
WINGED. I will say then, parenthet1-
cally, that experiment stations are
worth more to the average farmer
than are the illusions of the chem
lists laboratory, especially when it
tickles the fertilizer manufacturer
with a report that the published
formula is o. z. The PROGRESSIVE
FARMER would serve it's patrons much
better by giving them full instruc-
tions how to make their own tertili-
Ter at as small cost as possible, than
by calling the same a 'humbug'
when offered by some other than
that paper or the State Chemist. I
don't want to be hard on THE Pro
GREssIvE FARMER, Or the State Chem.
ist, but when did either of them
show to the farmer that the com.
mercial fertilizers are right much of
a cheatP I will not say humbug, as
a great many of the farmers call it.
eff the Hon. o. B. Stevens, Com
missioner of Agriculture Of Georgia,
is correct, we only have about 25 per
cent of the active principle or plant
food in the highest grades of guano.
Then what is the other rs per cent?
He calls it filler and of little use to
the farmer. He calls it an evil and
says there r $24, 600, 900 employed
to make it. Now if this is correct
what sense is there ina farmer pay
ing freight and hauling 1900 in