The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1911-04-26
Fertilizers and Corn.


fused by the Williamson formula,
zoo pounds of meal, 200 pounds of
acid phosphate. 400 pounds Of kainit
and 125 pounds of nitrate Of soda
per acre-gave several formulas with
ration Of about Is 1-2-1O. The
Progressive Farmer gave the opposite
1O-5-2 Land rather new, follow
| ing cotton for several years, which
produced about 500 pounds Of seed
cotton an acre." This is a sample
letter among hundreds from South
ern farmesr. On land where cotton
after cotton for years made but 500
pounds Of seed cotton an acre, the
writer wants to get a crop Of corn
by the aid Of fertilizer only. Regard
ing the soil only as a place to deposit
available plant food for temporary
results, and wholly overlooking the
greater need for restoring the or
ganic decay that the land had when
really new. Following a clean hoed
crop that has taken the fertility out
Of the soil with another clean hoed
crop to still further deplete it, and,
in fact as 1 have often said, merely
gambling on the chances
The Williamson formula is an ex-
cellent method Of trading commercial
fertilizers for corn and paying
good price for all the corn obtained
over what the land would make with
| the aid Of winter cover of crimson
clover and some cowpeas in summer
to give it some organic matter on the
road to humus. But really, and in
accordance with all the experience
and experimentation of a generation,
profitable crops Of corn cannot be
made that way. 1 have never found
that a complete fertilizer aver paid
on the corn crop, when we compare
the cost with what we can make
through good business-like farming
| on the same land. When Mr.. Davis,
of Alabama, gets as big crops Of corn
as Mr.. Williamson at a cost Of IL
| cents a bushel, and Mr.. Collier, of
| Maryland, gets over 9S bushels Of
shelled corn an acre with only a GRIM
son clover sod lined on land that
formerly needed a good season to
make 25 bushels, 1t is evident that
there Is more economical way to
make corn than by relying on an ap-
plication Of fertilizer costing over $40
| an acre, besides taking chances on a
dry season that may make the fer
tilt2cr do moro dnma~n than good on
a soil evidently deficient IN the nee.
ossary moisture-retaining humus.
We buy nitrogen et d high price
when there IS Mt the slightest need
for buying it when the farmer really
farms instead Of gambling with fer
tilizeTs only. While Mr.. Williams does
use peas, and gets some organic decay
| into his soil, and gets good crops of
| corn. he cannot do it as cheaply as
those l have mentioned who do not
use fertilizers so lavishly. 1 have
often cited the example of the best
wheat growers in Maryland, who have
bought no fertilizer for thirty years
but acid phosphate, and that only
for the wheat and who make as
many bushels of corn an acre with a
clover sod as Mr.. Williams does with
his fertilizer, and make an average of
40 bushels of wheat per acre. Their
scccess shows that good rotative far
ming and humus accumulation in the
soil is far better than trying to galva-
nize dead soil into a semblance Of
life with fertilizers alone. And even
II Mr.. Williamson does get good re-
suits on the sandy soil Of the upper
pine belt Of South Caroline, II does
not follow that his fertilizer is the
best for the red clay Of the Pied
mont country. With a sod Of crimson
clover and manure to put on it from
iecuiiiS me aDundant forage tnat can
be grown on a Southern cotton farm
rightly managed, one can get a good
corn crop and have the soil in better
condition for a following small grain
crop than If he applied the William
son formula, especially if peas are
| among the corn. Then even if the
Williamson formula is all right in
plant food, you can get as much pot
ash, and cheaper, in 100 pounds Of
| muriate Of potash rs you get in 400
pounds Of kainit. Commercial fertil-
izers have their use in farming ani in
some shape we have to use them, bat
| what we object to is tho craze all