Year: 1866

/
from the soil, impoverishes the latter
For some years previous to the war.
the pratice of selling cotton seed to
the manufacturer, has been gaining
ground, and now seems likely to be |
resumed, as a means Of turning that
nuisance" TO some little account. l
wish to lay before the intelligent plan
ter the balance sheet of this transac-
ton, to show that in selling his seed |
at the rates current before the war, or |
in fact at any rate the manufacturer will |
be likely to pay, he is literally giving |
away his heritage for mess of pottage. |


In SO doing, l need no more than
allude to the great fundamental truth |
of Rational Agriculture, now gener-
ally understood, that no soil is or can
be inexhaustible that exhaustion is
owing to a withdrawal by the crops, |
of the mineral ingredients entering in
to the composition of the latter, and
remaining as ashes when they are
burnt; and that upon the restoration
Of these ingredients to the soil de
pends the maintenance or resuscitatiOn
of its fertility,


Everybody understands that we
might raise the same crop consecu-
lively on the same field for an indefi-
mite period, if, instead of harvesting,
we were to turn it under with the plow
every year So far from deteriorating,
the soil so treated would constantly
improve.


Suppose that in raising corn, we
aimed at the ripe shucks only, while
returning the fodder, stalks and ears
to the soil it is palpable that we
might go on raising corn and harvest
ing shucks almost indefinitely The
| corn ear contains, a score of times
over, the amount of nutritive ingre-
dients contained in the dry stalk, fod


der and shucks together


Suppose, again, that shucks were
saleable at Is cents pound, like cot


ton lint, while corn were of little use


save as a return to the soil, to enable


the planter to raise more shucks, what


propriety of selling the corn at seven


dollars a ton, as has been done with


our cotton seed for the latter bears
just about the same relation to the lint,


as the corn ear to the shucks.


But, letting comparison alone,
| we will come to the facts of
the case, as demonstrated by the


unerring balance of the chemist
| Assuming that 400 pound bale cor


responds to 1900 pounds seed cotton,


we find that 400 pounds cotton lint con


tains pounds of mineral ingredients
! 900 pounds of cotton seed contains 38


pounds of mineral ingredients; 1900


pounds of seed cotton contains 40


pounds of mineral ingredients.


OF these AZ pounds, four represent
| therefore, the necessary exhaustion re-


sulting to the soil from raising bale
of cotton while nine and half times
as mach ofingredients equally, or even


more valuable to the soil, enable it to


bear Ii similar number of crops of
| cotton, in addition to those it may


still bear from its natural store offer


tility


In other words For every 900


pounds of cotton seed finally with


drawn from our fields, we actually lose


what would, if returned, have enabled


us to raise NINE more bales of lint than


without this return, We shall be able


to do


And what does the oil manufacturer


offer to pay US for this precious mate


rial


| According to the rates prevailing
before the war, about "a i'll greenbacks


against aaine prospective bales ofcotton
| Truly, a small ''bird in the hand"


against those which an Industrious


hand is gdite satre of getting out of the


E'bush =


There is, III fact, not another crop
which ought legitimately to exhaust
the soil so little as cotton Take the
corn crop, and assume that an acre of
land which will make bale of cotton,


will Weld 35 bushels of corn. These


contain 25 pounds of mineral ingredi-


ents derived from the soil, or enough


for Si1 crops OF cotton Int But if in
| raising cotton we Withdraw the seed


also, the matter is reversed, and we


find that in q single crop 900 pounds) }


of seed we have lost or sold the in
| gradients for crop and half of corn
/ or SO bushels This is the value to the
planter of the 900 pounds of cotton
seed, for which the oil manufacturer
offers him four or Eve dollars


In view of these facts, it ia needless
to comment on the practice of those
who pile up around their gin houses,
or throw into the bayous, thousands
upon thousands of bushels of cotton
seed per annum. But these figures
enable us to understand how lands
which might have produced cotton
crops unintermittingly for century
and half, had the seed always been
returned, have on the contrary been
| exhausted in eighteen or twenty years,
for, thus managed, the cotton crop is |
one of the most exhaustive known.
But should we therefore denounce
and discoHntenance the cotton seed oil I
manufacture By no means; the oil |
is too, valuable, too much needed at a |
time when whale oil is fast declining |
in quantity and rising in price, to be |
lightly discarded Nor is the with /
drawal of the oil any injury to the soil
on which it was raised, since it con- |
tains scarcely an appreeiable quantity /
of mineral ingredients. The seed-cake
is equally as valuable as theseed from
which it was made, both as a manure |
and as food for cattle, (if We except |
fattening hogs, more valuable indeed /
in many points OF view.
The planter could well afford to give