The Florida agriculturist. [volume], July 19, 1893, Image 1

About The Florida agriculturist. [volume] (DeLand, Fla.) 1878-1911

Image provided by: University of Florida

                
MIL No. 29. Whole No. 761.
For The Florida Agriculturist.
Humbug vs. Humbug.
A circular from one of the numeroua
phosphate companies of Florida has fal
len into our hands. The circular bears
the caption, “Florida Soft Phosphate-
Humbug”? As might be supposed this
does not mean to say that the Florida
Phosphate is a humbug, but goes on to
say that there is more or less humbug
gery attached to the commercial fertili
zers sold in the State. We quote from
the circular as follows:
It is said that the American public
is fond of being humbugged; certain it
is that the American farmer has allowed
himnelf to be thoroughly and completely
humbugged, and by the same class of
humbug—commercial fertilizers —and
they are humbugged with their eyes
open, for the analyses of all fertilizers
is printed on the sacks. For instance a
noted orange tree mixture for which the
poor orange grower pays $40.00 per ton,
shows by analysis that it contains from
65 to 75 per cent, of lime, magnesia, etc.
and they ask you forty dollars per ton
for lime. You pay them, we persume,
'because the poor manufacturer of com
mercial fertilizers must be protected.
Now just stop and consider for a mo
ment. Think for yoursslf and reform.
JLiime can be purchased for $6 or $8 per
ton; why do you w ant to pay S4O for it ?
Say this fertilizer contains 4 per cent, of
ammonia and 3 to 4 per cent, of potash.
Can’t you purchase these ingredients
yourself and mix them? The process
is very simple. You can save at least
S2O per ton. Is this worth saving ?
The gist of the matter is that the com
pany issuing the circular offers to sell
soft ground phosphate at so much per
ton, which when mixed with the am
monia and potash will make a complete
fertilizer, and that the man who buys
these goods and mixes his own material
will save S2O per ton.
This circular while trying to make the
people believe they are being hum
bugged with commercial fertilizers is at
the same time trying to humbug them
with soft phosphate. The circular says
that by using the ground phosphate
(worth $8 per ton at the works) a com
plete fertilizer can be made for S2O and
that this fertilizer will be worth as much
as the S4O commercial article. This
is where the humbuggery comes in.
Perhaps a so-called complete fertilizer
may be made at the price indicated but
the grade would be very low and it cer
tainly would not be worth as much 'as
the forty dollar article. This is a will
ful misrepresentation, and the verest of
humbuggers. Now let us see what would
be the cost of a ton of fertilizer with the
percentages as given in the above anti
humbug circular.
DeLand, Fla., Wednesday, July 19, 1893.
To contain four per cent of potash,
and four per cent of ammonia, the mixt
ure must contain—
-300 pounds Sulphate of potash.
320 pounds of ammonia.
1380 pounds of ground phosphate.
The cost of this (with freight added
from the phosphate works to most all
points in the orange region) would be
as follows—
-300 pounds potash $4.05
320 pounds ammonia 11.84
1380 pounds ground phosphate 8.28
Total cost of material $25.07
This represents only the cost of the
material, to which must be added the
cost of mixing, which would probably
bring the ton of mixture up to S2B. Now
let us examine the analysis of this mixt
ure and compare it with that of the com
mercial goods.
The analysis of tl.e c ‘phosphate” fertil
izer is as follows. Potash, 4 per cent,
ammonia 4 per cent, phosphoric acid,
(available) about two thirds of one per
cent.
The analysis of a popular brand of fer
tilizer we have before us and which sells
at $39 is as follows—
Ammonia 4to 4 % per cent.
Potash (ac ual) 12 to 13 per cent.
Phosphoric acid, available 10 to 15
per cent.
We have before us another brand
made by the same manufacturers in
which soft ground phosphate is used as
a basis of phosphoric acid. The guar
anteed analysis of this brand is potash 7
to 9 per cent, ammonia 3 to 4 percent and
phosphoric acid (total) 10 to 15 per cent.
This fertilizer is of a much higher grade
than that made from the formula in the
circular, and is sold by the manufactur
ers at S2B per ton which is about what it
would cost to make the fertilizer referred
to in the circular.
The manufacturers of fertilizers buy
ing their material in large quantities
and having machinery for mixing it can,
of course, do the work better and
cheaper than the individual who must
do it by hand and purchase the materi
al in smaller quantities. Thus we see
as above the manufacturer can make a
higher grade of fertilizer from the soft
phosphate and sell it for less than the
consumer can make the lower grade ar
ticle, and at the same time this fertilizer
would doubtless be in a better mechan
ical condition and better mixed, as tke
manufacturer has machinery with which
to do this work.
After all there is more or less hum
buggery attached to the Florida phos
phates, perhaps not to the phosphates
but certainly to the representatives of
those who sell them. Those who wish
to apply to their grove any considerable
quantity of phosphoric acid will find the
ground phosphate but an indifferent
agent, as the available acid in the
rock is small in quantity, and the in
soluble slow inaction. If this element
was not immediately needed perhaps
the ground phosphate would serve the
purposes, as it would remain in the soil
and the phosphoiic acid it contains
in an insoluble form might be available
as plant food in the course of time, but
where immediate results are wanted the
ground phosphate in its raw state is
practically valueless, either if applied
alone or in combination with other
chemicals.
When the phosphate craze first struck
the State the boomers praised the
ground phosphate to the tikies as a
complete fertilizer—they claimed it con
tained all the elements of plant food
needed by the orange tree, and that the
cost of fertilizing would as a consequence
be very largely reduced. Many growers
were humbugged by this statement and
applied the phosphate and the phos
phate only to their groves. The ap
pearance of these groves is now the
strongest evidence that the grow ers who
used the phosphate were hum
bugged. We are inclined to think that
those who will follow the advice given
in the circular above referred to and at
tempt to compound a high grade ferti
lizer with ground phosphate as the basis
of tb.eir phosphoric acid, at one-half the
cost of the standard commercial brands
will admit after a trial that they have
again been humbugged with the ground
phosphate.
Curing Tobacco.
Mr. Carl Niedercr, of Winter Haven,
Polk County, writes us as follows under
date of the 19th.
“As tomatoes of late have been a total failure
with us, Mr. R. Kleraan and myself have planted
a little tobacco and wish to cure the same. I
thought it best to ask of you whether or not you
could inform us as to the process of curing, or
else where I could obtain the desired informa
tion.”
To those who have large tobacco crops
we would refer them to the article of
Prof. Hoodie’s in another column on the
modern tobacco barn, but if the crop is
a small one the following extract from
one of the bulletins of the Florida Exper
imental Station will be serviceable. We
republish it for the benefit of Messrs.
Niederer and Kleman and others who
may be interested in the matter.
CURING TOBACCO
The curing shed or barn may or may
not be a costly building in our climate.
For those who are beginners it is not nec
essary to build a barn especially for the
purpose if there is a gin house on the
premises or a log house that can be used.
I have seen the very best quality of
tobacco cured in a log house, the joists
of which were not six feet above the floor.
A common wagon shed will serve the
purpose to begin with, if closed on the
sides by rough-edgccl boards. The to
bacco crop of the Station is cured in the
upper part of a wagon and tool house.
A great many persons will doubtless be
gin the cultivation of tobacco by plant
ing from one-half to five acres. In their
interest the above is written. For those
who are determined to make it their bus
iness and who wish to build barns they
can do so cheaply with rough lumber.
The points to be observed are ventila
tion when needed and the shutting it oil'.
There should be doors at each end of the
barn large enough to drive a wagon
through. There is no necessity for a
wooden floor, but the sills ought to belaid
on brick or rock in our climate to pre
vent rotting and the space between the
sills and the ground closed with plank.
Frames from the top to the bottom should
be built inside on which to place poles or
laths on which to hang the tobacco to
dry. A sharp hollow spear that will fit
a lath, made sharp enough to pierce
through the stalk should be used. The
stalk pierced and slipped on the lath or
small pole and repeated until the pole is
full, not allowing the leaves to touch
each other and then put in place on the
frames, is the cheapest, easiest and most
expeditious way of hanging tobacco in
the barns. It, however, may be tied by
strings to a pole, or with a knife a slit
may be cut in the stalk and one end of
the small pole or lath may be sharpened
and pushed through but these methods
are both costly and tedious. Care should
be taken to economize all the space pos
sible and the number of stalks to each
lath or pole is to be settled by the dis
tance of frames apart on which they are
to rest. A shed thirty by sixty feet and
from ten to fourteen feet high is sufli
ciently roomy to cure five cr six acres of
tobacco. Persons who desire to build
fancy barns can do so, keeping in view
the necessity of ventilation both above
and below.
Messrs. E. G. Dickinson and A. 0.
Sasser of this place have recently re
ceived letters patent on an instrument
that is destined to prove of much value
to the farmers of the Smth. Its pur
pose is to remove weevils and other de
structive insects from grain stored in
bulk, which it does by injecting certain
chemicals into and throughout the bulk.
The chemicals are harmless only to in
sect life and the instrument has been
sufficiently tried in this county to test
its merits and insure its success.—Madi
son Recorder.
$2 Dcrlimm. in advance