In this article I wish to speak of soil analysis as helpful in determining what manures to apply to land. It is a plain proposition. If by analysis we can discover the constituents of soil, we can equally as readily detect the absent elements. Primary soil always contains potash, phosphorus, soda, magnesia, lime, sulphur, chlorine, silica, manganese, iron; hence, tests indicate which are not present, and the appropriate fertilizers can be applied. Science must be brought to bear in agriculture, or the highest success cannot be attained. I desire to treat of soil analysis, to give it the credit I think it merits. I by no means claim for it that it answers every purpose, so far as the ascertainment of the exact character of an extended area of land is concerned, though an approximation may be arrived at. Ground varies so in its composition, considered in its entirety. Says Prof. Robert Peter, chemist of the State College of Kentucky, " It has been found by experience, that the direct chemical analysis of the soil and of the fertilizer is the most economical method of ascertaining the deficiencies of the one and the composition of the other; and, as, this is necessarily somewhat costly, but can be more economically done by the community than by the individual, many governments in Europe and States in our own country have provided for this public want by the establishment of so-called agricultural stations.

The State of Kentucky, by providing for an extensive chemical analysis of her soils, has rendered great service to the future of her agriculture." Soil analysis, though certainly showing all the elements which are present, yet may prove deficient in determining the fertility of the land, from the soil elements being in insoluble combinations. Says Morris Copeland, "Each man's farming may be much improved by his clearly comprehending the principles of analysis, and the mutual relations between crops, manures and soils, the general physical character of different fields. He may then apply to each soil that kind of manure which is richest in the elements in which the soil in question is deficient; he will not waste it on a soil compounded in the same proportions as itself".

Soil tillage, to be worth anything, necessitates thorough familiarity with the constituents of land. How can we proceed intelligently otherwise ? Says Dr. Lawes, the world-noted agricultural experimenter, " It is quite true that all investigations concerning the composition of the soil are attended with great difficulties, but when once the fact is clearly recognized, that our advance in the path of scientific agriculture lies in a more complete knowledge of what is taking place in our soils, some, at all events, will be found who will not be deterred from such investigations because of the difficulties to be encountered in their pursuit." Dr. I. R. Nichols asserts, " Difficult and delicate as is the labor of determining the fertilizing principles in soil, it is quite within the power of the chemist to correctly determine their amount. If chemistry had no more difficult service to perform, we would not complain." Here is a very important feature in soil analysis. Suppose you are trying to raise a particular crop on certain land, and find it does not come well, though you expend a great amount of care upon it. Perhaps your neighbor is producing the same crop remuneratively, and on ground, to all appearances similar to your own. You are greatly puzzled.

You apply various fertilizers, without any appreciable effect. In your despair you resolve, as a last resort, to send a sample of your soil to some analyist. He detects just what is lacking, or what is too abundant in your land for the special crop you wish to raise. This is no fancy picture of mine. I can give exactly such cases. On Brae's Island, South Carolina, and on much of the South Atlantic coast there was a black soil that would not advantageously produce cotton. This was a serious matter, for cotton was styled " King." A sample was forwarded to the Agricultural Department at Washington for analysis. A qualitative examination was made, revealing the presence of proto-sulphate of iron, very probably sufficient cause for the poor cotton returns. A complete quantitative analysis was made. The preliminary gave moisture, 4.75; organic matter, 14.24; inorganic matter, 81.01. Specific gravity, 1.14. Aqueous extract of soil had an acid reaction. A stratum of soil I foot deep, extending over one acre, would contain 3,100,055 lbs; remembering the specific gravity, 1.14, a cubic foot of it therefore weighed 71.42 lbs.

The 3,100,055 lbs. of the soil was found capable of yielding materials immediately available for plant food as follows : Silicia, 1,331 lbs.; peroxide iron,.651; phosphoric acid,.440; potash, 2,077; magnesia, 1,305; lime, 1.023; organic matter, 6.201. "The presence of proto-sulphate iron, and probably free sulphuric acid," rendered the soil unfit for cotton. The analysis showed the necessity of removing the salt of iron and of neutralizing the free sulphuric acid, which could be effected by copious applications of lime. It taught also the necessity for under-drainage. I am thus minute, Mr. Editor, to show the keen searchings of soil analysis. The sorghum plots at the Department of Agriculture, Washington, were found lacking in something necessary for the perfect production of sorghum. The soil revealed, on analysis, a very small content of lime, and an almost entire absence of chlorine. Its need was sulphate of lime (land plaster or gypsum). I ask, was not this soil analysis valuable ? Was it not the very best thing to be done ? Here was a portion of the Department experimental farm set apart for the cultivation of sorghum. It was found to be ill adapted for the purpose.

Was it to be given up for that purpose ? Science wisely said, " No, not if tests can unfold the trouble." Again, the dark, steel-gray limestone of New Jersey was positively injurious to vegetation. What was to be done ? Leave the ground vacant ? That would have been folly. Something was radically at fault. Science again steps to the front and solves the problem. Analysis showed its deleterious effects were due to the high percentage of magnesia. The remedy was found. The influence of the magnesia was to be overcome. Prof. Hilgard affirms that the power of analysis is almost illimitable; it stops almost at nothing. Soil analysis began in this country about the year 1860. W. H. Farquhar reports a signal triumph in 1867. A quantity of soil from an old sedge field, long thrown out from cultivation, very sterile, was analyzed, with an equal quantity of very rich soil. The usual constituents, clay, silex, etc., were present in both, also lime. But the phosphates were almost entirely wanting in the poor soil, while present fully in the rich. The remedy was at once known. Bone was applied, and for nearly twenty years good crops of wheat, corn, clover and timothy were produced.

Says Farquhar, '* It appears to me a matter of positive certainty, whatever chemistry may have done or failed to do for agriculture in the past, that a wide field is open for it in the future. Great improvements are yet to be effected by its agency; but, in order to realize them, the chemist must become a practical farmer, and the farmer be an intelligent chemist." With your permission, Mr. Editor, I will continue the subject. Lexington, Ky.