^\^ sr4r/'
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITV LIBRARIES
S00641232 I
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE DATE
INDICATED BELOW AND IS SUB-
JECT TO AN OVERDUE FINE AS
POSTED AT THE CIRCULATION
DESK.
T5!c
OICEPTIOM:
earlier if this v
i0A^b mt
150M/01 -92— 920179
Date due will be
emisRECALLPr*
WCSU LIBRARIES
THE SUGAR BEET
NORTH CAROLINA.
REPORT TO THE
COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE
ON THE RESULTS OF
Experiments with the Sugar Beet
IN THE COUNTIES OF
ANSON, BEAUFORT, BURKE, CABARRUS, CHATHAM, DUPLIN"
EDGECOMBE, GRANVILLE, ORANGE and WAKE,
ALBERT K LEDOOX, Ph. D.,
CHEMIST TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
AND
Director of the State Experiment and Fertilizer Control
Station, at the State University.
CHAPEL HILL, N.C.
R A L E 1 a H :
FARMER AND MECHANIC STEAM BOOK, JOB OFFICE & BOOK BINDERY,
18 78.
REPORT.
Hon. L. L. Polk, Commissioner of Agriculture,
Dear Sir : I have the honor to lay before you the f ohow-
ing report upon the Sugar Beets grown in this State, and sent
to the Experiment Station for analysis. It is a matter of pro-
found regret to myself, as i^is to you and the other members
of the Board of Agriculture, that so few and meagre returns
have been made for the trouble you have taken, and the seeds
sent out.
The correspondence of those experimenters who have made
any report will point out many of the causes of failure. Chief
among them, perhaps, is the fact that the seeds did not reach
their destination until late in April, or early in May, a full
month too late. There are other causes undoubtedly wdiich
had their influence, and prominent among them, no doubt,
was a lack of full knowledge as to the proper means of culti-
vation. With this in view, I have embodied in my report at
some length, a synopsis of the best German experience. Owing
to a desire to awaken an increased and intelligent interest in
the subject, I have also added a brief resume of the present
state of the Sugar Beet industry in this country, and some
other matters which may be found practically valuable.
Though the results of your efforts to have the State fairly
represented have been so unfortunately few in number, yet
the analyses of the product of the ten counties represented in
my report are by no means discouraging. While in no case
does the per centage of sugar reach 12, yet the average of all
is much higher than that obtained in some States, and quite
encouraging. At any rate I hope that the present report may
(4)
be the meaus of keeping up the interest in the^State, and that
by beginning in season, and with the help of this year's ex-
perience, and with new hght on the subject, we can show the
world next year that the results we hoped|_to attain can be
fully realized. Yours respectfully,
ALBERT R. LEDOUX,
Agricultural Experiment Station,
State University, Chapel Hill, K. C
January dth, 1878,
SUGAR.
"Sugar, in the form with which we are most familiar — the
so-called " Cane Sugar" — has been known and used from the
most remote ages in India and China, the very name com-
ing down to us through the Arabic or Persian language, and
it is known as " Sukkar" in Arabia at the present day. The
*' Calamus," and " Sweet reed" of the Bible are also supposed
to refer to the Sugar Cane.
The manufacture of Sugar came slowly into Europe, en-
tering by way of Venice in the 10th century. Strabo,
Arrian, Pliny and others had already mentioned in their
historical accounts of the nearer Orient, the occurrance of a
plant — undoubtedly the Cane — which yielded a syrup that
was eaten as honey with bread, and was brought originally
from India and Ethiopia.
Pliny says further that it was called " Sacoharum," and
that sometimes when allowed to flow from the bruised plant
it would form a white, solid substance resembling salt, which
was used as a medicine. The early crusaders found the
Syrians indulging in a sweet juice " extracted from a Cane
which they broke up in mortars, and sometimes allowed
this extract to stand in the sun and evaporate, when a
whitish substance separated out, which was eaten with
bread." The crusaders got some of the seed, and bringing
back samples of the Cane, they introduced its cultivation
into Rhodes, Sicily and Crete in the 9th century. Thus
spreading from the Levant as a starting point, the process of
manufacture reached Venice in 996, Spain and Portugal
coming next, and finally in 1319 Sugar became an article of
importation into Great Britain in considerable quantity.
(6)
It is by no means improbable that the Spaniards found
the Sugar Cane already growing, when they discovered the
"West Indies ; at any rate with their wonderful adaptability
of soil and climate, and the subsequent introduction of slave
labor, they soon came into complete control of the sugar mar-
kets, and in the 16th century India, Europe, and the Medi-
terranean Islands were driven out of all competition, and
their manufactures languished.
There are three chief saccharine substances, difi'ering
slightly in chemical composition, which are more or less fa-
miliar to us. These are called " Cane Sugar," •' Grape Su-
gar," and " Milk Sugar." The last gives to milk its sweet
taste, and is found only in that animal secretion of which it
constitutes from 3 to 10 per cent. It is made frora whey, on
quite a large scale among the mountain dairies of Switzer-
land, and finds its chief use as a vehicle for Homeopathic
medicines, and in some localities as an article of food. It is
white, hard, and brittle.
Grape Sugar, called also " Glucose," is undoubtedly the
most abundant and widely distributed in nature of the three
forms of sugar. It gives to almost all fruits their sweet
taste, and is the main cause of the sweetness in nearly all
our cultivated vegetables. It can moreover be made artifi-
cially from starch by a very simple process, and yields
readily to fermentation, forming Alcohol, and on this ac-
count it is coming more and more into demand for the man-
ufacture of beers and alcoholic liquors. It is not crystali-
zable.
Cane Sugar is to every one a familiar friend, and needs no
description. It is the most common of all our so-called lux-
uries ; the last we give up when compelled to economize.
*It is claimed by some political economists that the cou-
*In 1866, at the close of the war, the consumption of sugar per capita
in the United States was only one half what it was in 187G.
(7)
sumption of Sugar will give a very fair idea of the wealth
and prosperity of a people.
Unlike Grape Sugar, Cane Sugar is produced by compai-
atively few plants, in sufficient quantity to render its ex-
traction profitable. The Sugar Cane, Chinese Cane, (or
Sorghum) the Sugar Maple, a few species of Palm and
the Sugar Beet being the only members of the vegetable
kingdom from which it is obtained in any quantity. ^Nor
can it be made artificially. Of the above mentioned sources
of Cane Sugar, Sugar Cane supplies G6 per cent., Sugar
Beets 28 per cent., the Palms 5 per cent., and the Maple 1
per cent.
In the Report of the United States Commissioner of Agri-
culture for 187G, we find the following tables, showing the
consumption, source and cost of the sugar used in this
country.
SOURCE AND CONSUMPTION.
" The commercial estimate of the supph' of the past year
is as follovrs :
TONS.
Cane Sugar, domestic and foreign 038,869
Cane Sugar received on the Pacific coast 28,300
Cane Sugar made from Molasses -13,(300
Maple Sugar 13,000
Domestic Beet, Sorghum, etc., 2,000
Taken for consumption in 1876 725,269
Taken for consumption in 1875 773,002
On the basis of a population of 45,000,000 the consumj*-
tion would be 36 pounds to each in 1876, and 38 for the
population in 1875. The sugar supply of the commercial
world in 1875 was 3,457,623 tons, of which 40 per cent, was
Beet Sugar made in Europe. Cuba produced one-third of
the Cane Sugar ; the other We:^t India Islands and Brazil,
(8)
Java and Mauritius, are all prominent sources of supply.
The ^following is an estimate from high authority of the
quantities produced of hoth kinds in 1875 :
CANE SUGAR.
TONS.
Cuba 700,000
Porto Eico 80,000
British, Dutch, and Danish West Indies • 250,000
Java 200,000
Brazil 170,000
Manila , 130,000
China 120,000
Mauritius 100,000
Martinique and Guadaloupe 100,000
Louisianna 75,000
Peru 50,000
Egypt 40,000
Central America and Mexico 40,000
Reunion 30,000
British India and Penang 30,000
Honolulu 10,000
Natal 10,000
Australia 51,000
Total tons 2,140,000
BEET-ROOT SUGAR.
TONS.
German Empire 346,646
France 462,259
Russia and Poland 245,000
Austria and Hungary 153,922
Belgi um 7 9,796
Holland, and other countries 30,000
Total tons 1,317,623
(9)
COST.
"The cost of these sweets is a serious burden upon the
country. " We have the soil to produce a full supply, either
of cane or beet sugar and laborers sufiering for work, and
measures should be taken for a rapid increase of home pro-
duction. The details of the cost of the sugar used in this
country, subject to a slight reduction from re-exportation,
are thus given in the statistics of the customs receipts :
FIfCAL YEAR OF 1876.
Sugar, brown pounds, 1,414,254,663 $55,702,903
Sugar, refined pounds, 19,981 1,685
Molasses .gallons, 39,026,200 8,157,470
Melada, syrup, &c pounds, 79,702,878 2,415,995
Candy, &c pounds, 87,955 18,500
$66,296,553'
Beside the cane proper, and sugar beet, a few other sources
of sugar have been suggested or tried in this country.
Among the most prominent being sorghum, the maple, and
recently watermelons.
SORGHUM,
Quoting again from the report of the Agricultural Bureau
for 1876:
" As an estimate for twenty-one years since the introduc-
tion of sorghum, 11,000,000 gallons of syrup per annum
might approximate the product. At an average value of
65 cents (it is less now) the value of the annual product
would be $7,150,000. The sugar of sorghum is a small
item, yet in fourteen years, in Ohio alone, it amounts to
(10)
503,000 lbs. Including sugar and forage, the annual value
must be not less than $8,000,000, and the aggregate value
$168,000,000 since its introduction by the Department of
Agriculture."
MAPLE SUGAR.
This industry which is of less importance in our Southern
country, is nevertheless of considerable value to the United
States. The total amount of sugar and syrup obtained from
this source in 1870 was equivalent to about 57,000,000
pounds of sugar, which at 10 cents per pound gives a total
value of $5,700,000.
The manufacture of sugar from watermelons is of more
interest to our people than that from the sugar maple, and
we shall watch with interest an experiment now in progress
in California. A stock company, with a capital of $2,000,-
000 is about commencing operations, and though chemists
and manufacturers are rather doubtful of their financial
success, they enthusiastically claim that they can obtain 10
per cent of sugar from the juice, alcohol from the pulp and
rind, and 25 per cent, of oil for table use from the seeds.*
THE SUUAR, BEET,
Having thus briefly examined the other sources of cane
sugar, let us now turn to the Sugar-Beet.
As long ago as 1747 a German chemist discovered the
presence of cane sugar in the white and red beet, and in
1796 the first factory for the manufacture of beet sugar was
established in Prussia. The great cost of cane sugar made
the new idea of obtaining it from a domestic source exceed-
* At some future day I hope to be able to make some experimeuts with
the Sweet Potato, which has a large per centage of grape sugar and starch.
and may yet possibly form the basis of a large industry in North Caro-
lina and the other Southern States.
(11)
ingly alluring. The experiment spread tlirougli Europe,
with many a failure, many a lesson gained through the loss
of enormous fortunes invested; now taxed, now protected
by the Governments, with constant improvements in culti-
vation and machinery, until at the present day nearly one-
third of the cane sugar used by the civilized world is ob-
tained from beets. At first the percentage of erystalizable
sugar in the juice of the beets was low, and only with im-
proved means of cultivation, the results of many experi-
ments, did the French and German agriculturists learn to
produce a uniform average of 12 per cent, or over.
The beet is a natural growth in several localities, abound-
ing in a wild state on the Mediterranean coast. The present
varieties of sugar beet are the result of cultivation and hy-
bridization.
Before speaking of the results of our experiments in this
country to raise the beet profitably, I have deemed it best
to present to our farmers a synopsis of the results obtained
by the European experimenters, and which show what treat-
ment the beet requires from the cultivator to give uniformly
good results. This information is clearly and concisely
stated in Dr. Stammer's " Lehrbuch der Zuckerindustrie,"
and I beg to be allowed to give a somewhat free translation
of the valuable chapter on the
CULTIVATION OF THE BEET.
1. " The Soil. — Although neither by chemical analysis nor
by examination of the physical properties, can we tell in
every case that a certain soil will or will not grow the beet
successfully, yet experience has shown that, in general,
successful culture requires a soil loose ; deep, rather more rich
in humus; more loamy and limey than sandy ; with porous sub-
soil, and a warm., sunny (xjyosure. Of course not dejicie7it in
any of the necessary ingredients of plant food, which may
(12)
easily be the case, when the potash and phosphoric acid
have been too largely drawn upon.
The recognition of a suitable soil for sugar beets presents
greater difficulties than for many other plants, for they
obtain most of their indispensable nutriment, by means of
their long root, from the sub-soil, and the composition of this
eub-soil is therefore of immense importance. It is on this
account that the experiments hitherto, with superficial ma-
nuring, have yielded no uniform results. We manure that
portion of the soil, to be sure, from which the growing beet
does long derive noarishment, but not that portion whence
the plant obtains its food during the all important period of
the formation of sugar. And the chemical means of send-
ing the manures down into the sub-soil (viz : by admixture
of chloride of sodium,) are by no means so certain in their
application that we can trust confidently that invariable
results will follow every such experiment.
On the other hand, and in perfect accord with this, deep
ploiving, (subsoiling) has given the best and surest results
in beet culture ; and all observations upon the happy influence
■of the steam plow upon the beet crop, without exception,
(if we look at them in the proper light) may be referred
back to this cause, deep plowing.
From this standpoint all those efforts lohich have for their
mm the improving of the subsoil by mechanical., as loell as by
chemical means are the most important in beet cidtivaiion. In
other words, on one hand the deeper cultivation of the ground,
•on the other the sub-soiling ['untergrunddungung,' (manur-
ing the subsoil.)]
Chemical analysis of that portion of the soil which we are
accustomed to call the sub-soil ('acker krum') with a view
to the cultivation of sugar beets, save in exceptional cases,
is of little or no importance or use. And as far as the phys-
ical properties are concerned, experiment is always the best
■means of ascertaining ivhether a soil is suited for beet culture
(13)
07' not. Of course such soils as do not meet the general re-
quirements mentioned above are out of the question; for ex-
ample, such as are too sandy, wet or stony. And on the other
hand, those soils which, from their origin would be expected
to possess those elements of plant food most abundant in the
ash of the beet, will more probably show a better adapta-
bility for beet culture. We should not, however, draw too
hasty conclusions from the result of a single experiment.
The work expended upon the soil becomes perceptible only
by degrees, hence a field only becomes a good beet-growing;
field by degrees."
MANURING.
2. " Manuring should always first of all give back to the
ground what the harvest has removed from it, and not only
the mineral (inorganic) constituents, but also the nitrogen.
Nothing is surer than that a soil to which a full return of ijlant
food is 7\ot made, loses by degrees its power to -produce the crop
requh^ed in normal quantity and composition. The experimental
cultivation of the beet with artificially prejiared fertili-
zing liquids has been much less pursued than with other
plants, and therefore the relation between the composition of
these liquids and the development of the beet is not yet de-
termined. AVe lack also the basis upon which to predicate
the direct action of manures upon the beet. Here lies the
difficulty, above indicated, of applying the manurial sub-
stances to that layer of the soil whence the beet principally
derives its nourishment. Hence in the present state of our
knowledge and of our fertilizers, the object of our fertiliza-
tion can be nothing more than the retaining in good condition
of a soil ivhich is already suitable for beet culture.'"
" After the above remarks it will not be thought aston-
ishing when we say that all the laborious and painstaking
experiments with the manuring and culture of beets have a&
yet giveu no results uniform and everywhere applicable.
Such results we can only expect from a study of those laws
which may be deduced from the artificial cultivation of the
beet in special liquids.
And yet it is in no contradiction of these facts when we
advise the beet culturist to keep up constant experiments
with fertilizers upon different sells. It is in such cases Only
necessary to determine the particular form and quantity of
manure which under the peculiar local conditions gives the
best returns. And in many cases some particular form of
manure will prove the best, but the power to produce a safe
and invariable influence upon the crop will only seldom be
attained. The effect of those factors over which we have no
power, climate and weather, are of infinitely greater in-
fluence than the small alterations which we can produce by
ihe augmentation, deterioration, or maintenance of good
■condition of soil within the circumscribed limits of artificial
fertilization."
" Experience has taught that those beets which are raised
upon fields manured with fresh — especially stable -manure
are less suited for manufacturing purposes. On this account
the rule has long been established that the manure should
not be applied directly to the beets, but to some other pre-
vious crop, or, that beets should be cultivated as the 2ad or
3rd in a series of rotation. Unfortunately this rule, most
important to the manufacturer, was not so generally observed
in earlier times as it should have been, so that very often on
account of heavy manuring large crops were obtained, but
at the expense of the sugar, or quality of the juice.
This rule is especially applicable to stable manure, and
that from cess-pools ; less so to the so-called " artificial ferti-
lizers" which, when they are not employed directly in too
great quantities, are followed by fewer injurious effects.
The principal constituents which must be taken into ac-
count in reckoning the addition to and removal of plant food
(15)
from the soil by beets, are Potash, Phosphoric Acid, Mag.
nesia and Nitrogen. As the amount harvested difters with
the soil and other circumstances, we will therefore employ
for our calculations following, the mean proportion of these
four substances present in 1000 lbs of beets and bett tops,
as determined by analysis :
1,000 lbs of
Roots Leaves
CONTAIN :
Potash 3.9 lbs. 6.5 lbs.
Phosphoric Acid 0.8" 1.3 "
Magnesia 0.5 •' 2.7 "
Nitrogen 1.6 " 3.0 "
Ash 7.1 " IS.l "
We see from this table, by noticing the proportion be-
tween roots and leaves, that the removal from the soil
by the leaves is so considerable, that it should receive cpiite
especial consideration in the calculation, when the tops are
not returned to the field immediately after the harvest.
The latter proceeding is to be urged all the more, since on
most beet farms there is a deficiency of fodder, and it is a
temptation to replace the loss in fodder by feeding the tops.
From this standpoint, the wide spread custom of paying for
pulling the beets by giving the tops to the laborer for his
work, is an evil which should be striven against. It is pretty
certain that a full compensation to fields so treated carmot be
effected.
"The removal of potash can be easily reckoned, as in the
following illustration, for example, and thereby we can
show what return of potash is needed, if the field is to con-
tinue to produce plants containing potash. In one distillery
in France, which is, to be sure, rather exceptional in the
enormous business it does, over 82,000 lbs. of molasses per
(16)
day are converted into alcohol, equivalent to the yearly
harvest of 79,000 acres of beets. The residue from this
molasses is worked up into potash and soda salts. These
salts were originally extracted from the soil in minute quan-
tities, little by little, by the long and tedious processes of
vegetation ; processes artificially inimitable. They are ex-
clusively used in chemical industries, and not returned to
the soil.
If we calculate the amount of potash which is removed
from 79,000 acres in the molasses and add to it besides that
removed with the raw sugar, we find it reaches at least 28,000
cwt per year, for which compensation must be made. * *
* * As in this case only the potash is considered which
was obtained in the Jinal product, these figures are much
below the reality; really deceptive in fact, when we think
of what is lost by imperfect extraction, and left in the press
cake, &c., &c.
In this way should evert/ farmer calculate, in order to find
out whether there is danger, either in the near or distant
future, that his land should become 'poor in potash. That such a
result will happen is certain, even though a particularly bountiful
supply of potash in the soil inay put it off for some time J'
"The fonn in which the above mentioned plant constitu-
ents should be returned to the soil, is fixed as far as the phos-
phoric acid and magnesia are concerned ; partly also for
the nitrogen. Super phosphates, with more or less accom-
panying nitrogen (naturally present or added) may always
be used. The magnesia may come from the w^aste material
of sugar manufacture, with which direct investigation has
shown it is nearly all returned to the soil, although the state
of sub-division does not insure entirely even distribution.
This latter defect may be partly remedied by cutting up or
composting. It is to be recommended from time to time to
' make calculations based on analysis of the manurial sub-
stances employed, so as to ascertain the amount of phosphoric
(17)
acid, and especially magnesia, added to the soil. For these
last two substances this (calculation) is easily made. More
difficult is the question of the potash which has been re-
moved by the crop. Manuring with potash salts is fre-
quently undervalued, and undoubtedly because large and
tangible results were expected which failed to appear, while
the chief end of potash manures is neither in augmenting nor
bettering the crop, but in causing it to hold its own. This re-
sult is especially noticeable from the fact that no diminution
takes place in the yield, which would certainly be the case
in a greater or less number of years if the compensation
was not complete. *****
A further consideration, and such an one as would greatly
modify the results, lies in the form of the potash compound
employed. There is no other point on which the opinions
of practical men so much differ as in this, and continually
are new compounds declared to be the best; but of universal
application alone is the rule above, that we should always
mix the potash salts with common salt (NaCl), in order to
insure their being conveyed to the lower soil ; also the ad-
mixture of magnesia salts, when these have not been ap-
plied in some other way. l!^one of the potash salts from
natural deposits possess any peculiar merit above the others.
But those having an admixture of organic matter seem to
me to be preferable. * * * * For this pur-
pose, that potash coming from the beet itself — the residue
rich in lime, the molasses, &c. — is most valuable and
should be returned to the field when possible. One
should not believe, however, that potash sufficient for
the development of the plant has been added when the
molasses and other waste products of the beet harvest have
been returned to the field. Without taking into considera-
tion the leaves, which may have been left upon the field, a
very large amount of potash is still necessary, and the mo-
alone does not restore the amount needed by a good
(18)
deal, as an easy calculation will show. In manufactories
where raw sugar is sold, much potash is disposed of with
the sugar, and in all manufactories the waste water always
carries off potash compounds, and although in compara-
tively small amounts, yet in sufficient quantity to account
for the difference between the amount of potash found in
the beet, and in the molasses. This is no theoretical consid-
eration, but one founded upon exact comparative analyses."
" There are however large tracts of beet growing country
where, on account of the present state of things, or owing to
their locality, this style of manuring (with beet re-
fuse) is difficult or impossible. For such, as also for the
«ver present deficit above mentioned, we are thrown back
upon the "Potash salts," and this must be the case on many
farms till an easier method of manuring with beet refuse
[press cake] is discovered. Without allowing myself to go
into the question as to which is the best Potash salt, and
why such dissimilar results from manuring are observed,
I will nevertheless point out the fact that the universally
good results which follow the manuring with beet refuse
[press cake] will serve as a kind of guide board for us; that
is, that the present method of applying the Potash salts broad
cast over the field should be supplanted by another, viz :
dissolving the salt in liquids which are rich in organic matter.
We should certainly expect that a solution of the Potash
salt in the urine from the stalls and stables for example,
would insure a very equal distribution of the Potash in the
soil, and in fact in a form better suited to the assimilative
powers of the plant, than scattering about small crystals of
an inorganic Potash compound. Naturally this same result
may be reached in other ways, as for example, by mixing a
concentrated water solution with the other manure, or with
the compost heap and applying to the field the manure
thus enriched with Potash. Experience and personal ex-
periment will point out the preferable way.
(19)
Tlie advantages of such mixing of Potash salts with the
stable liquids (often accomplished by farmers by strewing
the Potash salt about the stalls) are thus enumerated by
Frank.
1. The sulphate of magnesia contained in the Potash
salts holds (retains) the Ammonia and Phosphoric Acid.
2nd. The too rapid fermentation of the urine is prevented.
3rd. The prevention of the loss of Ammonia, and too rapid
fermentation make the manure sweeter and more healthy.
4th. The tediousness of scattering broadcast is obviated, and
a much better sub-division and distribution upon the field
are obtained. 5th. Tjie cost of manuring with Potash is
thus lessened, as the cheaper Potash salts, on account of the
magnesia they contain are better for dissolving in this
manner. 6th. The expense for plaster which otherwise
would have to be employed is obviated." [Dr. Stammer
here goes on to prove the value of the sugar beet refuse,
and gives the three methods of applying it usually em-
ployed, viz : leading the liquids in pipes to the field from a
reservoir, carrying it there in barrels, etc., or burning it
and then applying the ashes. The first is too expensive for
general use, and the the latter causes a loss in nitrogen
A. R. L ] * *****
'' If we ask what quantity of the above recommended
manures should be used, surely no farmer would expect a
special, universally applicable answer, and I will only re-
call the general rule that it is alwaijs desirable, if not actually
necessary, to restore to a ji-ild all thz mineral elements of ^lant
food, and from 2 to 2, times tlu amount of Ammonia removed by
the crop. I will further remark that an excessive applica-
tion of Potash and Phosphoric Acid (the cost of Ammonia
will insure that the above given proportion is not exceeded.)
has no injurious effect upon the beet, at least not within
the limits caused by errors in calculation, or mistakes in
practice. On the other hand writers are beginning to agree
(20)
that excessive application will not increase the yield in the
same proportion. *****
* * * * "In speaking of the purely agricultural
part of the work of sugar beet culture, I will only point out
the importance, the necessity oi deep cultivation, and though
the subsoil, according to its character, need not always be
turned up, it must be pulverized and drained as well as
possible — an axiom which cultivation by steam has fixed
beyond a doubt." *****
" I think I can not better close this short consideration of
the most important points in the development of the beet,,
than by giving the most important rules in a brief and
concise form :
1. Be exceedingly careful in choosing your land and your
seed.
2. Spare no pains in applying the manure. For this pur-
])ose take into consideration, not only the debtor and credit
sides of the yield of the field, but also the compensation that
the ground requires for the constituents removed by the
harvest, and their proper return in manure.
3. A rotation of crops must be observed, and such fields
kept out of the number used for beets, which show their un-
suitableness for beet culture.
4. Beet culture must not be on too large a scale, when one
wishes larger harvests and good beets, and larger lather
than smaller harvests of grain, than he obtained before
going into the beet culture.
5. The preparation of the soil must take place at the
proper time, in a proper way, and with proper tools.
G. The seed should be sown as early as the state of the
ground and the climate will allow.
7. Be not too tardy in pulling up the beets.
8. The lioc siiuuld be used as often and as much as possi-
ble.
9. The harvest must not be put off. * * *
(21)
iO. Never cease to observe and learn.
11. Protect the birds, which destroy the hurtful insects,
and wage against their enemies a ceaseless warfare."
This excellent advice of Dr. Stammer, embodying the
experience of French and German agriculturists, contains
much by which we may profit, not only in our experiments
with the beet, but also in our general farming.
As before said, the cultivation of the sugar beet has
spread to all parts of Europe, and but slight trouble seems
to have arisen on account of the difference of climate, for
we find the beet growing, and manufactories running in
Russia, Sweden, Bohemia, Austria, France, Germany, Hol-
land, Belgium, etc., etc.
In this country nearly every one of the northern States
and many of the western have made greater or less experi-
ments on growing the beet, and have usually stopped there.
In many instances a fair per centage of sugar was found in
the juice, even Canada comparing very favorably with the
old world in that respect. Statistics of these experiments
are not easily accessible, but I will give below some of the
results attained in several States, and will refer the reader
to the various State reports for the details.
Average amount of sugar in beets raised in the following
localities:
Per cent, sugar.
Westchester county, N. Y., 1872, 8.70
Dutchess county, " " 10.97
Washington " (a) " " 11.70
" (b) " '' 9.50
Herkimer " " " 11.00
Orleans " " " 12.40
Amherst, Massachusetts, 1870, 12.70
1871, 10.79
(22)
Amherst, Massachusetts, 1872, 7.37
Montreal, Canada, 1973, 8.86
Bridgeville, Delaware, 1876, 2.75
Camden, " " 7.40
Newark, " " 3.70
Seaford, " " 2.00
Wyoming, " " 5.50
Wilmington, " " 3.00
Harbeson, " " 2.88
Milton, " " 3.90
Dover, " " 4.40
Felton, " " 4.75
Ellendale, " " 2.00
Milford, " " 14.70
Lincoln, " " 3.00
Harrington, " " 5.10
Pleasant Hill, " " 7.74
Falkland, " . " 13.00
Farmington, " " 5.70
Wood stown, New Jersey, " 4.30
Pennsgrove, " " 3.90
Pedricktown, " " 4 20
Sharpsburg, Maryland, " G.20
Omaha, Nebraska, *' 13.50
Lincoln, '' " 13.50
(13 other localities in Nebraska gave an average of over
15.50 per cent., the highest being 15.61, the lowest 7.20 per
cent.
Virginia Agricultural Experiment farm, 1872, (a) 13.72
u (b) 10.17
There have been many other* experiments in growing the
beet in different Slates, but they do not differ in general re-
sults from those cited above. It will be seen that in many
cases very excellent results were obtained, and yet in spite
(23)
of this fact there has been comparatively little done in the
line of manufacture. I have not thought it necessary to
cite the variety of seed used in the several cases, nor the
character of soil and cultivation employed.
MANUFACTURE OF BEET SUGAR.
The history of the efforts to make sugar profitably from
the beet in this country can be very easily told. The fol-
lowing are the principal experiments in that direction :
David L. Child, of Northampton, Mass., made 1,300 lbs.
of sugar from beets grown on his own farm in 1838. Yield,
13 tons of beets per acre, at a cost of $42.
In 1853 Gennert Bros., from Germany, started a beet far'^i
of 2,400 acres, at Cliatsworth, Ills. The land ''analyzed
well," yet failed to yield satisfactory results. Drought, poor
seed, floods, &c., also militated against them, and in 1870
they removed to Freeport, Ills., and, if I am not mistaken,
have but lately closed their factor}", having produced 200,-
000 lbs. of sugar in 1870, at a reasonable profit.
In 1867 a company was formed in Wisconsin, at Fond du
Lac, under the lead of Messrs. Bonesteel and Otto,l)ut on n
small scale, the works having a limited capacity. They
have recently consolidated with a California compan}' which
is still working successfully in that State.
In 1870 a co-operative company of farmers started a smal'J
factory, and were quite successful, at Black Hawk, Wiscon-
sin. A deficiency in their water-supply seems to have been
their greatest drawback.
The largest and most successful experiment was institu-
ted in California. In 1860 Mr. Speckman made an attempt
at beet culture near San Francisco. The soil was not suit-
able and he abandoned the enterprise. In 1869 Mr. Went-
worth instituted another experiment at Alvarado, and suc-
ceeded in extracting from his beets several hundred pounds
((24)
of sugar. Capitalists became interested and a company
was formed which, under the management of General
Huchison, has had quite a success. The two German ex-
perimenters from Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, Messrs. Bone-
steel and Otto, were taken into the company, as already
stated. Drought and other causes interfered with their suc-
cess at times, but in 1871 they reported an average yield of
15 tons of beets per acre, and a product of 1,000,000 pounds
of sugar. Another company is now formed in California,
and the industry seems to have gained more of a foothold
on the Pacific coast tlian elsewhere.
Besides the above experiments many individuals have
raised the beet and extracted the sugar on a smaller scale.
Prof. Goessman, with apparatus improvised for the occa-
sion, obtained a yield of from 8 to 9 per cent, of sugar from
beets grown in Massachusetts, or at the rate of nearly 2,000
pounds of sugar per acre.
The number of failures to make the business pay has
been due to a variety of causes; prominent among them a
lack of sufficient capital to outlive the unavoidable dela3's
and expense of getting a good start, neglecting to determine
beforehand how cheaply a good beet can be raised, &c., &c.
Bad management, too, had its share of the blame. One
company failed, I am told, because they selected for the site
of their works the summit of a hill ; very picturesque, to
be sure, and giving a fine outlook over their acres of grow-
ing beets, but unfortunately the extra expense of carting all
their fael and beets uj) hilj and pumping up all their water
ate up the profits, and the company failed. Another com-
pany bought the works, moved them down the hill and are
now said to be doing tolerably well.
There are many sanguine people both in tiiis country
and in Europe who point to the sugar beet industr}' as one
•of great importance to America, and embodying the poten-
tial flemcnts of great wealth to our people. And they point
(25)
to our climate, soils and improving methods of agriculture ;
to the comparatively limited area where the cane can thrive,
in support of their views. But there are others who point
to the price of labor, the expensive processes compared with
those necessary for the raising and working up of the sugar
cane, and the small profits now being made by our cane
sugar manufacturers and refiners, and declare the whole
idea a snare and a delusion.
To show the profit and loss side of the question, I will
append a calculation made by Mr. H. P. Humphrey, of
Philadelphia, a distinguished sugar chemist, who has given
much thought and time to the subject. He has addressed
a circular to capitalists and others in the hope that a care-
ful and thorough experiment, backed by capital, may be
made to prove finally the possibility or impossibility of
planting this new industry firmly in our midst.
After quoting the statistics I have already recorded to
show the amount of beet sugar produced in the world in
1865-76, Mr. Humphrey goes on to say :
" The following table represents the statistics of the Ger-
man Empire in regard to the beet sugar industry, as gath-
ered from data in "Stammer's Jahresbericht," the most re-
liable authority obtainable :
1
lb
^1
2
p
<
Amount
Molasses os
Centners.
4
5
6
I
c i
7
m
ill
z°3
1836-37
506,923
5,131,516
5,633,848
27,550,208
.50,712,709
70,575,000
55,072,412
28,162
284,102
402,418
2,071..579
4,024,818
5,779,442
21,789
5.5
18.
1841-42
.59
3.54
14.16
17.75
18.93
18.93
1846-'47 ....
1856-'57
1866-'67 ....
1873-'74
169,615
633,678
1,242,461
200,000
3,912,271
10,001,508
13,389,827
10,525,207
7.14
7.52
7.9
8 2
14.
13.
12.6
19, 9
1874-'75 ....
5,011,.589
9.ll 10.99
(26)
Column 1 shows the advance which has been made in the
industry since 183G. Columns 4 and 5 show the tax which
has been levied and the amounts which have been realized
by the Government. The average yield of an acre in Ger-
many is 11.7 tons. The tax paid upon this quantity is $45.
This amount would be a great offset to the greater cost of
cultivation in this country. No data can be found to estab-
lish at what price beets may be raised here. Estimates
have been given, which vary all the way from sixt3'-four
cents to four dollars a ton. The average of the results of
the experience of eighteen persons is two dollars and forty-
two cents per ton. (See "Scientific American," April Hd,
1869.) These estimates, I think, should not be relied on,
as the cost would probably reach three dollars per ton ;
there are also no sufficient data to show the amount of beet
roots which can be raised to acre in this country.
The following tables will elucidate these points as regards
Germany, France and Russia. These estimates were made
some j'ears ago, but will serve to give a general idea of the
amount raised per acre :
COST OF PRODUCTION AND THE DIVISION OP EXPENSES INCITKRED
PER ACRE.
GERMANY. FRANCE. RUSSIA.
Rent and manure $ 18.73 ) $ 38.31 $ 12.39
Cost of production 14.28) 12.39
Tax 42.30 49.58 13.52
Cost of manufacture 50.47 69.11 50.70
$ 125.78 $ 157.00 $ 89.00
Tons of beets per acre 11.6 17.9 9.2
Per cent, sugar extracted — 8. 6. 6.
Pounds sugar extracted per
acre 2,078 2,403 1.236
By reference to column 6 of preceding table it will be
seen that the amount of sugar extracted is nine and one-
(27)
tenth per cent, which is the amount extracted at the date-
of this latter table.
I would also call your attention to columns 6 and 7, as-
showing the gradual increase in the extraction of sugar
from the beet, owing to the production of a better quality
of beet, as well as the improvements made in ihe method
of manufacture. As regards the possibility of our being
able to raise a beet of good quality, there is very little doubt
when we consider that excellent sugar beets have been pro-
duced here experimentally, and that the beet flourishes in
Europe in such a variety of climate, from Italy to Russia
and Sweden. In Sweden, where the season is very shorty
beets having a high per cent, of sugar are produced in pay-
ing quantities. I would again refer, whilst considering the
probability of the production of the beet at a suflficiently low
figure, to the enormous sum paid as tax — from ^34 to $54
per acre.
As regards the comparative yield of the beet and cane :
In Louisana the average yield per acre is about seventeen
tons, and five per cent- is extracted :
pounds.
Amount of sugar produced per acre in Louisiana, 1,904.
Amount of sugar produced per acre in foreign
cane districts, 1,600 to 4,800.
Amount of beet sugar produced per acre in Ger-
many, 2,078.
Amount of beet sugar produced per acre in France, 2,403.
Russia, 1,236.
Only one-eighth of the amount of sugar consumed in the
United States in 1875 was prqduced in Louisiana.
The following is an estimate which I have made upon the
probable returns of a manufactory consuming fifteen
million pounds of beets in one hundred days. The manu-
factory would cost about sixty thousand dollars. Stock of
bone black (75,000 lbs) $2,250.
(28)
EXPENSES.
16,350 days labor at $1.20 $19,610
Superintendent, 3,000
1 boiler, 1,500
1 defecator, 1,200
Book-keeper and clerk, 3,000
Engineer, 1,000
Carpenter, &c., 1,000
Total skill labor $10,700
1,100 tons of coal at.... $3.50 3,850
Taxes, Insurance, 2,000
Bone black loss 750
4,500 bushels of lime at $28 1,260
Int. on working capital 3,500
6,696 tons beets at $4 26,784
Incidentals, 10,000
Interest on plant 4,200
Interest, total, $28,654
1,200,000 lbs. 8 per cent., yield at $8.25, ... $99,000
1,227 tons of press cake at $4 a ton, 4,908
Molasses, 1,825
Residues as fertilizeis, 1,500
Total, $107,233
Total expenses, 82,654
Profit, $24,579
I have considered four dollars per ton a fair price to pay
(29)
the farm for the beets. Should it be possible to raise the
beets for three dollars a ton, there would be for a farm of
578 acres the net profit of $6,704 which is to be added to the
above profit if the manufacturer cultivates his own beets.
8i cents per pound is a low estimate for raw sugar. Sev-
eral refiners whom I have consulted consider the value to
be 8f cents. I have considered the yield of sugar as 8 per
cent., although last year in Germany in was 9 1-0 per cent.
I have calculated the press cake as worth four dollars per
ton. This is a low estimate, Dr. Goessmann, a gentleman
who is perhaps better acquainted than any one in the coun-
try with the facts which bear upon the industry, considers
that the value of the press cake is $17.40 per acre. This
would make the total amount for 578 acres $9,157 instead
of $4,908. I have thought better to choose the latter sum,
as there would be a certain prejudice to be overcome before
the farmers would be willing to pay the real value.
The foregoing are a few of the facts which I have chosen
to present to you, and which have been carefully selected,
and I think in respect to the estimates, fairly stated. My
views as regards the establishment of this industry are as
follows :
Starting out with the idea that the important point to be
established is, how cheaply can beets of good quality be
produced in this country, I would have a company formed
of capitalists who are willing, if the preliminary experi-
ments should prove successful, to furnish about $150,000-
capital. Two or three farms of from twenty to twenty-five
acres should be hired, in sections where the climate and
soil appear favorable. These should be cultivated at least
two years with beets according to the methods adopted in
Germany and France. It appears to me of no use to trust
the raising of beets to farmers alone. The experiment has
been tried repeatedly and it has proved almost impossible
to overcome their prejudice as regards the proper method
(30)
of cultivation. The amount of beets produced, the per.
cent, of saccharine matter, &c., and the total cost should be
carefully noted. If it was desired, the raw sugar could be
extracted, although this is not essential, as the subject has
been so well studied abroad that the amount of sugar ob-
tainable from a beet of a certain quality could be very
closely estimated. From these experiments the amount
and cost of raising the beet could be fairly calculated ; if
the results should be satisfactory, the land could be pur-
chased and the manufactory built. The experiment would
not be expensive, as the crop of beets could be sold and go
far to repay the outlay. It is of course not probable that as
satisfactory results as are figured will be obtained for several
jears, but there seems to be little doubt that Government
^nd State aid might be obtained. Already in Canada they
liave offered $7,000 a year and exemption from taxes for
ten years to the first manufacturer. In Maine the same in-
ducements are offered, one cent a pound until the amount
reaches $7,000 ; with that surety capital would run small
risk in making the venture."
I have no doubt at all that such experiments as Mr.
Humphrey proposes will be undertaken, and why shall not
Korth Carolina prove so alluring a field that they will be
undertaken here?
THE SUGAR BEET IN NORTH CAROLINA.
It was without doubt an easy conclusion to reach that
somewhere within the ample borders of the " Old North
State" the sugar beet — or indeed almost any other plant —
might find itself at home, and prosper, embracing as she
does nearly every variety of climate, and infinite diversity
■of soil, with an average temperature corresponding with
that of the best beet growing portions of Europe.
(31)
These and other natural advantages, together with the
results of a small experiment made in Wake county in 1876,
induced the Department of Agriculture to institute the ex-
periment on a broader field, and with this end in view, they
procured from a reliable source a quantity of seed of two
kinds : the French or " Vilmorin," and the Silesian or " Im-
perial," These seeds were sent out to 100 prominent far-
mers, in 34 counties, embracing nearly every variety of soil
and climate represented in the State. The following in-
structions were sent out wdtli the seeds:
"Circular to Experimenters in Sugar Beets.
NORTH CAROLINA, )
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, ^
Raleigh, April 20th, 1877. )
Sir : — Encouraged by the results of an experiment, made
in Wake county last year with the sugar beet, the Board of
Agriculture were induced to buy a lot of imported seeds for
purposes of experiment in different sections of our State. It
is confidently believed, that should a fair test be made the
result would show, that here, as in France and Germany,
it would be one of the most profitable industries of our
people. Nearly half the sugar consumed by the civilized
world is made from the beet and it is thought that the
adaptability of our soil and climate to its successful culture,
would at no distant day, place our State on the list as
among the largest producers of this great commercial com-
modity.
With the view of introducing this important industry,
you have been selected as a proper person to test it in your
county. The following suggestions we ask should be ob-
served rigidly, as they are founded on the experience of 50
years in Europe, and are indispensable to success.
Soils. — Newly cleared, heavy clay, wet or salt lands are
(32)
unsuited to the beet— any good wheat lands, light, rich and
loamy ; or in other words, any place that would make a
good garden spot would suit the beet.
Preparation and Manure. — Plough or spade at least 15
inches deep, and pulverize thoroughly, putting on broad-
cast any commercial fertilizer known to be good for vege-
tables, at the rate of 400 pounds per acre, or ashes at the
rate of 25 bushels per acre. Be sure not to use stable or barn-
yard manure. The object of deep cultivation is to cause the
beet-root to grow entirely below the surface, the part above
being injurious to sugar making, and if the root should
grow above the surface it must be kept covered with earth.
Seed-planting. — Soak in water 24 hours, and as soon as you
see signs of sprouting roll them in wood ashes or plaster,
and plant not more than one inch deep, and thick enough
in the drill to leave the plants from 8 to 12 inches apart af-
ter thinning. Have the rows from 18 to 22 inches apart
Remember that large beets are poor in sugar, and it is the
percentage of sugar ice wish to determine.
Cultivation. — Should be deep and thorough, and should
begin as early as practicable, keeping the ground loose and
clear of weeds — thinning out or transplanting as may be
required to secure a proper stand.
Maturity of Beet. — This will be ordinarilly about five
months after planting. The proper time for gathering may
be ascertained by the leaves turning yellow or looking
flabby — or perhaps better still by cutting a root in slices
with an iron knife, and if the surface cut does not change
its color, or if any, but little, it is time to take them up. If,
however, the surface should turn first red, then brown, and
finally quite dark it is too soon. In harvesting, particular
care should be taken not to cut or bruise them, and they
would do better, if the weather be favorable, to lay them in
piles on the ground, and cover with the tops to protect them
from the sun, for three or four days.
(33)
Presercatlon—h\ our climate the usual methods a(l(»[)te«i
for keeping the ordinary beet or potatoes will answer.
lleport to be 31ade. — You will please keep correct notes of
your process of treatment from the time you begin the pre-
paration of the ground— kind of soil and subsoil — kind and
quality of manure used — mode of cultivation — estimate of
the number of bushels per acre, &c.
It is exceedingly important that this report be correct
Packing the Lot for Analysis. — As soon as you gather them,
you will select carefully not less than two bushels, taking
particular care to select such as have the roots and tops entire
and imbrulsed, and that are of average si::e and well matured.
Do not wash them, but rid them of the dirt as best you can
without breaking the roots, and pack them in a good strong
crate or box, so made as to admit passage of air. Mark the
box plainly, " Department of Agriculture,'' Raleigh, N. C, and
send it by Express. We will pay all charges. In packing
use green leaves or grass. This lot is designed for analysis
by the Agricultural Chemist, and whatever expense is in-
curred in packing and shipping will be paid by this De-
l)artment.
L. L. POLK, Commissioner:'
As already stated, we are disappointed in the meagre re-
turns received and the general low per centage of sugar
obtained. As will be seen from the letters of some of the
experimenters, there are several general reasons for these
results; unfavorable season, the ravages of insects, &c., &c.
While the unavoidable but unfortunate delay in sending
out the seeds is another cause of the comparative failure.
I will now give the results of my analyses of the samples
received.
(84)
ANALYSES.
In eacli case I have determined :
(1.) The weight of the beets.
(2.) Specific gravity of tlie juice.
(3.) Water in the juice.
(4.) Cane sugar in the juice.
•(5.) Substances in juice other thaii cane sugar (by dif-
ference.)
The beets were carefully cleansed by brushing and rub-
bing, without washing, and grated by hand on a large tin
grater. The pulp was subjected to pressure in thick cloths,
or in an iron screw press.
The method of analysis was, briefly, as follows: The
water was determined in the usual w^ay by heating a certain
portion mixed witli a weiglited amount of pure, dry sand,
at 212° F. until the w^eight remained constant.
The sugar Avas determined in an accurately measured por-
tion of the juice by means of an excellent " polariscope."*
The determinations Avere duplicated in almost every case,
and the figures given are the average of all observations.
Raised by I\Ir. J. 0. Pass, Faison's, Duplin county. Re-
(^eived in September.
Weight of largest ISiozs.
" " smallest 6| "
Average of twenty beets 9.G "
-lam deeply indebted to Dr. Arno Behr, of the sugar refinery of
Messrs. Matthiessen & Wiecliers. Jersey City, for the loan of a valuable
iustrument, by which I was enabled to commence work promptly
without annoyance from a delay in receiving tlie instrument ordered
by the Department from Dr. Scheibler, of Berlin.
(35)
Specilic gravity of juice 1.0417
PER CENT.
Water 86.G3
Sugar 6.46
Solids other than sugar 6.91
100.00
A "check" analysis on a second lot of the same beets gave
the following results:
Specific gravity 1.0396
Svgar 6.44 perct.
Mr. J. C. Pass reports upon this lot raised by him as fol-
lows :
'* It is possible that the soil on which the beets were
planted, though well drained and very fertile, contains an
excess of saline and alkaline substances. The specimen sent
is not above the average.
Land planted, 40x89 feet, (1-12 acre.)
Fertilizers used, acid phosphate (Navassa), 40 lbs.; wood
ashes, about one bushel.
Quality of land, rich loam.
Mode of preparation, flushed with a one-horse plow and
sub-soiled 15 inches deep, and thrown into ridges 22 inches
apart.
Quantity of seed sown, quarter of a pound, less one table-
spoonful. Seeds put into water to soak the 25th April,
rolled in wood ashes and planted the 26th and lightly cov-
ered, from which a stand of about 85 per cent, was obtained
(7 inch drill space desired). The "re-set beets from thinning
the hills were of no value.
Cultivation consisted in plowing one time and hoe-worked
four times.
(3G)
The cut-worm attacked the plants in spring. Some of the
tubers commenced decaying in the latter part of July.
The bugs attacked the tops about the middle of August,
and have proved about as destructive to beet tops as the
army worm to the cotton plant.
Dug 910 lbs. of roots, including debris of tops loft by the-
bugs."
LOT No 2,
Raised by Mr. J. W. Pelletier, Morehead city, Beaufort
county. Received in September.
Total weight Tibs.
Weight of largest 1 lb. 2^ ozs.
" " smallest 5J ozs.
Average of 10 11 2 "
Specific gravity of juice 1.0390
TKB CENT.
Water 87.28
Sugar 5.12
Solids other than sugar 7.60
100.00
Mr. Pelletier reports as follows :
*' Received seed, May 8th, 1877.
Soil, gray sand, with yellow sub-soil
(Preparation, broke up ten inches deep.
Manured with ashes at the rate of 20 bushels per acre,,
with same amount of cotton seed. Planted seed 11th May,
in drills two feet apart and ten inches in drill.
Cidtivation. — Plowed 25th May, ] 6tb June, 9th July and
28th July, with a small turn plow, and followed each plow-
ing with hoe.
Yield, 150 bu.sluls per acre.
I have no experience in raising the sugar beet, but the
-ordinary beet, planted the first of March, would yield at
(37)
least twice as large a crop as when planted the 11th of May.
The land should have been plowed at least a month before
planting."
Mr. J. H. Swindell writes as follows :
*' I turned over my seed to Mr. John W. Pelletier, one of
the best farmers of our section. I would add to Mr. Pelle-
tier's report that we have had this season entirely too much
rain for beets to do well. I am satisfied he would have done
much better but for this and not having received the seed
■earlier."
LOT No. 3.
Raised by James Norwood, Esq. Hillsboro,' Orange county.
Keceived in September.
Total weight 25| lbs.
Weight of largest 3 "
" " smallest 1 "
Average weight of 13 "2 "
:Specilic gravity of juice 1.0322
P*R CENT.
Water , 88.54
^uf/ar 10.24
.Solids other than sugar 1.22
100.00
Mr. Norwood reports as follows :
" Planted on the 27th April, the seed already sprouted, on
■a piece of ground 5 by 33 yards, in rows 2| feet apart ;
when about an inch high gave a dressing of 2 bushels of
lialf-slacked ashes along the line of plants, and thinned
them to 12 inches apart ; then with a good cultivator stirred
the ashes well in. About a month afterwards, sowed 2 bushels
of ashes broadcast and gave the patch a deep and thorough
stirring with a cultivator. Aftervrards kept the weeds and
grass out.
(38)
The piece of land is not rich, would bring 4 barrels of
corn to the acre, is red clay soil ; no sand in it ; was twice
ploughed in the last of the winter, and thoroughly broken
up 9 inches deep.
I will deliver a sample of the beets, and you will find
them too large, probably:"
LOT No 4,
Raised by Capt. Jno. Ilutchins, 4 miles from Chapel Hill,
Orange county.
Total weight 14^ lbs.
Weight of largest 4 "
" " smallest 1^ "
Average weight of G 2| "
Specific gravity of juice 1.0408
PER CENT.
Water 90.08
Sugar 4.55
Solids other than sugar 5.37
100.00
Capt. Ilutchins reports that he did not attend to the
planting or cultivation of the beets in person — in fact did
not know they were on his plantation until ready to pull.
They were planted in rich bottom land, and had little or no
care.
L< )T No. 5,
■ Raised by Mr. II. W. Ledbetter, Wadesboro, Anson county.
Total weight 18^ lbs.
Weight of largest 3 "
" " smallest 1 "
Average of 11 , 2 "
Specific gravity of juice 1.0248
(39)
PER CENT.
Wate?' 89.79
Sugar 4.30
Solids other than sugar 5.91
100.00
"I have taken up, placed in a box, and will ship in a few
days, as directed, J bushel of the sugar beets. As you know
I did not get the seed until May — they should have been
planted several weeks sooner — I planted six short rows in
my sweet potato patch, a light loam, rather sandy. Phmted
11th of May, used Whann's Raw Bone Superphosphate in
drill, about 300 lbs per acre, gave same cultivation as I did
cotton adjoining. There came up about half stand, and
grew finely ; had no rain until 3rd of June. New beets came
np, the older ones were then about G inches high ; the
younger ones never did much, the sun was too hot for them.
The beets seemed to do well until the dry hot weather oi
August, when the tops seemed to die and fall off. They art.-
putting out again new, and seem to be taking tlie second
growth. I estimated the yield to be about 210 bushels per
acre. If planted earlier, wiih suitable preparation of good
manure, and good cultivation, the yield vv'ould have been 3
times as large. The land has a clay sub-soil, red, iit about
12 or 14 inches from top. Sorry I did not get the seed in
time to make a more complete experiment ; will try again
next year."
LOT NO. 6.
Raised by Dr. G. W. Blacknall, Raleigh, Wake county.
Received in September :
Total weight 51| lbs.
Weight of largest 5| "
smallest 3J "
Average weight of 12 4 lbs. 4 ozs.
Specific gravity of juice 1.0182
("40)
I'BR CENT.
Water 92.85
Sugar 4.55
Solide other than sugar 2.60
100.00
No report received.
LOT KO. 7.
Raised by Mr. .John M. Crenshaw, Forestville, Wake
county. Received in October.
Total weight 26 Iba.
Weight of largest 3 "
" smallest f "
Averageof22 2 "
Specific gravity of juice 1.0183
PKR CENT.
^ Water 89.06
Sugar 6.97
ii^olids other than sugar 3.97
100.00
Mr. Crenshaw reports :
" They were received late in the season, without any idea
•of their mission, and wore planted and not much attention
given them."
rOT NO. 8.
Raised by , Tarboro, Edgecombe county.
Received in October.
Total weight 23f lbs.
"Weight of largest 2 "
" smallest I "
Average weight of 25 1 lb. 6 ozs.
Specific gravity of juice 1.0498
41)
PKR CBNT.
Water 87.99
Sugar 6.30
Solids other than sugar 5.71
100.00
No report.
LOT NO. 9.
Kaised by A. M. McPheeters, Raleigh, Wake county
Received in October.
Total weight ISJlbs.
Weight of largest lib.
" smallest Gozs.
Average weight of 34 11 "
Specific gravity of juice 1.0378
PER CENT.
Water 86.24
Sugar , 10.97
Solids other than sugar 2.79
100.00
N'o report-
I.OT NO. 10.
Raised by W. M. Blackwell, Oxford, Granville county.
Received in October.
Total weight 19^ lbs.
Weight of heaviest IJ lbs.
" lightest 7 ozs.
Average weight of 32 14 ozs.
Specific gravity of juice • 1.04270
I'ER CENT.
Water 84.90
Sugar 11.37
Solids other than sugar 3.67
100.00
(42)
A check ana]ysis oti another lot gave :
Specific gravity 1 .04277
Sugar 11.46pr.ct.
Mr Blackwell reports :
" I plowed the land about six inches deep with a cast
turning plow, and followed in the same furrow with a
coulter, breaking the land about 14 or 15 inches deep, and
applied 700 lbs. to the acre of "Dixon's Compound," com-
posed of equal parts of Peruvian guano, dissolved bone, plas-
ter and salt. I planted the seed the 4th of May. As soon
as necessary, I thinned them to 8 or 10 inches apart in the
drill, rows 22 inches apart. The first working was done
with a harrow, the second Avorking a small turning plow
was run, throwing one furrow to the beets, and harrow in
middle of the row, which was all the plowing I did to them ;
each time the hoes followed the plow, chopping out all
grass and weeds, and leaving the land nearly level. The
seed was planted on sandy soil with yellow clay (subsoil?)
The yield was only 140 bushels to the acre. We had the
worst seasons I ever saw, owing to excessive wet. My
crops of all kinds were seriously injured, as we had more rain
in my immediate neighborhood than any other part of the
country I gave one of my neighbors, W, B. Crews, some
of the seed, and his land Avas better adapted to beets than
mine, he using ashes as a fertilizer, his yield was 2o0 bushels
to the acre."
LOT NO. 11.
Raised by Mr. J. W. Wilson, Morganton, Burke county
Received in October.
Total weight 30 J lbs.
Weight of largest 3 "
" smallest | "
Average weight of 24 If "
Specific gravity of juice 1.0175
(43)
I'ER cent:
Water 92.14
Sugar 5.91
Solids other than sugar l.^o-
lOO.OO
No Report.
LOT NO. 12.
Raised by , Chapel Hill, Orange county^
Received in November.
Total weight 49 lbs,
AVeight of largest 2| "
smallest 12ozs,
Average weight of 36 llb.l2ozs..
Specific gravity of juice 1.0247
PER CEST..
Water 94.07
Sugar 3.35
Solids other than sugar 2.58
lOO.OO
These beets were grown upon very rich soil, (in a garden
spot) and were fertilized with ashes.
LOT NO. 13.
Raised by J. W. Wissler, Lockville, Chatham countT.
Received in November, marked "Imperial, No. 4."
Total weight, (but 2 in the lot) . .-. 4 lbs.
Average weight 2 lb&.
Specific gravity of juice 1.0396
(44)
PBR CBKT.
"Water 90.99
Sugar 5.51
Solids other than sugar 3.50
100.00
Mr. Wissler sends samples of 6 lots, and his report accom-
panying them will be given after the analysis of all the
samples.
I.OT NO. U.
Raised by Mr. J. W. Wissler, Lockville, Chatham, coun-
ty. Received in November, and marked " French, No. 2,'
only tv^o beets in the lot.
Average weight 1 lb. 6 ozs.
Specific gravity of juice 1.0501
Check ^ '' " " 1.0502
PER CBNT.
Water 85.47
Sugar 10.82
Solids other than sugar 3.71
100.00
I.OT NO. 15.
Raised by Mr. J. W. Wissler, at Endor Furnace, (near
Egypt) Chatham county. Received in November, and
marked " Imperial No. 6," only two in lot.
Average weight llb.9|ozs.
Specific gravity of juice 1.0880
I'ER CENT.
Water 91.83
Sugar 527
.Solids other than sugar 3.40
100.00
(45)
LOT NO. 10.
Raised by Mr. J, AV. Wissler, at Lockville, Chatham
county. Received in November, and marked ■' Imperial
No. ] ," two in lot.
Average weight 1 lb. 10|ozs.
Specific gravity of juice 1.0307
PER CENT,
Water 03.21
Suf/ar 5.27
Solids other than sugar T. 1 .52
100. 00
Lor NO. 17.
Raised by Mr. J. W. Wissler, at Lockville, Chatham
count}'. Received in November, and marked " French No.
5," two in lot.
Average weight 1 1 lbs.
Specific gravity of juice 1.0522
I'KR CENT,
Water 87.61
Sugar 11.22
Solids other than sugar 1.17
100.00
LOT No. li.
Raised by Mr. Wissler, at Lockville, Chatham county,
Rtcjived in November, and marked "French No. 3.'' Tivo
in lot.
Average weight 1 lb. 5 oz.?.
Specific gravity of juice 1.043G
(46)
PER CENT,
Water 90.08
Sugar 7.14
Solids other than sugar 2.78
100.00
Mr. Wissler reports as follows:
'^No. 1, (Lot No. 16), is the Imperial seed, put in soak on
the 11th of May and planted on the 12th, in a lot on river
<(Igw ground). This piece of ground had been used for
several years as a cucumber patch. Top-dressed heavily
with " Phuine." Plowed deep (about 10 inches) first time,
on the 11th, and again on the 12th, before planting. The
.gro'iind was nicely pulverized and in good condition for
^planting. After planting on the 12th (May) we had no rain
until the 9th ©f June, when they came up nicely, and I had
them replanted, when it again got dry, and I suppose we had
no rain for at least six weeks. Owing to this, I failed in
lifiving a stand anywhere.
I worked the beets about the same as I would a crop of
corn- After the season got better they commenced growing
and were still growing finely when I had them pulled up on
the 23d of October. On that night v/e had a heavy frost,
and I was fearful it might injure them to leave them stand
longer.
ISTo. 2, (Lot No. 14), is the French Beet, planted on same
ground, and same as No. 1.
No. 3, (Lot No. 18), is the French Beet, planted on same
day and treated similarly as Nos. 1 and 2, except that it was
planted on a stiff clay. This lot had been in clover for two
3'-ears, heavily top-dressed with stable manure, and broke up
about the 15th day of February, and again top-dressed with
^^ Phuine '' and plowed on tlie 11th of May. Just before
planting, this ground — owing to the dry weather — got so
(47)
iiard that I never, even by transplanting, got a stand; but
late in the summer and fall they seemed to grow well.
No. 4, (Lot No. 13), is the Imperial Beet, planted on same
ground as No. 3, and treated similarly ; all these beets were
gathered on the 23d of October.
No. 5 is the French Beet, planted at Endor Furnace,
^near Egypt), on the 16th of May, on a nice, mellow soil
neither sandy nor stiff. The ground had been plowed
about six weeks before, and I had it plowed again just be-
fore planting. After drawing the furrows (whi:h I did in
all cases with a 'scooter' plow), I had it well sprinkled
with ashes, this being the only fertilizer used in Nos. 5 and
The seed had been soaked forty-eight hours, and was
nicely sprouted when planted. If any difference, the season
was drier at Endor than at Lockville, and yet I must con-
sider ray success the best there, the beets growing smooth
and of a uniform size of form, 2 to 3 lbs. each.
No. 6 is the Imperial Beet, treated similar to No. 5.
I had still made another experiment at Buckhorn, but
must confess to a failure tliere. The beet, through neglect
and dry weather grew very slowl}^, and was not over half
pound beets.in October, when gathered, and so green that
they soon dried and shriveled up.
The last of March or beginning of April is the proper
time to plant here, wlien the beet will have root enough to
stand the drought and hot weather of July.
One difficulty I had was to keep the beet covered, it seem-
ingly having a tendency to grow out of the ground ; forthis
reason I shall in future plant three feet apart, instead of two,
as this year."
LOT No. 19,
Tliis was a separate lot of 7 beets which came in the box
with Ifr. Wisskr's samples. Whether a separate lot, or
merely specimens from the other 6 lots, I could not ascer-
tain, and so analyzed them.
(48)
Average weight 1 lb. ISozs.
Specific gravity of juice 1.0421
I'EE CKKT.
Water 90.34
Sugar 5.96
Solids other than sugar 3.70
100.00
LOT No. 20,
Raised by Mr. Columbus Mills, Concord, Cabarrus county.
Total weight 27^ lbs.
Weight of largest 5 "
" smallest 2| "
Average weight of 7 3^ "
Specific gravity of juice 1.0414
PKK CENT.
Abater 91.23
Sugar 5.50
Solids other than sugir 3.27
100.00
Mr. Mills reports :
"Planted the last of April, and came up sparsely until
the June rains; rows IJ feet apart; ground, a rich loam.
They were worked according to the French mode of culti-
vation."
I.OT No. 21,
Raised by , near Chapel Hill, Orange county.
Received December 1st.
Total weight 16 lbs.
Weight of largest 2^ ''
" " smallest S ozs.
Average of 12 1| lbs.
Specific gravity of juice , 1.0390 (? )
(49)
PER CENT .
Water 89.37
Sugar.... 7.61
Solids other than sugar 3.02
100.00
No report.
CONCLUSION.
While some of the lots analyzed show a very low per
centage of sugar, there are, on the other hand, five (more
than one-fifth of the whole over ten per cent., viz:
SAMPLE FROM PER CT. SUGAR.
Oxford 11.46
Egypt 11.22
Raleigh 10.97
Lockville 10.82
Hillsboro 10.24
Of the remaining sixteen lots more than three-fourths go
over^five per cent., by no means a very bad showing.
It had been ray intention to endeavor, by a careful exami-
nation of the results obtained in different localities, and on
different soils, and with difi'erent management, to be able to
point out the cause of failure of one, or the success of another
in obtaining beets with a high per centage of sugar. But
with the few results that we have been able to gather and
the few reports made by the experimenters, we would reach
an idle, or at least highly conjectural conclusion. Still, I
would recommend our farmers to notice carefully the reports
of the experimenters, and comj^arethe results of their labor,
and they will oftentimes find valuable hints and suggestions
for their guidance next year.
4
(50)
I will close with the reiteration of the wish that the re-
sult of this report may be to keep alive the interest in our
experiments, and that another jear may find our people
ready to give intelligent and efficient aid to the Department
of Agriculture in its eftbrts to implant this new industry in
our State.
^ OCT 83
i51# N. -MANCHESTER,
^jS^ INDIANA 46962
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11