ted as the evidence of disinterested
parties. It has been represented to farmers that peculiar and
mysterious virtues are imparted to the plant-food constituents by
proper mixing, and that really proper mixing can be accomplished only
by means not at the command of farmers. Such statements are
misrepresentations, based either upon the ignorance of the person who
makes them or upon his determination to sell commercial mixed goods."

Criticisms of Home-mixing.--The manufacturer's advocate formerly laid
much stress upon the danger attending the treatment of bones and rock
with sulphuric acid. That is a business of itself, and the home-mixer
has nothing to do with it. He buys on the market the acidulated bone or
rock, just as a manufacturer makes his purchase.

It is claimed that the manufacturer renders a great public service by
using supplies of plant-food that the home-mixer would not use, and
thus conserves the world's total supply. Let us see the measure of
truth in the statement. The manufacturer gets his supply of phosphoric
acid from rock, bone, or tankage exactly as does the home-mixer. His
potash he buys from the syndicate owning the German beds, and the
farmer does the same. These sources must contribute all the phosphoric
acid and potash used on land, if we except trifling supplies of ashes,
marl, etc., and the only difference in the transaction is that in one
case the manufacturer buys the materials and mixes them, and in the
other case the farmer buys them direct and mixes them. The remaining
constituent is the nitrogen. If the manufacturer uses nitrate of soda,
sulphate of ammonia, bones, tankage, or manufactured nitrogen, he does
what the home-mixer may do. Most nitrogen must come from these sources.
If all came from these sources, the increased demand would not affect
the price. The beds of nitrate of soda will last for hundreds of years,
the present waste in ammonia from coal is immense, and the supply of
manufactured nitrogen can be without limit. The saving in use of inert
and low-grade forms of nitrogen is more profitable to the manufacturer
than to the farmer who buys and pays freight on low-grade materials.

The rather remarkable argument is advanced that fertilizer
manufacturers do not make a large per cent on their investment, despite
the perfection of their equipment, and therefore the farmer cannot find
it profitable to mix his materials at home. By the same reasoning,
assuming for the moment th