On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
The German Grain Supply To the Editor of the Scientific American : As a reader of your esteemed journal, may I ask the courtesy of extending me space for a little comment on Mr. Albert K. Dawson's article in your issue of the 27th January on Economic Conditions in Germany. At the bottom of the first column of the article it says, on the authority of Herr Direktor Meyer, that in 1913 Germany exported over 2,000,000 tons of grain and grain products in excess of her imports, this, consequently, being the quantity produced in Germany over and above her own needs. The same authority also states that Germany sends her rye crops to Russia. It seems that Mr. Dawson has accepted these statements without any verification whatsoever. This is all the more surprising because it is quite common knowledge among the initiated both in Europe and in America that Germany herself never produced enough cereals to satisfy her own demands, and, moreover, that Russia is one of the largest grain raising and grain exporting countries in the world--hence could never be a field for any surplus of cereals of other countries. I will substantiate this by figures, taken not from statistics of countries hostile to but from her own year-book treating on the matter of her foreign trade. In the Official German publication, under the title Statistick des Deutschen Reiches, A uswartiger Handel im Jahre 1913, Heft III, Band 270--III. Ges-amteigenhandel des Deutschen Wirtschaftsgebietes im Jahre 1913 nach Waren gruppen. Bearbeitet im Kaiser-lichen Statistischen Amte we arl! told that under caption A, comprising all direct products of agriculture, the German imports were kilograms, valued at 3,946,889,000 marks, against exports of 3,822,530,900 kilograms, worth 979,737,000 marks; and that under caption D embodying all agricultural by-products, imports were 3,421,107,500 kilograms, of 519,590,000 marks value, while exports totalled 2,657,883,500 kilograms, or 659,348,000 marks. Caption A, it may be remarked, includes all grain shipment, seeds, vegetables, etc., but the major part naturally is grain. Caption D includes flour and all other secondary products. It is plain, then, that Germany's agricultural imports were 17,729,000 metric tons of 2,204 pounds, her exports 6,480,000 tons, the excess of imports 11,248,000 tons. If we analyze these figures more closely, confining ourselves to grain, we find imports of 8,334,581 tons, exports of 2,570,553 tons, excess of imports being here 5,764,015 tons. And as for the assertion that Germany exported her rye crops to Russia, the before us show that she imported from Russia 313,583 tons of rye and exported to Russia 231,253 tons, leaving an import balance of 82,330 tons. The exports of rye to Russia can be explained by the vastness of the Russian territory, so that in some instances Germany found it profitable to import Russian rye from provinces near her borders, and with a change in the grain market to export the same rye back to Russia by water. Some cause for it may, doubtless, also be found in the former German-Russian Commercial Treaty and the liberal Russian Customhouse Tariffs, by dint of which up to May, 1914, shipments of grain from Germany were allowed to pass duty-free. However, in any event, it is clear that Germany imported more rye from Russia than she exported to that country. Therefore, the statement in Mr. Dawson's article to the effect that Germany disposed of her rye crop in Russia does not hold out a proof. Again, the total trade between Russia and Germany under captions A and D for 1913 shows that Russia shipped to Germany 5,575,124 metric tons, valued at 761,756,000 marks, receiving in return but 360,059 tons worth 82,782,000 marks. Subtraction here seems superfluous. The above summaries clearly evidence the fact that not only never had any surplus in cereals, but that she actually is dependent upon other countries for the, maintenance of her supplies in foodstuffs. Further, that during the year 1913 this shortage in cereals reached the huge amount of 11,248,238 tons, of .which about fifty per cent she covered out of imports from Russia. In addition to cereals Germany likewise imports vast amounts of other foodstuffs and, if these are taken into consideration, her shortage in foodstuffs generally will be augmented to approximately 20,000,000 tons. All of this, as said in the beginning, will not be a surprise to the majority of people both here and on the other side of the ocean, but it will perhaps serve to prove to some extent that statements like the one made by Herr Direktor Meyer should be taken with a grain of salt generally and not accepted for gospel as did Mr. Dawson. As many Americans in Entente countries have fre-One metric ton 1,000 kilograms 2,204 pounds. quently remarked on the laxity of these nations in giving publicity in America to the truth of the Allied cause, I have ventured to ask your indulgence by kindly giving space to this letter, for the sake of truth, for truth only is science. Yours respectfully, I. Caoul. [The editor is indebted to Mr. Caoul for the above statement. Mr. Dawson states that he quoted Herr Meyer correctly, and that accordingly the only comment he can make is that any misstatement made in his article is Herr Meyer's, and not his. The editor passes the comment along to his readers, with the remark that Mr. Caoul has quoted his official German source correctly. It is to be regretted that existing conditions make it impossible to seek Herr Meyer's source of information and track the discrepancy to its lair.--The Editor.] Universal Disarmament Again! To the Editor of the Scientific American: To befog the paramount issue of universal disarmament with discussions as to the lacks of pacificists were lackadaisical indeed. I quite concur with your correspondent, Mr. Gregg, in his assertion that the hearty desire for peace has extended the world over. But the fact remains that while the most powerful fleets in the world, and the most powerful armies in the world, have entirely failed to insure peace, Monroe's new plan of disarmament on our northern frontier has wholly succeeded. He, too, may have lacked imagination. But, in urging his new American policy on Great Britain, when Adams, our Minister in London, told him it was apparently hopeless to obtain British assent, he used a few phrases well worth remembering. Adams had advised him of Britain's interest to continue the old European system of militarism, and to crowd more war vessels on the Great Lakes. Monroe's views, as written in reply, were that in following that course there would be, for both parties, vast expense incurred, and the danger of collision increased"; while the rivalry in armaments would prove a continual stimulus to suspicion and ill-will. He further insisted that the moral and political tendency of such a system (European militarism) must be to War and not to Peace." Perhaps come conclusions of the German philosopher, Nietzsche, may also interest your readers. "The so-called armed peace that prevails at present in all countries is a sign of a bellicose disposition, of a disposition that trusts neither itself nor its neighbor; and partly from hate, partly from fear, refuses to lay down its weapons. "Our liberal representatives of the people, as is well known, have not the time for reflection on the nature of humanity, or else they would know that they are working in vain when they work for a. gradual diminution of the military burdens. On the contrary, when the distress of these burdens is greatest, the sort of God who alone can help here will be nearest. "The tree of military glory can only be destroyed at one swoop, with one stroke of lightning. ' The present world war possibly may prove the one swoop." Edward Berwick. Pacific Grove, Cal. Entrance To Sound Unprotected To the Editor of the Scientific American: If you have any influence with the powers that be in Washington, possibly you could bring to their attention the fact that there is absolutely nothing to prevent a foreign submarine coming through Long Island Sound, where a half dozen shots from a moderate-sized gun could put the bridges on the New Haven Railroad out of commission. Three or four guards now patrol each bridge, which would hardly prevent this, as the submarine would be three miles off shore. A couple of G-inch guns placed to cover each bridge from the Sound side, would seem to be a little better. This is just a thought for better protection of the main line of communications in the East. C onstant Read er. Bridgeport, Conn., March 10, 1917. Mellish's Comet To the Editor of the Scientific American: According to an orbit computed at the University of California, Mellish's comet will reach perihelion on April 12, at the unusually small distance of 15 million miles. When discovered, it was on the farther side of the sun, about 80 million miles from sun and 130 million from us, and it should grow rapidly brighter as it approaches both and become conspicuous to the naked eye. At the beginning of April it will be near the star of Arietis, and moving slowly westward. Until the 11th it will be visible in the evening at first after the twilight is well advanced, later only on a strongly illuminated sky. Between the 11th and 15th it should be seen before sunrise--probably not the head, for that will be within 10 from sun, but the tail, which, judging from previous comets of small perihelion distance, is likely to be conspicuous. Henry Norris Russell, Ph.D. Princeton, N. J., March 29, 1917. Nitrogen Fixation An Accomplished Fact AT the recent annual meeting of the Institute of Chemical Engineers in New York, Prof. John E. Bucher of Brown University spoke upon the fixation of nitrogen, which means the getting of nitrogen from the air into combination, so that it may be used for the production of fertilizers, explosives, munitions of war, dyestuffs and in the chemical industries generally. There has been so much written and said on this subject that many of the sophisticated members of the Institute considered it not worth their while to come to hear Prof. Bucher's contribution; but those who did come heard a most absorbing account of what bids fair to lead to a chemical .revolution of the first magnitude. At a later date Prof. Bucher gave an address at the College of the City of New York, describing his experiments and processes in some fullness. This we reproduced in the Scientific American Supplement of April 7th; but the subject is of such vast consequence that we here put it before those of our readers who do not see the Supplement. By way of explanation it may be said that the industry of fixing nitrogen began at Niagara Falls twenty years ago, in the effort to carry out the inventions of an American chemist, Charles S. Bradley. Lack of financial backing led the industry to drift over to Norway, where it now flourishes to a moderate degree, in spite of its enormous requirements in electric power. A German process, worked out to meet this objection, has not come into wide use because, in spite of the reduced power demand, it is still inordinately expensive. Germany to a large extent, and all other first-class powers exclusively, buy their nitrogen from Chile in the form of nitrate of soda. But when, some day, this supply gives out, it will not be possible for agriculture to thrive or munitions of war to be made without fixed nitrogen. Hence the extreme importance of the subject of fixation, and the great amount of attention it has received. Dr. Ducher has done away with the necessity for electric power in fixation by finding strictly chemical means for making the air give up the nitrogen to which it clings so tenaciously. The substance of his discovery is that nitrogen will combine with an alkali and carbon in the presence of iron as a catalyst, producing the cyanide. Reduced to concrete terms, this means that he mixes soda ash and powdered iron or iron ore--either will do--with powdered coke. Upon heating this mixture in an ordinary furnace and running air over it, the result is cyanide of soda, leaving the iron uncom-bined. In spite of this fact, that the iron is in the end untouched by the action, if it be omitted no action takes place. It acts as a sort of chemical parson to combine the nitrogen of the air with the soda and the coke. No electric power is needed, no heavy outlay, no costly materials; the whole thing may apparently be carried out anywhere at very low cost. It would seem that this finished the matter; for sodium cyanide, by treatment with steam, will pass into bicarbonate of soda and ammonia, and the latter is fixed nitrogen, capable of conversion into nitric acid or fertilizer or any one of a thousand other things. But Dr. Bucher went even further. He let into the cyanide of soda solution some waste carbon dioxide gas from his furnace, thus producing urea. This is three times as rich in nitrogen as the soda nitrate, twice as rich as ammonium sulphate; and both of these are used profitably by farmers. Moreover, urea will not make the soil acid and from preliminary tests it bids fair to give surprising results as a fertilizer. Under influence of the electric current the cyanide can also be separated into metallic sodium and cyanogen. For the former there is always great demand; the latter is readily absorbed by hydrochloric acid to form oxamid. This contains about thirty per cent nitrogen and is almost entirely insoluble. It would therefore not be washed away by rains, and should make another ideal fertilizer. Of course, nobody has ever thought of using urea or oxamid for fertilizer before because they have always been very expensive, but Dr. Bucher's work changes all this and puts them among the cheapest fertilizers. Perhaps the most extraordinary feature is that no single reaction of those employed by Dr. Bucher in securing such results is new. Every chemical fact of which he has taken advantage was already known, and it remained only for some one to have sufficient insight to arrange them side by side in proper order. This done, we have here a way of doing what chemists have been trying to do for forty years, without any other raw material than coal, iron, soda and air, and without the need of water power. There are engineering details yet tc be worked out, others that are still unproven in practice; but the idea is there.
