URUGUAY, or Monte Video, has an undulating and fertile soil, with a temperate climate. The rains fall almost entirely during the winter months. Pasturage, rather than cultivation, characterizes the lands. The exports are hides, skins, hair, horns and jerked beef. The city of Monte Video contains 20,000 inhabitants. The chief trade of Monte Video is with Europe and Havana. In consequence of the siege and blockade of the town, no exports were made in 1844, &c.;

PATAGONIA and the adjacent islands are in the extreme south of South America. The Indians are tall and bulky, averaging, it is said, six feet, though very exaggerated notions of these tall savages were once circulated and believed. They live under petty chiefs, who are possessed of but little authority. The Spaniards settled, in 1779, Port St. Julian, but speedily abandoned it. The coasts are not often visited by other than whaling ships. Little in this barbarous and almost unexplored country can be worthy of mention.

We have thus taken a survey of all the various divisions of South America in a manner much more hurried and imperfect than we at first anticipated. Scarcely more than a bird's eye view has been presented.

We must apologize to the reader, by pleading the haste of the printers, in getting out the present number of the Review. Whilst writing this sheet, the previous one is in the compositors' hands, a thing very common in our editorial experience. To Mr. McGregor we make all acknowledgments for the assistance derived from his valuable work.

Art. II. THE SUGAR CANE.*

MC CULLOH'S REPORT ON SUGAR TO THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, REViewed.

Prof. J. D. B. De Bow:

New-Orleans, June 1, 1848.

In the March number of your Review, (page 249,) one of our sugar planters, who is also an able refiner, has stated some incorrect facts, in the report of Professor McCulloh, made relative to the sugar culture in Louisiana. Yet Mr. V. Aime, the author of these remarks, has only touched the part which has some reference to the improved apparatus, and to the ameliorations which have been introduced in the manufacture of sugar, for some years past. His long experience, his practical knowledge on this subject, have certainly given him the right to correct the errors of the learned Professor McCulloh, who, in my opinion, has not always done justice to the Louisiana planters, in neglecting to notice the efforts which they have never ceased to make, in order to ameliorate this important branch of industry, notwithstanding the immense difficulties which surround it.

It is impossible not to approve the excellent critical remarks which Mr. Valcour Aime has made, and for my own part, I think them perfectly just. Like him, I have had opportunities of examining, at different times, the finest sugar works in Cuba, and I did not find that they have made greater progress there in this branch of industry than in Louisiana. But if we agree on this point, as we do on many others, there is, nevertheless, one point on which we entertain a slight difference of opinion. In commencing his remarks, Mr. V. Aime declares that the report of Professor McCulloh "is the work not only of a man of science, but of a conscientious one, who has represented things as faithfully as he could, and without anykind of deception."

I am willing to admit, with Mr. V. Aime, all the high qualities which distinguish the author of the report; I do not deny him any. But, sir, are all these high qualities sufficient to render the chemical part of the professor's work exempt from faults? Assuredly not. I will now endeavor to show you, that with science, and the best faith in the world, it is possible to commit gross mistakes.

In my opinion, the work of Professor McCulloh is essentially de

*It is but fair to the author to remark, that his criticism was originally written in he French language, and translated in our office into English.-[ED.

fective. The scientific or chemical part is radically and insufferably bad. This is the point of difference between Mr. V. Aime and myself. In his excellent remarks, Mr. V. Aime has shown you that the purely practical part of this work contains nothing new; that it is of little value; that, on the contrary, it contains a great many errors, and has proved it to you. I will proceed to show you that the scientific part is worth still less than the practical.

Since the appearance of this report, many of the New-Orleans journals have analyzed and lauded it, in terms more or less extravagant, according to their inspirations or tastes. There are, per

haps, circumstances in which the puff is permitted, or at least tolerated. But when the subject treated of is of such importance as that of the sugar culture in Louisiana, it seems to me it is highly culpable to bestow such extravagant praise on a work like Professor McCulloh's. As a serious work, this report is undeserving any eulogy. Truly, the critic, in reviewing it, has little or nothing to do.

The mission of Professor McCulloh was one of high interest. I believe you will agree with me upon that point. His report having been made public, every one has a right to praise or criticise it as he pleases. The opinions which I am about to express, are entirely disinterested. Relying on those pompous eulogies, which I had seen in a daily journal, I hastened to procure a copy of this report. I commenced its perusal with attention, in order to discover the interesting chemical researches which I expected to find; because, I confess, I am naturally curious about these sorts of novelties. I had believed that a work of the kind could only be undertaken by an able man, by a skilful chemist, and one who was also well-versed in the practice of making sugars.

I will not undertake to make a formal and regular criticism of this work; the task would be long. I might tire your readers, and it would be painful for me-I say painful, for I confess that I always experience a sort of unpleasantness in exposing the errors made by an author, especially when they are so great as those made by Professor McCulloh. You will look in vain for a single paragraph in the chemical part of the report which does not present an open flank for the attack of the critic. I appeal, sir, to all persons who have the slightest knowledge of chemistry. I will not, however, take advantage of the unfavorable position in which the author has placed himself. I will confine myself simply to the most glaring errors.

The process followed with a little too much confidence by the professor, in the experiment on molasses and raw sugar, has been tried in France long ago. The principal fault of this method is, that it is only applicable to the simple cases of a dissolution of pure sugar in water. If the liquid sugar to be examined contain foreign substances in solution, matters gummy, mucous, lactose, glucous, glutinous sacchamates, in general, the hydrate of carbon and other substances badly defined, mineral and organic salts, they act in the same manner as crystallizable sugar, and lead the operator into In acting upon a solution of pure sugar, the mistakes are

error.

not less than from two to three per cent; but in acting upon molasses, they become monstrous! I will return again to this subject.

In estimating the quality of foreign molasses arriving in the northern ports, the professor has made serious mistakes; but, with the assistance of his favorite algebraic formula, and some logarithms, he arranges all that in the most elegant manner in the world; he extricates himself from this false position like a skilful man; to embellish his errors, he adorns them in a mathematical form! To say the least, it seems to me ridiculous to apply a learned algebraic formula to an experiment on molasses. We ought to have recourse to these means only, when acting upon bodies perfectly well defined, admitted by all the chemists, and of which the elementary composition is known. Otherwise, I repeat it, we are subject to fall into serious mistakes.

Molasses is, by itself, a very complex liquid, the intimate constitution and composition of which, the professor seems to be entirely ignorant of; while his plan, aided by his formula, makes him commit errors from 10 to 12 per cent. in the appreciation of its richness in sugar, and that, without his being aware of it. Is the professor ignorant that, independently of organic matters, molasses from Cuba and other sugar-producing countries, where the cane attains a complete maturity, contain from 15 to 20 parts in the thousand of saline matters-salt of potash, salt of lime, of magnesia, hydrated silica, and that these matters can vary strangely in their proportions, according to the localities where the cane is cultivated? In this letter I propose to prove to you, that the molasses proceeding from raw sugar of Louisiana contains the matters which I have named, in proportions two or three times more considerable!

The appreciation of the real worth of the deposits or sediments, which we find in hogsheads of foreign molasses arriving in the ports of the northern states, that is to say, the appreciation of the quantity of crystallizable sugar which the deposits contain, is entirely erroneous in the report of the professor. The deposits are often as rich as certain raw sugars, and almost as easy to work by the refiner.

At page 25 of his report, Professor McCulloh has given us a series of experiments or speculations, which he has made to ascertain in what manner the juice of the cane of Tahiti acts with some re-agent which he has employed for this purpose, (it would be the same with the juice of all other varieties of cane,) but it would be difficult to explain with what view he has done it, and wherefore. Since in the expose of his researches, he does not at all consider the signs which the re-agent has furnished. If he had analyzed the precipitates, he would doubtless have discovered the presence of phosphates of lime and magnesia in the juice of the cane; hence, he would have been led to find the salts of potash and hydrated silica-the organic matters; all that would have followed, of course.

The experiment which he reports, (page 26,) upon the precipitate occasioned by the acetate of lead, is exceedingly curious. The professor tells us, that after letting it remain 12 hours upon the filter, his cane juice had become so clammy and slimy, that not a drop

passed through the filter. His filter had become impermeable, and he seemed astonished at it!

The professor, then, does not know that in warm climates the juice of the cane becomes deteriorated after some hours of extraction; and that at the end of twelve hours, his juice, the juice upon which he makes his chemical investigations, had entirely passed into a state of viscous fermentation!

At page 26, paragraphs 6, 7, 8, and 9, of his report, Professor McCulloh exposes the comparative experiments made upon three varieties of cane, with a view of ascertaining the quantity of juice which they contain per cent. Let him speak for himself:

COMPARATIVE EXPERIMENTS ON THE YIELD IN JUICE OF THREE VARIETIES OF THE CANE.

(6.) "I weighed, and accurately, 21.111 ounces of ribbon cane, which was then rolled in a handmill, consisting of a pair of small rolls, similar to those used for rolling metals, or to the large rolls of the ordinary sugar-mill. For the use of this apparatus, I was indebted to Mr. Duggan, of the Saratoga Estate, who had caused it to be constructed for similar experimental purposes. The above mentioned quantity of cane thus yielded 12.542 ounces of juice of the specific gravity 1.035, corresponding to 10° Baume of the cross instrument I employed, but to 11 Baume as indicated by the glass pese-sirop belonging to Mr. Duggan. The wet begasse obtained at the same time weighed 8.007 ounces.

"The sum of the weights of the juice and the begasse being only 20.549 ounces, it follows that 0.562 is the weight of juice lost and retained upon the surface of the mill. This loss I considered so great that I was induced to repeat the experiment, with, if possible, greater care, and with the following results: 19.483 of ribbon cane yielded 11.024 ounces of juice, and 7.886 ounces of moist begatta; the quantity of juice retained by the mill, or lost, being 0.573 ounces. we have the comparative results:

Moist begatta..
Juice obtained..
Juice lost....

Ribbon cane.

1st Experiment.
.37.92.
....59.40..

2.68.

.100.00.....

Hence

2nd Experiment.

40.51 ..56.58 2.91

.100.00

(7.)-"After drying for forty-eight hours by exposure to air and sun, the 8.007 ounces of moist begatta, of the first experiment, weighed only 3.422 ounces, and had therefore lost 4.585 of water by evaporation. Likewise, the 7.886 ounces of begatta of the second experiment, similarly dried, weighed 3.510 ounces, and had therefore lost by evaporation 4.376 ounces of water; if this water be supposed to be united with one-fourth of its own weight of sugar, a supposition which differs probably little from the truth. Then 5.731 would be the amount of juice retained by the 8.007 ounces of moist begatta in the first experiment, and 5,470 ounces would be the corresponding amount of juice retained by the moist begassa of the second experiment. Hence it would follow, that the ribbon cane experimented upon consists of:

"Of the 88 per cent. of juice thus shown to exist in this ribbon cane, 62 per cent. only were expressed; and the begatta of cane ground in large mills probably retains a similar proportion.

(8.)-" From 15.072 of Creole or crystalline cane, rolled in the same manner as the above, 9.399 ounces of juice of the specific gravity of 1.079, or 9 5 Baume, were obtained, and also 5,365 of moist begatta; 0.308 ounces of juice being left on the surface of the rolls. By drying for forty-eight hours in the air and sun, the