Record of experiments at the Sugar Experiment Station on Calumet Plantation, Pattersonville, La

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Record of experiments at the Sugar Experiment Station on Calumet Plantation, Pattersonville, La
Series Title:
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. Division of Chemistry. Bulletin
Physical Description:
42 p. incl. tables. : ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Edson, Hubert
Publisher:
Govt. Print. Off.
Place of Publication:
Washington
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Sugar -- Manufacture and refining   ( lcsh )
Genre:
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Statement of Responsibility:
By Hubert Edson ...

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 029705883
oclc - 17476122
lccn - agr09001066
Classification:
lcc - S584 .A3 no.23
System ID:
AA00024991:00001

Full Text






























41




It 'A IK









lp









.! tAlt


4jr












,T ET SJUANTA


































4e



I r





144
*1 41or

1 41, 41













'It









1HaR S


4 cit




A7~/~ .14_____________J___________It_____lot,






U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY.
BULLETIN No. 23.




RECORD OF EXPERIMENTS




AT THE





UGAL EXPERIMENT STATION ON CALMET PLANTATION,





PATTERSONVILLE, LA.





BY
HUBERT EDSON,
ASSISTANT IN LAlORA IORY.


PUBLIMIED BY AUTHORITY OF T1E SECURE V'ARY OF AGRICULTURE.




WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.
1889.


























PRE FATORY NOTE.



Sru: In submitting to you the results of Mr. Hubert Edson's work at Calumet Plantation, La., during 1888, I desire to call your particular attention to the fact that the yield of sugar by the milling process reached the unprecedented amount of over 200 pounds per ton. This remarkable yield was the result of a rich crop and careful chemical and technical control of the factory.
It is believed that the data of this work here published will prove of great benefit to the sugar planters of the country.
Respectfully,
H. W. WILEY,
Chemist.
Hon. J. M. RUSK,
Secretary.
3





























LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.



U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, D. C., August 3, 1889. Six: I have the honor to submit herewith the first report from Calu met sugar factory to the Department.
Respectfully,
HUBERT EDSON. Dr. H. W. WILEY, Chief Chemist.
5




S@




Ie





















Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013















http://archive.org/details/recexperimeOOedso















REPORT OF EXPERIMENTS AT CALUMET SUGAR FACTORY, SEASON 1888-'89.



The present being the first report from Calumet plantation published in the bulletins of this Department, it will be useful, for a proper un. derstanding of the data given, briefly to describe the machinery with which the recorded results were obtained. The following is kindly furnished by Mr. Wibray J. Thompson, who, having for many years had entire control of the factory, is familiar with the apparatus in every detail of construction, capacity, etc..



I.

REPORT OP CALUMET SUGAR FACTORY, LOUISIANA.-CAMPAIGN 1888-'89.

This factory is located on the immediate bank of the Bayou Teche, 4-1 miles above the post-office town of Patterson, parish St. Mary, La., and has therefore an unlimited supply of water, well adapted to every sugar factory purpose. It is the result of additions and extensions made to an establishment began before but left in ruins by the war.

THE PLANT.
Iti plant consists of: (1) Five-roller mill; (2) bagasse burner of the so-called Taylor type, the boiler setting being the invention of Mr. Lewis S. Clark, proprietor of the neighboring Lagonda factory; (3) eight copper clarifiers, with a capacity of 1,306.3 gallons each; (4) five Kroog filter presses, manufactured by the Sangerhausen Machine Comnpany, Germany, of 220 square feet filtering area each; (5) vertical double effect of 2,000 square feet heating surface per pan; (0) eight foot vacuum pan, affording 337 square feet heating surface, operated at 15 pounds; average steam pressure; (7) seven Weston centrifugals, divided into one battery of four for first sugars and one of three for wagon sugars; together with appropriate pumps, sugar packers, electrie lighting apparatus, machine shop, and their appurtenances.
7






8

THE BOILERS.
In addition to the three boilers fired exclusively by ba are two batteries, both arranged for coal, nominally of about equivalent horse power with one another and with the bagasse battery: (1) Four double flue boilers. 26 feet long, 42 inches diameter; flues 15a inches diameter;
(2) two 17-flue boilers, 22 feet long, 54 inches diameter; flues 6 inches diameter. Of these one battery only is operated at one time, alternation every second week permitting their maintenance in superior condition. Average coal consumed per ton of cane and per 1,000 pounds of commercial sugar during each of the last three campaigns has been as follows:
188,6-28i7. 1 88,88 1888' .

Average coal per ton of cane ................. pounds 105.4 117.8 130.41
Average coal per thousand pounds of sugar ..pounds 053.0 665.5 630.48

The three years' average per 1,000 pounds of sugar is believed to be the most satisfactory ever recorded for Louisiana. Steam is maintained for the wagon-room until the drying of any thirds is completed which may have been boiled, this in 1887-'88 being only on May 17. No thirds were made in 1886-187. The coal, as stated, is for all purposes, including washing of house, preliminary trials of machinery, warming of sleeping and other apartments, electric lighting, etc., and is all actually weighed. No hot water being allowed to escape from the establishment, the boilers are supplied almost entirely with hot distilled water. The small quantity required aside from this return is first fitered by a Hyatt apparatus.
THE MILLS.
The mills are operated by a single, adjustable cut-off engine, cylinder 24 inches diameter by 48 inches stroke. This is provided with Corless valves and the Joy. expansion gear. The cut-off being ordinarily accomplished only at 42 inches, the engine is practically controlled by the wire-drawing of its governor, a practice rendered permissible by the use of its exhaust, under about 4 pounds average pressure, in juice concentration by double effect. An average of 43 revolutions of the engine is maintained, under 95 pounds initial steam-pressure. For every 100 revolutions of the engine the first or three-roller mill accomplishes 5.142 and the back or two-roller mill 4.210 revolutions. The principal dimensions of the two mills are given below:

of rolls Diameter ain th oDiametr
between of etrof Lou of
1) tW v4,1 o Ioi sh81ve M Joram junl.
CoJllars.

Iwhes. -InHeu. Inche, Iawhex. InwhL
Th 'l.-olier Iill,. 59. .5 9. 5o 12 12 11 Two-r1ller mill ... .00 40.00 18 20 161




L9

mills are heavily double geared with steel pinions and crown
throughout, neither being provided with hydraulic or other o r pressure regulating attachments. The back mill is driven by lower ol shaft, and is provided with a roughening device believed tmuch merit,. The mills are separated 15 feet between cents aturation between them was first introduced this season, beg g about the middle of its third run. This will find full discussion

apparatus is operated upon a plan quite unlike that customary in te milling of cane in Louisiana in that the feed upon the carriers is i stained as uniform at all times as possible, variations in the amount of eane consumed being regulated to that received from the fields as r as practicable by altering the speed of the engine, the governor
to which is provided with a speeding device. The speed of the ceutrifua is likewise regulated to the necessaries of the sugar being dried. The otherwise constant necessity for a change of the mills "set" is thus obvie, insuring a uniformity of expression and a reduction of time l to be better secured only, it is believed, by the hydraulic-pressure ulator. The averagejuice extraction of this mill for a series of years,
in percents of the canes' weight, has been:

188.28. 188-'87. 18 7-'88. 1888-'89.

of 5-rol1 mill juice (per cent, of cane). 76.30 73.90 74.60 72.45

T t of the three-roll mill prior to the erection of the supplemental r011s, the same engineer remaining in charge throughout, was1881-'82. 1882-'83. 1883'84. 1884-'85.

Extraction of 3-roll millijuice (per cent. of cane). 64. 70 (t) 69.84 65. 03
Inundated; no crop.

This indicates an average advantage, by campaigns of 7.58 per cent. juice on the canes' weight, to the credit of the supplemental mill, in which no account is taken of the variations in the character of the canes or the quantity of these treated per hour, which remain much more constant in Louisiana than upon more tropical estates.

MfINOR CONVENIENCES.
The minor conveniences of the establishment are as perfect as they S unusual, and are mentioned as contributing largely to the excel]e of results attained by it, and as worthy of imitation. Twenty-four p and molasses tanks and blowups, uniformly of 3,50( gallons cap each, and 300 sugar-wagons, together with the entire pla and p t of the house, offer exceptionally favorable opportunities both to




10

excellence of industrial work and of mechanical and chemical control. Strict uniformity of dimensions and patterns is adhered to wherever practicable in all duplications of tanks, wagons, pumps, centritugals, or other parts. Two hot rooms permit string sugars to be treated at discretion by such temperatures as are thought best adapted to their various needs. Gas and water, with appropriate drains, are everywhere conveniently located. The circulating pumps and oilers operate automatically. No washouts exist for the loss of juices, scums, or sirups. The sugar elevators, storage bins, and packing arrangements are particularly well designed and executed. All but minor steam-pipes, live and exhaust, are felted, and all steam outlets sre trapped. The pumping plant is so reliable as to have caused no loss of time to the establishment since 1883. Speaking-tubes connect various parts of the building, which last is well illuminated by day and night. Utility, convenience in arrangement, permanence and consideration for the possible demands of the future, are evident throughout the factory.

ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION.

The organization of the establishment is probably the most complete in Louisiana, and its administration probably the most efficient, though possibly the most expensive. Besides an engineering department, with its chief, there are recognized the following distinct branches, each with its appropriate foreman or chief, viz, defecating and filter-press, boiling, centrifugal, packing-floor, clerical, and chemical. The foremen are chosen with reference to their especial skill in the various operations which they are to supervise, having been in the employ of the house ranging from four to eight years, are paid exceptional salaries, are expected to perform no part ot the ordinary manual labor of their divisions, have no authority outside theirown well-defined precincts, live in the buildings subject to call at all hours,,and are under the sole direction of the factory "superintendent, who, in turn, is alone responsible to the proprietor. All other operatives are subject to the orders of the various foremen in whose departments they work, the latter having the power to discharge. The foremen report regularly the number of men employed, the amount and character of work performed, and such other matters as are desirable, either upon printed forms or blackboards, or otherwise, at the factory office daily.
Temporary instructions are generally posted upon bulletin boards in the various departments, instead of being orally given, to avoid misunderstanding. The work is for the most part done by six and twelve hour watches or shifts, instead of by the eighteen-hour Louisiana systen.
The fields-manager and factory superintendent meet daily to co-ordinate and arrange the work of their respective branches, as far as possible, each to the best advantage of the other. To this system, worthy a larger institution, and to cleanliness another considerable part of the








establishment's past industrial success is no doubt due, the introductio of which elsewhere is the more to be recommended that it involves no additional outlay of capital.

PROCESSES PURSUED.

The raw juices from the two mills, passing through paraffined wooden gutters, where they mix at once, enter a sulphur saturation machine placed as close to the crushers as convenient. This machine, of the paddle-wheel type, is described in Bulletin No. 3, page 99, of this Department, and, except for the excessive amount of power required to actuate it, seems highly satisfactory. The sulphurous gas is produced by the burning of sulphur in a small iron furnace kept surrounded and cool by running water. The fumes first pass through lead pipes, also submerged in constantly changing water which effects their thorough cooling, then over a considerable surface of running water intended to wash them free of H2 SO4. They enter the juice cool and practically free of the latter. A considerable quantity of this probably formed between the water bath and the saturation box, is trapped off at the entrance to the last.
The draught necessary to a combustion of the sulphur is furnished by the movement of the paddle-wheel, and the furnace on which the coinbustion takes place is so constructed as to prevent, so far as practicable, the passage of any uncombined oxygen through the apparatus. Care is exercised to prevent the admission of air at any other point than through the furnace, as a safeguard against the subsequent production of sulphuric acid. A device to free the juice of its contained air also, before sulphurization, is proposed for next season, but seems little necessary.
The juice, entirely altered in appearance by this treatment, is then pumped at once into the defecators, upon the third floor. Bronze pump barrels and copper conduits are alone used for juice, skimmings, and sirups.
The coils of a defecator being covered, steam is immediately admitted to these, and the addition of lime begun at once. By the time the defecatop is filled, the lining is complete, the juice heated, and skimming begun. No boiling in the defecator is permitted. The skimming having been completed, subsidence goes on for from one-half to one hour before decantation of the clear, defecated juice. About 2 inches of juice are removed from the surface of each defecator by the skimming and brushing, and about 8 inches of settlings are left behind in the bottom of each 35 inches, approximately, being, therefore, decanted. The decanted juice goes immediately to the double-effect, no further settling being permitted. Skimmings and settlings are run to an appropriate receiver on the floor below, are limed and reheated whenever this is thought necessary, and are pumped immediately through the filterpresses. The defecators are thoroughly washed with a water-hose and






12

broom, the wash-water also going to the presses in the outs and a scum-ditch. The filtered liquors join the juice from which derived in the double-effect's receiver, and are con without delay. The rapidity and cleanliness with which these operations are performed probably account for the alm t total absence of inversion, attributable to a use of sulphur, between raw juice and sirup, and for the absence of fermentation in the juice d e nent. Thework of the filter-presses received no attention from the laboratory this season.
Transparent liquors and a hard cake were the invariable rule. About eight hours and 60 pounds pressure were necessary toinsure the t. Two hours were generally allowed for a cold-water lixiviation. of the cake, a pressure some 10 pounds less than that employed for the juice being used and the sweet water being run to two and one-half or three degrees Baum6. This supplementary process, it is said, is nowhere else followed in Louisiana. Basing calculations upon last year's chemical data, the net savings from It, after deductions for extra evaporation, interest on extra plant, etc., to be about $12 per day when the factory is working at its normal capacity-say, 300 tons cane per twenty-four hours. An extra large battery of presses was provided especially to meet the requirements of this lixiviating process. The filter-press cloths are customarily washed biweekly. On one occasion they were operated one week without cleansing. This introduced fermentation, and is not to be repeated. Six sets of filter-cloths answer for five pr The wear and tear of these are nominal. After two years' service already, very few will need replacement before the close of another campaign. The sirup-tauk bottoms and other sweet waters of the establishment are also brought back to the presses. The last operate entirely without expert attendance, except oiling of the juice-pump by the engineers. The lixiviation pump is allowed to run dry. The pre are worked on strict rotation and the times and other data of each pressing systematically recorded. Over 22 per cent. of the entire volume ofjuie passes through the presses.
The treatment of sirups is similar to that of other Louisiana estab, lishments. It is not thought necessary to settle these, and they are not reheated and skimmed after leaving the double-effect. The first product is a large grained Y. C. sugar, which grades in the New Orleans market from choice to ultra choice. The second product, boiled to wagons at a high string-proof, is a fine-grained article which dries very slowly in the centrifugals. As high as 50 per cent. commercial sugar was, in at least one instance, secured from second min ulte. With sufficient vacuum-pan capacity, this product might, the present season, with its rich and pure juices, have probably better been grained in the pan. For the first time in the history of the establishment, the entire crop was reboiled to a blank string-proof for a third crystaliza n. Though the second molasses so reboiled showed in some instnoes






13

cose to be already in actual excess of sucrose present, graining was rapid and copious and maturity rapidly attained. First sugars were washed with 2 pints of water, in which is dissolved a minimum of stannous chloride crystals. Seconds and thirds with one pint, more or less. Analyses of these sugars and of the molasses from them are given further on. The weights or gauges of all products being now ascertained, no estimates are incorporated in the returns to follow, and no allowances have been made for trash weighed as cane.
MECHANICAL CONTROL.

The system of department reports referred to constitutes an excellent mechanical control. The amount of coal and cane consumed, the number of laborers employed in each department, the quantities of juice, sirup, sugar, and molasses produced, and the number of packages used, give daily the amount of work done by each department and the daily cost of each operation, and ;xhibits mechanical derangements and wastes before the loss from these can become important. The stop and start of all portions of the apparatus has been long recorded apd the average possible hours of daily operation and the hourly capacity of each machine thus established. The causes of lost time, with means for their remedy, have also been carefully determined; the house is thus found to be remarkably well balanced throughout and correspondingly economical in operation. The average performance of mill and vacuum pan, per actual running hour, the last three seasons, expressed in pounds of commercial sugar, has been1_S86-87. 1887-'88. 1888-'89.

M ill .................................. 2,224.87 2,804.98 2,904.04
Vacuum pan ......................... 2, 558.19 2,738.13 2,731.41


This indicates the maximum capacity of the establishment to be something over 60,000 pounds commercial sugar per diem.


Previous to my arrival at Calumet a general plan of work had been arranged for the chemist, in which the main features were experiments in connection with the mechanical filtration of cane juice.
With this end in view, a physical laboratory, equipped as a minature sugar-house, had been added to the "plant." This included a sminall mill, small diffusion battery of the Hughes system, with defacators, filter press, open evaporators, and vacuum strike pan of corresponding capacity.
These experiments, the mechanical part of which was under the direction of Mr. B. Remmturners, who worked most intelligently and per-






14

sistently at them, were undertaken by myself with a great deal of reluctance. Knowing the amount of work already done on this subject and the uniformly unsatisfactory results, it was hardly possible that where much of the time had to be occupied with affairs of the sugarhouse that anything worthy of note could be accomplished.
However, that which was attempted was very thoroughly and systematically executed. Caustic lime, carbonate of lime, superphosphate of lime, and many other reagents, besides brown coal, wood char, and other substances, were all tried in the cells of the small battery, not only as an aid in mechanical filtration, but also to assist in defecation.
While it was found that diffusion juices filtered mu-h more easily than in ill juices, none of the different clarifying agents employed seem to have assisted the subsequent filter press filtration to any appreciable degree, and the analysis are not thought to be of sufficient value for publication.
Aside from the work on filtration, however, careful and systematic analyses of the raw, sulphtred, and clarified juices were made three times daily, and of the sirup once daily throughout the season, and during two runs alter the work on filtration had been discontinued a complete chemical control was maintained throughout the house, each stage of the manufacture being carefully gauged, samples taken, and analyses made.
The season's work was, for convenience, arbitrarily divided into five runs two of them on stubble and three on plant cane.

FIRST STUBBLE RUN.
The cane of this run had nearly all been ground before my arrival at Calumet, and but few analyses of juices were secured. Judging, however, from the analyses made, the juices were the richest of the season, but thecane being second-year stubble, contained avery high percentage of fiber. There was on this account not only a less quantity of juice in the cane, but also a poor extraction of that present, the woody-fibrous cane making good mill work impossible.
The yield, however, was very good, the ratio of glucose to sucrose in the final molasses being higher than any ever reported before by a Louisiana sugar house. Its analysis gave sucrose double polarization 23.56 per cent, glucose 42.09, and purity 29.70.
One thing worthy of much notice, in this run, was the boiling of molasses, for third sugar, in which the glucose was already in actualexcess of the sucrose. This molasses contains 33.20 per cent sucrose and 33.74 per cent glucose, and gave a massecuite which grained excellently in the wagons, "swung" out well in the centrifugals, and yielded 12.06 pounds of commercial sugar per ton of cane.
The extraordinarily high content of glucose compared with sucrose in the final molasses is probably due in part to a high percentage of glucose present in the raw injuice. Owing to the non-arrival of the cheical sp






15

no glucose determinations were made the first run, but since in st work the analyses of the final molasses showed as low percof sucrose without as high glucose content, it is reasonable to a me that the glucose in the molasses in question was derived from t originally present in the juice and was not a result of inversion.

SECOND STUBBLE RUN.
On this run the data are more complete than on the previous one. The remarkably good work which had characterized the house in the t run was once or twice slightly interrupted during this run. The most serious mistake made was the neglect of the sulphur machine, by which moist air was admitted freely to the sulphur dioxide after it had passed over the wash water, and, as the conditions were most favorable, there was, in all probability, quite an appreciable amount of sulphuric acid formed. At any rate, the inversion in this run was much greater hn in any other, amounting to 4,365.54 pounds of sucrose, being 1.32 per cent of sucrose present in raw juice. The analysis of the final tool gave sucrose, 23.78 per cent; glucose, 32.68, with a purity of
30.87. The sucrose in the final molasses of the second stubble run, it will be noticed, is very little in excess of the sucrose of the first stubble, while there is nearly ten per cent less glucose, making the content of total sugar in the last run much lower.
It would seem from this work that the glucose present in the juice of the cane did not possess the power to restrain the crystallization of s that it is commonly supposed to have. With much more gluc in the first run the amount of sucrose is a little less than in the second. Whether this glucose is different from artificially prepared gpe sugar in its physical characteristics or whether the restraining power of the latter over crystallization has been greatly overestimated, are questions that this work would naturally suggest, and it is probable that, with the awakening interest of the Louisiana planter in scientific work, both these questions will, before many years, be settled.
These two runs are noticeable, not so much for the yield of sugar as for the point to which crystallization was carried. Molasses, which be. fore would have been considered worthless, can now, in view of the work done at Calu met, be profitably boiled again for another crop of crystals.
In boiling for the lower-grade sugars, the massecuite was boiled as stiff as possible without converting it into "taffy." This required a good deal of judgment on the part of the sugar-boiler, and it is to the excellent manipulation of the material at this point that the high yield of ugar is due.
FIRST PLANT RUN.
This was much. the largest run of the season, and had the richest n The work of the sugar-house was uniformly excellent, the methan i loss between the juice and sirup being small as compared wit the stubble cane, and in other parts of the house scarcely notice-






16

able. Maceration, or the addition of water to the ba be front and back mill was commenced in this run, and a kable increase in the yield was derived from it. This will be di d further on under the head of "maceration." Available sugar, or sugar actually secured, expressed in terms of glucose present in the juice, was 0.82 ti the glucose deducted from the sucrose. The final mol contained 26.80 per cent sucrose, 30.85 glucose, with a purity of 33.49.

SECOND PLANT RUN.
This run, judging merely from the nicety with which the machinery worked, would have been pronounced the best of the season. Careful chemical control showed, however, that the mechanical losses were proportionately larger than in any other run of the season.
The chemical control carried through this run was, I believe, one of the most complete if not the most complete work of its kind ever attempted in Louisiana. All the products from the raw juice to the final molasses inclusive were carefully analyzed, weights and measurements taken at each stage, and the sugar present compared with that of the previous stage. The work was extremely satisfactory, the losses being accurately located and the parts of the house which worked well noticed. The chief and in fact almost the only loss after the juice had been expressed occurred at the double effect. This, owing to the prac. tice of maceration at the mills, was being so worked beyond its capacity that not over 7 to 8 inches of vacuum could be maintained in its first pan, while 27 to 28 were secured upon the second. The difference of the boiling points of the two pans being thus so great the juice from the first entered the second pan far above the latter's boiling point, and flashed therefore instantly into vapor, the excess of its sensible, being absorbed as latent heat. This instituted a current of vapor direct from the liquor feed-pipe towards the condenser evidently sufficiently violent to entrain large amounts of the entering juice in the form of globular spray or mist which escaped the catchall.
After the juice had passed the double effect there was only one other place where there was any appreciable loss, the work in the refinery being remarkably good and close. In boiling for third sugar some of the massecuite was boiled too stiff, and about 6 inches in the bottom of the wagons having been chilled by too low a temperature at or near the floor of the hot room during a spell of cold weather could not be dug out, and had to be melted and run into the molasses. This accounts for the relatively high percentage of sucrose in the final molasses, the analysis of which gave 29.11 per cent of sucrose, 29.36 gluce, and purity of 36.94.
THIRD PLANT RUN.
In this run, though the chemical control was carried as tema as in the previous, the results were not quite so sat the
fact that a great deal of settlings from the first molasses w carried






17

over from the first plant and worked in with this run. All this was of course measured, analyzed, and deducted from the sugar present in the juice, but what the effect was on crystallization, added as it was to all the different grades of product, it would be impossible to state.
One very serious accident occurred during this run which delayed the work for three days. The shaft of the back or bagasse roll of the front or three-roller mill was broken, but as the season was so near the end the crop did not suffer from the delay.
Thecane worked, being from new, back, stiff, and inadequately drained lands, was comparatively poor, the sucrose being much lower and the glucose much higher than in the previous plant cane runs. A neutral defecation was carried throughout this run, and a good deal of glucose was destroyed, forming probably a compound with the lime, which was broken up and dissolved by the juice. The amount of first sugar secured was very large compared with the sucrose in the juice, and as a consequence the lower grade sugars did not crystallize as well as in the other runs much of the grain in the seconds being so small that it passed through the sieves of the centrifugals. The final molasses contained 26.62 per cent of sucrose, 28.52 glucose, and a purity of 34.44.
The last two runs made with the idea of comparing a neutral with the ordinary Louisiana acid clarification both as to the effect on yield yield and care of working, will be discussed further on.

SPECIAL INQUIRIES.
One of the things watched with especial interest was the effect upon th~ juices from the use of sulphur dioxide as a depurator.
No data on this subject have ever been collected in Louisiana in practical sugar-house working. Laboratory practice has, of course, made us familiar with the danger attendant upon the use of sulphur, if not properly handled.
The Louisiana experiment station, under the direction of Dr. Stubbs, has strongly condemned its use, without suggesting anything to take its place, and, judging from the published reports of the station, the loss there was much greater than any sugar-house could afford.
In endeavoring to find out how great the inversion was at Caluminet, analyses were made three times daily of the raw, sulphured, and clarifled juices throughout the season. Samples were also taken from each tank of sirup and from the different grades of sugars and the final molasses, and in two runs of all the intermediate products. As all these different products were carefully weighed or measured, any increase in the glucose would be quickly noticed. The analyses of both raw and sulphured juices are, I conclude from the season's work, unnecessary, and either the one or the other should be dropped, thus reducing the chemist's work a great deal and eliminating nothing essential.
Of course where the sulphured juice is heated before being run into the clarifiers both juices should be analyzed. Enough sugar would,
7083-Bull. 23- 2






18

however, be inverted by this treatment, I should say, to any one to stop its use.
As a result of Calumet's work, I can not but be very favorably impressed with the use of sulphur as an aid in improving the quality of the output of a sugar-house.
The total inversion for the crop was 6,111.91 pounds sucrose, of which a loss of 4,865 pounds as already mentioned, was sustained mainly through inattention during the second stubble run. This is undoubtedly a smaller loss than would be occasioned by the use of a boneblack plant that can be operated on any Louisiana plantation.
The entire loss by inversion, with the exception of 317 pounds, wa confined to two runs, and in another year's work will be almost entirely overcome by a new arrangement, designed by Mr. Daniel Thompson, for cooling the sulphur dioxide fumes as they come from the furnace.
This improvement was put in at Calumet the latter part of the season, and after its introduction the inversion was practically nothing.
It consists of a box about 18 feet long by 2 in width and depth, and is divided into two parts, the first division containing about 16 feet of 6.inch lead pipe, through which the sulphur fumes passed, and around which cold water was kept continually circulating. This effectually cooled the fumes and allowed the absorption in the second division of the box of any sulphuric acid which had been formed. In this second division the fumes came in actual contact with water, allowing, as mentioned above, the absorption of sulphuric acid, while having been cooled by the previous treatment the sulphur dioxide formed no fresh sulphuric acid. A further trap for sulphuric acid, which had been in use with the old sulphur-box, was kept in place and allowed any sulph uric acid present to drop perpendicularly down, on account of its specific gravity., into a suitable receptacle, while the lighter sulphur dioxide is drawn off by suction at right angles into the juice.
After the new arrangement for cooling the fumes had been put in, two runs were made, one with an acid defecation, the. other with a neutral. Each run contained a little over 197,000 pounds of sucrose in the juice extracted, and with the acid defecation only 317 pounds of sucrose were lost by inversion, while in the neutral not a pound disappeared from this cause. From this I am led to believe that in another year the inversion caused by sulphuric acid will be entirely stopped, but, since to secure the best results with sulphur the juices must be left a little acid after defecation, there will always be a slight inversion, but the acidity will be from a weaker acid, and will amount to nothing.
That sulphur in cane-juice can be made a dangerous and formidable enemy in the lands of untrained and unskilled workmen can not for a moment be denied, but when properly and scientifically hadled it is one of the most, if not the most, valuable aid in a mill.house. Witb diffusion it will not be as important. if used at all, as the diffusiouice







19,

areusaly drawn from the cell at too high a temperature to admit of
itsusewithout great danger of inversion. With mill juices even,
whe suphur is used, great care and celerity should always be exercised Sprate the sulphured juice at once, evaporate the juice to
immediately after defecation and from the sirup concentrate to
masseuite without stopping, and so on as fast as the lower grades will alw of good results. This, however, is true of any sugar-house, whether supur is used or not, and large losses, which are often attributed to some mthod of manufacture, are due to nothing else but delay in working up the juice after it has been soured. Certainly Cjalumet, with the height average season's yield ever reported in Louisiana, and this with an extraction of from 80 to 87 per cent of sucrose present in the cane,
hsno r a for changing its treatment of the juice as lo11g, at least, aaitcotinues mill-work. Cheapness and effectiveness are two as good reco nations as anything needs, and both of these can be applied to he use of sulphur at Calumet.


MACERATION AND ITS EFFECT ON YIELD.

Below is given a table showing the work done both before and after maceration was begun:

Without water With water
added. added.

Cane ground---------------tons.. 3,993.26 3, 3-8.31
Do.........pud. 7,986, T-5 6,776,623
Sucroselincane---------------...do... 1, 016 :365 4,18
,Juice extracted......gallons.. 650,878 599,213
DO,..........ouns..5,786,909 5,327,383
Surs injuice-------d.. 818,269 736,478
Sucrose in bagasse-------do... 198,096 107, 008
Sucrose in bagasse, per cent of total 19.49 12.69 Sucrose obtained, per cent of total.... 80.51 87.31
Sucrose obtained, per 1,000 pounds sucrose in cane-------------...pounds.. 805.1 873.1
Sucrose gained per 1,000 pounds by maceratioa.............. pud.............puds.6
Sucrose lost in first part of season by not
insoerating................ pounds-..........9,113
Sucrose lost in first part of season per
ton of cane................ Pounds .. ,............ 17.31
Sucros~e gained in second part of season
by m certion............. oun s..57,357
Sucrose gained in second part of season
per ton of cane ...............pounds............... 16.93
Water added, per cent of normal jitice,

Will extraction of juice, per cent cane .. 72. 45 78.61 Average tons crushed per hour, ....... 14.22 14.03


Te addition of water was begun about the middle of the first plantru, nd as it was thought unnecessary to divide the run, the actual yedof merchantable sugar can not be given exactly, but since a pound






2 0

of sucrose in the juice meant a pound of commercial the return can be easily figured from the table. At any rate, as the extra amount of sugar secured in the juice is the only way to judge of the good m eration does, everything will be found in the table which is necessary to form an opinion of the work. A gain of 17 pounds of sugar per ton of cane by simply adding 11.94 per cent of water is an amount of sugar secured in such a way that no planter can afford to overlook it. The only extra expense entailed is the evaporation of the water added, and, as at Calumet, all the exhaust-steam could not be used before maceration was begun the extra yield was secured with almost no expense.
The method employed for adding the water is believed to have much in it to recommend itself, and since the manner of doing anything has as much to do with success as the mere fact of doing it, the method will be given in full. The water was ejected from a perforated pipe upon the bagasse as it was being released from the pressure of the front mill.
It was argued by Mr. Wibray J. Thompson, and rightly, too, in my opinion, that during the expansion which follows this pressure the bagasse is more likely to thoroughly and uniformly absorb the added water, as it is known to do such juice as passes through the mill, than at any subsequent period, a minimum of water thus being made to produce maximum results and a maximum of time afforded for diffusive and osmogenic action before entering the second mill. The water added and the juice present in the bagasse from the front mill should, he thought, become a homogeneous liquor practically resembling the normal juice in every particular except in having a lower specific gravity. It can readily be seen that this juice of a uniform quality would give a higher extraction of sucrose than if the water be added indiscriminately at any point of the intermediate carrier, supersaturating some of the bagasse and not reaching other parts at all, which would give a smaller extraction of sucrose with a higher dilution, since from that part of the bagasse which was supersaturated an excess of water would be expressed while an excess of juice would be left behind in parts insufficiently saturated or diffused.
By carefully observing these conditions the yield of sugar, as was mentioned before, was increased 17 pounds per ton of cane. This is an enormous advance over ordinary mill work, but on an estimate of what diffusion would have done with the same cane and a 96 per cent ex. traction, which can easily be obtained, a net gain over maceration of 23 pounds of sucrose per ton of cane would have been made. Thus, while it can be seen that maceration is of great advantage, it is at its best only a temporary expedient to be used till plantation owners can prepare their sugar-houses for diffusion.
The most eflrctive and economic maceration will require a dilution of about 15 per cent. on the weight of normal juice, while diffusion needs but little more. Multiple effect evaporation is, then, as necessary for maceration as for diffusion, and without this aid the e.ad l






21

of sucrose during evaporation would not be balanced by the return of sugar. The chances for extremes of dilution are much greater in maceration than by diffusion, allowing both to be in charge of inexperienced persons, and taken all in all, though the gain by good maceration is great where a fouse has to be changed at all for either of the two processes, there should not be the slighest hesitancy in choosing diffusion. Easy to handle and effective, the latter has everything in its favor, and, since it has been proven that the exhausted chips can be burned, there is nothing against it. Come it will sooner or later, and he who introduces it first will reap the greatest benefit.

AVAILABLE SUGAR.

While in my opinion it is unnecessary and useless in sugar-house work to have an arbitrary formula for predicting results, as from the very nature of the material nothing constant can be secured, still as it has hitherto been customary by the Department to use some such standard, I will report Calumet's work in the same way. The formula
-which has been mostly used for this purpose has been one and a half times the glucose present in the juice deducted from the sucrose. The product thus expressed is sugar of 1000 polarization, which should go to market as crystal.
At Fort Scott, Kans., campaign of 1887, working sorghum cane the crystallized product obtained was expressed by deducting 1.42 times the glucose from the sucrose, this being slightly better work than according to the ordinary formula. The following table gives theo results of each of the five runs into which the campaign was divided at Calumet. This table gives both the amount of sugar according to the regular formula and that which was actually secured; also a formula expressing the results. It will be seen that even in the one sugar-house the widest variations exist.

Pounds
oPounds of
of sucroseodsf
1.50 < sucrose amu- Formula for available sugar. glucose, ally secured.

Firststubble................ Analysis of juice not complete.
Second stubble ............. 348, 986. 68 361, 574.02 Sucrose- 1.04 glucose.
First plant .................. 696, 189. 62 727, 071. 90 Sucrose 81 X glucose.
Second plant ................ 177, 438. 40 180, 625. 35 Sucrose 1.25 glucose.
Third plant................. 171, 153. 83 188, 066. 89 Surrose -.53 glucose.
Total crop ......... ... 1, 393, 768. 53 1, 457, 3. 16 Sucrose-. 87 \ glucose.

This is up to the present time the best work with cane-juice ever pub. lised, there being a difference of .55 between Calumet's average factor for available sugar and that of the Fort Scott works, the latter the best reviously recorded.






22

NEUTRAL VERSUS ACID CLARIFICATIO
In all Louisiana sugar-houses where sulphur is used the juices are left slightly acid for the purpose of securing an improved color in all the products from first sugar to final molassesinclusive. This practice is followed both in open-kettle and vacuum-pan sugar-houses.
The great trouble in working such juices is, naturally, the inversion caused by the presence of a free acid. A very slight acidity is all that is necessary to secure the desired color in the pibduction of yellow clarified sugars, but even in skilled hands this acidity is very difficult to control, and under the charge of the ordinary Louisiana clarifierman the juice is left first at one extreme and then at the other, with a tendency always to the more acid juice.
In the manufacture of white sugar the evil is, of course, intensified by higher degrees of acidity sought. The lack of knowledge and care has been so marked in most cases that the owners themselves were ignorant even that it was possible for such a loss to occur.
Only in a very few places, and even in these but for a few years, have any attempts been made to give the juice a practical chemical treatment. In most places where this has been done a considerable inversion has been found in working the acid juices. To overcome this loss by inversion the juices are limed to neutrality. This practice, however, lowers the quality of the sugar, for as soon as the juice loses its acidity it fails to give so brilliant a sugar, because of the formation of calcic glucates and other dark-colored compounds; hence it is ney that a sufficient, amount of additional sugar be recovered by the neutral clarification to overcome the difference in price of the sugar from an acid clarification.
The last two runs of the season were selected for a trial of the relative merits of the two methods of clarification, and a tabulated statement of the work done is given below:

Acid run. Ntl

Cane ground .................................. tos.. 88023 950.55
Mill extraction------------------. percent.. 78.48 80.31
Extraction of sucrose------------------do.. 87.21 89.16
Dilution dueto laceration .................... do.... 13.98 15.49
Sucrose in diluted juie--------------------do.... 12.54 11.46
Sucrose in ice ..................... pounds.. 197,281 197,317
Sucrose in siru .............................. do.... 186, 543 194,71
SMechanical loss hetwcOn Juice and Sirp-1 ...... do.... 10,632 2,048
Ilnvrsioni of sucrose in whole run ............. do.... 317 None.
Sugar 10o polarization obtained----- ... do,... 180,726 188,0607

The selection of these two runs for the trial proved to be a Very unfortunate one, the difference in the quality of the cane beingvery marked. With no other difficulty than this a strict comparison of reslts would






23

bible, but coupled to this the mechanical loss at the double
in the acid run was the largest of the season, while in the neutral the smallest. This loss can not, in my opinion, be attributed to
d nt methods of clarification, but merely to the handling of the
d e efct. Even if the different losses in the two runs were due to t different viscosity of thejuices, as was suggested might be possible by r. W. J. Thompson, the loss itself will be entirely avoided in another y and ought not to enter into a discussion of the results.
As far ds a loss by inversion is concerned, there need be no discussion, because by either process there was at Calumet no such loss, or practically none, the acid run having only 317 pounds, which is too small to be considered, and the neutral having none of course. This abece of inversion in the acid run disposes of the most important objection to that method of clarification and reduces the discussion to the comparative amount of sugar recovered by the two methods and the market value of the product after it is recovered. In the acid run 91.61 per cent. of the sucrose in the juice was put on the market as crystallized sugar, while in the neutral 95.31 per cent. was recovered. If, however, the mechanical loss at the double effect, mentioned above, had been the same the sugar obtained would have been very nearly equal, while all the products of the acid clarification had from .062 to .25 cents per pound the advantage in price on the gross sales.
As far, then, as this season's work was carried at Calumet the advantage lies entirely with the acid clarification. By careful and expeditious working of the juice inversion was almost prevented; as large an amount of sugar can be recovered from the juice' and the market value of the products are invariably higher.
Ta sowing comparative per cents of albuminoids in raw, sulphured, and clarified juices.

Raw Sulphured Clarified
juice. juice. juice.

186--------------.10937 .IC625 .06250
196 ............... 11250 .10625 .06250
219 ............... .12500 .109337 .05625
233 ....... .. .10937 10000 06875
250----------..... 13750 .12812 .07187
256................13125 10000 06875
265 ............... .11875 .10312 .05625
289 ............... .15000 ............ 09375
39 ........... 121S7 .09375 .05625
3 ...... .. .10037 .06875
12250 .105668 .0665)

It will be seen from the table that SO. combined with or destroyed sme of the nitrogen present in the juice. Whether this is albuminoid m r or not I can not say, but as all the nitrogen is calculated to alb 'noids the percentage is very sensibly decreased in the sulphured





Ie

24

juice. The clarified juice contains but little over one-half the albuminoids present in the raw juice. This is about the same percentage of albuminoid matter removed as that at Magnolia plantation, reported in Chemical Bulletin 15 of this Department.


Summary of total crops."
Solids in juice .................................... per cent.. 16.40
Sucrose in juice ...................................... do.... 13.94
Glucose in juice .......................................do.... .93
Purity coeflicient ........................................... 85.00
Sucrose in juice .................................... pounds.. 1,548,975
Glucose in juice ....................................... do.... 103,332
Commercial sugar obtained ........................... do.... 1,549, 078
Sugar of 100' polarization obtained ................... do.... 1,458,876
Sucrose in final molasses .................................... 67,423
Inversion of sucrose ................................ pounds.. 6,112
Mechanical loss of sucrose............................do.... 30, 431
Total loss of sucroset... ......................do.... 36,543
Total loss of sucrose ............................... per cent.. 2.36


Analyses of molasses boiled for third sugar.


Sucrose.
No. Solids. Purity. Glucose.
Direct. Indirect.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
224 77.4 28. 18 33.20 42. 77 33. 74
489 75.4 34.4 38. 96 51.67 20.38
493 77. 6 33.4 37.10 47. 81 21.51
494 75. 8 30. 4 36. 88 48. 65 21. 17
495 80. 1 27.2 33. 10 40. 09 32. 55
496 81.5 28.2 33.92 41.62 32.49
497 77. 1 36.4 41. 18 53.41 23. 60
498 76. 6 35. 4 39. 88 52. 06 20. 12
499 76. 2 35.2 39.72 52.11 19.94
500 74.4 39. 0 42.62 57.28 20.23
502 80. 6 33. 6 37. 30 46. 28 19. 97
503 77.1 33. 6 .......... .......... 22. 37



This table is given to show to what point crystallization can be carried. In one instance the glucose is already in excess of the sucrose, and in others the amount is nearly equal, and yet from all these a good crop of crystals wvas secured.

SThis table does not include the first stubble run, as complete analysesof thejuices were not made. Inclusive of this run the total commercial sugar was 1,733,421 pounds.
t The apparent excess of sullrose in the added products is due to the fact that 12,429 pounds of sucrose are shown by double polarization of the molasses, which were present but not shown by the single polarization of the juice.






25

AnaZyses of final molasses.

Sucrose.
Solids Purity. Glucose.
Direct. Indirect.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
First stubble run ............ 79.3 18.4 23.56 29. 70 42. 09
Second stubble run .......... 78.3 17.6 23.78 30.37 32. 68
First plant run .............. 78.6 20.4 26.30 33.49 30. 85
Second plant run ............ 78.8 23.2 29.11 36. 94 29.36
Third plant run ............. 77.6 22. 0 26.62 34.44 28.52
Means .................. 78.52 20.32 25.87 32.99 32.70

The exceptionally fine record made by Calumet is worthy of more than passing notice. As mill work it is unprecedented, having surpassed anything which has heretofore been thought possible. The extraction of juice was not phenomenally high, though after mascer. ation was began it was much above the average, but the manipulation of the juice after it was once secured was remarkably good. The machinery was well arranged and worked admirably, and to the arrangement is due much of the credit, as it allowed an ease and speed in working which otherwise could not have been attained.
The one noticeable mechanical loss was at double effect. The loss here was larger than thought possible, but the most careful measure. ment and analyses of the material, both before and after entering the double effect, only confirmed thedisappearance. During the campaign 30,431 pounds, or 1.97 per cent., of the sucrose extracted disappeared at this place. A portion of this loss is really due to the press-cake, but as this was carefully lixiviated from two to three hours all through the campaigns, the sucrose lost in this way was but a small amount. No analyses of cake were made, as the presses gave no trouble whatever at any time, and the other work was thought to be more important. Steps have been taken to stop this loss during the next campaign. A Helix separator is to be att-ched to the condenser pipe, and it is expected that this will arrest the spray and return it to the pan.
From the sirup to the final product it is hard to see how the work could be improved. The most noticeable feature, and the one, I think, to which the high yield may be attributed, was the remarkable stiffness to which the massecuites were boiled. In all grades of the material as much water was driven off as was thought safe to do. By this remarkably good boiling an amount of sugar was recovered which leaves absolutely no room for comparison with the work of other Louisiana sugarhouses. This is a record to be proud of, and the enterprising proprietor of Calumet, Mr. Daniel Thompson, and his son, W. J. Thompson, director of the sugar-house, deserve unstinted praise for showing the possibilities of cane culture in Louisiana when the manufacturing is carried ou~~t on a rational basis.







26


What has been done can be done again, and the Lii
planter adopts diffusions and carries his sugar-house work to such a degree of perfection as has already been attained at Calumet it will b no unusual thing to hear that 250 pounds of sugar have been obtained. from a ton of cane.

TABLE No. 1.-Raw jnice, second stubble ru.


Number. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. Glu e


23----------Nov. 8 15.97 12.77 79.96 1.19 9.32
29--- ----.Nov. 8 16.40 13. 41 81. 7 1.11 8.28
33...... Nov. 8 16.38 12.91 78.81 .1.33 10.

37 ........... Nov. 9 15.84 13.30 83.96 .98 7.37
42 ........... Nov. 9 15.67 13.03 83.16 1.00 7.67
48. Nov. 9 15. 79 13.00 82.33 .98 7.54
52 ........... Nov. 10 16.10 13.49 83.76 1.02 7.56
56 ........... Nov. 10 16.88 14.44 86.73 .92 8 37
59 ........... Nov. 10 16.29 13.60 8.1.48 1.06 7.79
64 ........... Nov. 11 16. 79 14. 31 86.47 .97 6. 78
77 ........... Nov. 13 16.01 13.79 86.13 .94 6.82
83 ........... N ov. 13 16.60 14.36 86.51 6.13
87 .......... Nov. 13 16.40 13.88 84.63 .91 6.56
91 ........... Nov. 14 15.99 13..55 84.74 .89 6.57
94----------Nov. 14 16.54 13.85 83.67 .86 6.21
97 .......... Nov. 14 16.32 13.96 85.54 .86 6.16
102 ........... Nov. 15 16.80 14.66 88.57 .79 5.39
105 ........... Nov. 15 16.87 14.56 86.31 .81 5.50
113 ........... Nov. 15 16.44 14. 17 86. 19 .91 6.42
Means........... 16. 32 13.78 84.43 .97 7.04


TABLE No. 2.-Sulphured juice, second stubble run.


Number. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose.e


24 .......... Nov. 8 16. 09 12.87 79.99 1.17 9.01
30..........Nov. 8 16.61 13.60 81.88 1. 0 7.73
34 ....... Nov. 8 16.81 13.20 78.64 1.23 9.32
38----------Nov. 9 16.02 13.19 82.33 .98 7.
43 ........... Nov. 9 15.70 12.93 82. 36 1.01 7.81
49----------Nov. 9 16.01 12.90 80.57 .98 7. 60
53 .......... Nov. 10 16.15 13.27 82 18 1.03 7. 76
57 Nov. 10 17.03 14.46 84.91 .91 6.29
0------- Nov. 10 16.36 13.40 82.03 .90 6.72
65 .......... Nov. 11 17.17 14.27 8310 .98 6.87
78 ........... Nov. 13 16.20 13.65 84.20 .93 6.81
84......... Nov. 13 16 66 14.29 s5.17 .85 5.97
Nov. 13 16. 54 13.96 84.40 .90 6.44
'....... Nov. 14 16.09 13. 8 4. 09 .88 6.35
95........ Nov. 14 16.65 13.88 83.38 .88 6.34
98 .......... Nov. 14 16.38 13. 77 814.09 .88 6.3
103. Nov. 15 16.82 14.54 86.44 .79 5.43
10 .......... Nov. 15 16. 77 14.32 5. 39 .81 5.66
114 ........... Nov. 15 1. 30 13. 19 85. 83 .92 6. 7

Means... ......... 16. 44 195 .4








27


TABLE No. 3.-Clarified juice, second 8tubble run.

Glucose,
No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. Gatio.
ratio.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
25........... Nov. 8 16.71 13.42 80.19 1.29 9.61
31 ........... Nov. 8 16.23 13.27 81.76 1.11 8.36
35 ........... Nov. 8 16.85 13. 26 78. 82 1.30 9. 65
39 ........... Nov. 9 16.34 13.32 81.52 .96 7. 21
44........... Nov. 9 16.60 13.60 81.93 .92 6.76
50........... Nov. 9 16.13 13.15 81.52 .98 7.45
54-........... Nov. 10 16.48 13.66 82. 89 1. 03 7. 54
58 ........... Nov. 10 17.08 14. 68 85. 89 .92 6.27
61........... Nov. 10 17.04 14.09 82.10 1.16 8.23
66........... ~Nov. 11 17.47 14.48 82.88 .97 6.70
79........... Nov. 13 16. 90 14.27 85.62 .93 6.51
85.. ........ Nov. 13 16. 21 13.78 85.01 .9 6. 60
89.......... Nov. 13 15.56 12.40 79.69 .77 6. 21
........... Nov. 14 16.21 13.70 84.51 .87 6.55
96........... Nov. 14 16.60 14.00 84. 34 .86 6.14
99........... Nov. 14 16.46 13.89 84.33 .88 6.34
104.......... Nov. 15 17.00 14. 6! 85.94 .79 5.41
107 ........... Nov. 15 16.97 14.40 84.36 .79 5.49
115........... Nov. 15 16.71 14.04 84.02 .95 6.77

Means.. .......... 16.61 13.79 83.02 .97 7.03


TABLE NO. 4.-irup, second stubble run.


No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. Glucose
ratio.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
36........... Nov. 8 57.90 46.10 79.76 3. 84 8.33
51 ........... Nov. 9 55.28 46. 16 83. 50 4.25 9.27
3........... Nov. 10 57.06 48.76 85.63 3.92 8.04
90 ........... Nov. 13 56.86 49. 16 86. 46 3. 44 6.98
100.........- Nov. 14 54.86 48.58 88.55 3. 12 6. 42
116 ........... N-ov. 15 56. 58 49. 66 87. 77 3. 12 6.28

Means... 56. 42 47.79 85.72 3. 62 7.57


TABLE NO. 5.-Sugars, second 8tubble run.


No. Description of Date. Sucrose. Glucose.
sample.

Per Ient. Per cent
20 First sugar..... Nov. 6 9.2 ..........
445 ....do ........... Dec. 29 98.4 ..........
446 ....do ......... Dec. 29 99 ..........

M an ........ .......... 9~.5 ..........

447 Second sugar ... Dec. 29 8 3. 63
448 ..do ........... Dec. 8 3.x3
4409 ...do.......... Dec. 29 90 3.22

ea ........ .......... 88 3.39

521 Third sugar ... Feb. 18 80.4 7. 13







28



TALE No. 6.-Third molaW8, seeoom 8tuble run.


Sucrose.
________________Purity.
Doub ratio.
lDouble
{o. Date. Solids. Single Double polarize
polariza- polarizai tion.
tion. tion.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cen.
521 Feb. 18 78.3 17.6 23.78 30.37 36.62 154.00



8ummary.-econd stubble run.

Cane ground .................................................. tons.. 1,945.04
Cane ground ............................................... pounds.. 3,890,078
Sucrose in cane ............................................... do.... 482,447.44
Juice extracted .............................................gallons. 318,775
Juice extracted ............................................. pounds.. 2,831,535
Sucrose in j juice ............................................... do.... 390,185.52
Sucrose in bagasse .......... ........................d.... 9,261.92
Sucrose extracted, per cent of sucrose in cane ....................... 80.8
Glucose in juice ............................................ pounds. 27,45.89
Available sugar at 1.50 X glucose deducted from sucrose .. .... 348,986.68
Total sugars in juice ........................................ do.... 413,120. 95
Sirup obtained .............................................. gallons.. 75,006
Sirup obtained .................... .................... pounds.. 799,155.42
Sucrose in sirup .............................................. do.... 381,91638
Loss of sucrose between juice and sirup ....................... do.... 8,269.14
Glucose in sirup ................................... do.... 28,929.43
Inversion of sucrose .......................................do.... 1,922.94
Commercial first sugar obtained ..............d.... 280,663
First sugar of 1000 polarization obtained ........ ........ do... 256,753.06
Commercial second sugar obtained .....................do.... 98,145
Second sugar of 1000 polarization obtained............... do. 4- 607,0
Glucose in second sugar. ................. ..... do ... 3,259.32
Commercial third sugar obtained .............................do.., 25, 141
Third sugar of 1000 polarization obtained .......... ...... do... 20,213.36
Glucose in third sugar ........................................ do.... 1,792.55
Third molasses obtained ................................... gallons.. 6,900
Third molasses obtained..................pounds.. 80,868
Sucrose in third molasses, single polarization ................. do.--. 14,232.77
Sucrose in third molasses, double polarization............. do.... 19,230.41
Glucos in third molasses ..................................... do.... 26,427-6
Gain in glucose between sirup and product .................. do.., 2,550.10
Inversion of sucrose between sirup and product............... do... 2,422.0
Inversion of extracted sucrose during entire 4un ........ do..., ,36554
Sucrose in sirup + that shown by double polarization ......... do.... 386,914.02
Sucrose obtained -s sugar ..................................... do .... 361,574.02
Total sucrose obtained in sugars and molasses -.......... do ... 380,804.43
Total glucose obtained in sugarsand molasses ..,............. do.... 31,479.53
Mechanical loss of sucrose between sirup and product ....... do.... .,870.99
Mechanical loss of sucrose during whole run .................. do .... 10,023.19
Loss of extracted sucrose during entire run by inversion and mechanically .................................................... pounds.. 14,388.73
Loss of extracted sucroso during entire run ............... per cmt.. 3.69








29



TABLE No. 7.-Raw juice, first plant run.



No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. Gltcose.
Ratio.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
117 ........... Nov. 16 16.98 14. 69 86. 63 .................
123 ........ Nov. 16 16.73 14.31 85.53.................
126__.....Nov. 16 16.87 14.39 85.30 .................
129 ........... -Nov. 17 16.82 14. 61 86. 86 .70 4. 79
138........... Nov. 17 16.69 14.15 84.79 1.10 7.77
141..........Nov. 17 17.07 14.83 86.88 .74 4.99
140..........Nov. 19 17. b5 15. 27 87.01 .54 3.53
153 ........... N.ov. 19 16.68 14.25 85.24 .85 5.96
159 .......... Nov. 19 17.16 14.83 86. 42 .80 5. 39
164 ..........N. ov. 20 17.21 14.45 83.96 ...................
168 .......... Nov. 21 16.36 14.23 86.99 .68 4. 77
171 .......... oW21 16.C6 13.79 85.86 .94 6.82
174..........Nov. 2.1 16.37 14.28 87.23 .90 6.30
180..... Nov. 22 16.97 14.65 87.51 .74 5. 05
183 ........... Nov. 22 16.94 14.84 87.60 .73 4.91
187 ........... Nov. 22 17. 03 14.81 86. 96 .72 4.87
193..........Nov. 23 16.35 14.05 85.93 .99 7.04
19.N.........Nov. 23 16.62 14.42 86. 76 1.00 6.93
199..........Nov. 23 16. 83 14.83 88. 01 .78 5.26
203..,........ Nov. 24 16.87 14.53 86. 13 .79 5.44
206 ........... N ov. 24 16.51 14.28 86.49 .98 6.86
214" ......... Nov. 24 16.02 13.97 87.20 .88 6.30
227.........N ov. 26 14.65 12.72 86.83 .61 4.79
231 .......... Nov. 26 15.04 13.07 86.90 .61 4.67
236 ........... Nov. 26 15.74 13.28 81.38 .67 4.29
21..........Nov. 27 15.35 12.94 84.30 .89 6.88
45N..........Nov. 27 15. 24 13.45 88. 25 .56 4. 16
253......... Nov. 27 15.23 12.57 82.53 .68 5.41
28N.........Nov. 28 14.60 12.45 85.27 .71 5.70
24........... .Nov. 28 14.66 12.59 85.88 .92 7.31
26......... Nov. 28 15.10 13.00 86.09 .94 7.23
273........... -Nov. 29 14.80 12.58 85.00 .99 7.87
280 ........... Nov. 29 15.63 13. 17 84.25 .85 6.45
289..........Nov. 30 14.57 12.64 86.75 .94 7.44
298N...... Nov. 30 14.62 12.41 84.88 .84 6.77
302 .......... Nov. 30 14.60 12.45 85.27 .89 7.15
306 ......... ec. 1 14.73 12.56 85.27 ....................
08.......... Dec. 1 13.83 11.81 85.52.................
310 ....... Dec. 1 13.60 11.95 87.87 ......

Means ........ 15. 92 13.69 85.99 .81 5.92

*Maceratiou begun.








30



TABLE NO. 8.-Sulphured juice-flrst plaid n .



No. Date. Solids. Sacroae. Purity. G1
t io.


Per cent. Per cent.
118 ........... .Nov. 16 17.04 14.58 85.58 .................
124 .......... Nov. 16 17.02 4 30 84.02 ................
127-........-. Nov. 16 16.93 14.25 84.16 ..................
130 ........... Nov 17 16.87 14.47 85.77 .7o 4.84
139 ........... 'Nov. 17 16.72 14.18 84.81 .93 6.56
142 ........... Nov. 17 16.90 14.58 86.27 .75 .14
147 .......... Nov. 19 17.48 15.12 86.50 .64 4.23
154 ........... Nov. 19 16.72 14.37 85.94 .83 5.78
160 .......... Nov. 19 17.14 14.56 84.95 8 5. 36
165 .........-.. -Nov. 20 17.06 14.47 84.82 ..........
169 .......... Nov. 21 16.33 14.06 86.10 .68 4.84
172 ........... -N ov. 21 16 18 13.79 85.11 .91 6.80
175......... ov. 21 16.43 14.09 85.15 .88 5.54
181 ........... Nov. 22 16.88 14.52 87.20 .70 4.82
184 ........... -ov. 22 16.91 14.68 86.81 .72 4.90
18..........N ov. 22 17.27 14.64 84.77 .72 4.92
194 ......... ov. 23 16.48 14.09 85.50 .99 7.03
197 ........... ov. 23 16.62 14.51 87.30 .84 5.78
200........... Nov. 23 16. 91 14. 73 87. 11 .79 5.36
204 .....Nov. 24 16.86 14.60 86.60 .81 5.55
207 .......... INov. 24 16.63 14.22 85.51 .97 6.82
215* .......... Nov. 24 15.96 13.98 87.59 .86 6.15
228 ........... 'ov. 26 14.67 12. 74 86.84 .62 4.87
232.......... ov. 26 14.81 12.74 86.02 .57 4.47
287 .......... .Nov. 26 15.54 13.49 86.81 .67 4.90
242 ......... Nov. 27 14.65 12.29 83. 89 .87 7.08
246 .......... Nov. 27 14.81 12.67 85.55 .53 4.20
254 ........... Nov. 27 15. 22 12.63 82.97 .71 5.62
259 ........... Nov. 28 14.54 12.49 85.93 .73 5.80
265..........Nov. 28 14.57 12.05 82. 70 .95 7.88
269........... Nov. 28 15. 08 12.74 81.48 .92 7.22
274 ........... Nov. 29 14.79 12.48 84.18 .97 7.77
281.......... Nov. 29 15.97 12.88 80.65 .82 6.83
290 ........... Nov. 30 14. 39 12.06 83.81 .95 7.88
299........... -Nov. 30 14.58 '12.51 85. 80 .81 6.50
:3.......... Nov. 30 14.72 12 45 84.58 .84 6.75

M ans...16.05 13 70 85.36 .80 5.84

Maceratiou begun.








31

TABLE No. 9.-Clarifed juice-first plant run.


Glucose
No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. ratio.
ratio.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
119 ........... Nov. 16 17.68 15.15 85.80 ..................
12 ........... Nov. 16 16.87 14.27 84.58 .................
l ......Nov. 16 16. 90 14.40 85. 21 .................
13..........Nov. 17 16.62 14.50 87.24 .68 4.69
140.......... Nov. 17 16.70 14.43 86.41 .89 6.16
143 .......... Nov. 17 16.71 14.48 86.65 .74 5. 12
18..........Nov. 19 17. 57 15.09 85. 88 .58 3.84
155 ........... Nov. 19 16.87 14.61 86.60 .82 5.61
181----------Nov. 19 17.22 14.85 86.23 .77 5.19
10 .......... Nov. 20 17.40 14.66 84.25................
170 ........... Nov. 21 16.57 14.21 85.18 .72 6.07
173 ........... Nov. 21 16.56 14.08 85. 02 .88 6.24
176..........Nov. 21 16. 75 14.31 85.43 .85 5.94
182._........ ov. 22 17.24 14. 71 85. 33 .73 4. 96
18 .......... Nov. 22 17.38 14.89 85.67 .72 4.83
19 ............ Nov. 22 17.00 14.75 86.77 .69 4. 68
195 .........Nov. 23 16.77 14.73 87.83 .95 6.45
198 .......... INov. 23 16.71 14.70 87. 97 .81 5.51
201 ........... Nov. 23 16.94 14.78 87.25 .75 5.07
205.. ...... Nov. 24 17.16 14.77 86.07 .81 5.48
2N........ Nov. 24 16.82 14.22 85.14 .91 6.40
218w........ Nov. 24 16.31 13.91 85.28 .82 5.89
2-9........... N ov. 26 14.75 12.83 86. 99 .58 4.52
3........... Nov. 26 15.06 13.01 86.39 .57 4.87
238.........N ov. 26 15.8t 13.64 86.27 .69 5.05
243.......... Nov. 27 14. 71 12.40 83.95 .84 6.77.
247 ........ Nov. 27 14.74 12.85 87.18 .53 4.12
255.......... Nov. 27 15.40 12.76 82.86 .69 5.41
26o.......... Nov. 28 14.94 12.77 84.81 .69 5.40
28........., Nov. 28 15.01 12. 98 86. 47 .92 7. 10
270 ...... Nov. 28 15. 20 11.08 86.05 .92 7. 03
275._....... Nov. 29 14.65 12.58 85.87 .95 7.55
22..........Nov. 29 15.41 13.13 85.20 .82 6.25
291 ...........N ov. 30 15. 13 12.44 82.22 .94 7.56
300 ..........Nov. 30 15.00 12.55 3.67 .83 6.62
304 ........... Nov. 30 15.07 12.53 83.15 .89 7.10

Means............ 16. 21 13.89 85.-69 .78 5.62

Maceration begun.








32


TABLE NO. 10.-Sirup, first plant run.


I p Glucose
No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose.
ratio.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
128 ........... ov. 16 55. 42 48,41 87.35 2.55 5.05
144 ........... Nov. 17 55.90 48.67 87. 07 2.96 6.08
163........... Nov. 19 51.60 48.94 89. 3 2.50 .........
179 ........... Nov. 21 56. 21 49. 14 87.40 2. 68 5.45
190.......... Nov. 22 53.95 47.39 87.84 2.36 4.98
202 ..........Nov. 23 54. 29 47. 54 87.57 2. 99 6.29
223 ........... Nov. 24 53. 6 47.30 87. 82 2. 86 6.05
239 ......... Nov. 26 53. 87 48.59 90.20 2.55 5. 25
256 .......... Nov. 27 49.50 44.83 90.56 2.0 5.35
271 .......... -Nov. 28 46.83 40.72 86.95 2.65 6.51
283........... Nov. 29 48.92 41.97 85.79 2.82 6.72

Means ............ 53.03 46.68 87.84 2. 62 6.04




TABLE NO. 11.-tSugars8, first plant run.


No, Description of sample. Date. Sucrose. Glucose.


Per cent. Per cent.
453 First sugar ........................ Rec. 2 99. ..........
454 ......do ............................ Dec. 2 98.4 ..........
455 ......do ............................ Dec. 2 98. .........
456 ......do ............... ............ Dec. 2 98.2 ..........
457 ......do ............................ Dec. 2 98.2 ..........
458 ......do ............................. Dec. 2 97.6 ..........
459 do ............................. Dec. 2 99. ..........

Mean ......................... ...... 98.34 ..........

461 Second sugar ...................... Jan. 4 88.4 2.98
462 ..... do ..........................Jan. 4 88. 2.93
463 ......do ............................ Jan. 4 87.4 3.07
464 ...... do ............................. Jan. 4 86. 3.19
46.5 ...... do ............................. Jan. 4 85.8 3.47
466 ..... do............................ Jan. 4 86.2 3.86

Mean .......................... ........ 87.4 3.25
511 Third sugar ........................ Feb. 9 80. 6.92




TABLE No. 12.-Third molasses, first plant run.


Sucrose.

No. Date. Solids. Single Double Purity. GIucose.
polaiza' polaria.
tio. tion


Per ct. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.,
514 F4b. 9 78. 2'J. 4 26. 30 33.40 30. 85








33

Summary-First plant run.
Cane ground.................................................... ns.. 3, 593.75
Cane ground........................................... ...... pounds.. 7,187,490
Sucrose in cane........................ ........do... 925,015.66
Juice extracted, without maceration ........................galons. 332,103
Juicextracted,with maceration ........ ..................do.... 297, 158
Totalnice extracted ..........................................do.... 629. 261
Juice extracted............................................. pounds.. 5, 582 114
Sucrose in juice................ ............................... do.... 764,191.41
Sucrosein bagasse.............................................. do ... 60, 824. 25
Sucrose extracted, per cent of sucrose in cane ............ ........... 82. 61
Glucose in jai e ...........................................- pounds.. 45, 215.12
Available sugar, at 1.50 X glucose deducted from sucrose ....... do .. .96, 189. 62
Total ngar inj u ............................................do ... 809,406.53
Sirup obtained................................................ gallons.. 153, 826
Sirupobtained............................................... pounds. 1, 612. '096
Sucroseinsirup .............................................. do ... 752.526.41
Los of sucrose between juice and sirup....................... do.... 11,665
Glucoseinsiruap .............................................. do.... 45.461.11
Inversion of sucrose between juice and sirup ................... do .. 857.88
Mechanical loss of sucrose between juice and sirup ............ do .. 10 ,07. 12
Commercial, first sugar obtained ..........................do.... 493, 456
First sugar, 1000 polarization obtained......................... do... 4!7, 207.58
Commercial, second sugar obtained ........................... do.... 210, 713
Second sugar, 1000 polarization obtained ....................... do ... 1-3. 591. 24
Glucose in second sugar...... ................................. do.... 6 64. T7
Commercial third sugar obtained ............................... do.... 54. 41
Third sugar 100 polarization (1,728 pounds of 57,6: polarization do .... 4: 19G. 95 Glucose inthird sugar .......................................... ... 3, 770o. 02
Third molasses obtained .................................. gallons.. 9. 0
Third molasses obtained.................................... pounds.. 115. 540. 50
Scrosein third molases, single polarization ................... do .... 2, 570 2ty
-rose in third molasses, double polarization .................-------------do .. 30, 37. 15
Glcoseinthirdmolasses.................-----............... do... 33. 64.24
Gain in glucose between sirp and product ................... do . to .32
Inversion of sucrose between irup and product................do .. 571.25
Inversionof sucrose duing entirerun ........................ -do 1.4-2.13
Sucrose in sirup + that shown by double polar1iati; n .... ... do.... 79. 343. 30
Scroseobtained as sugar................................... do .... 714 0. 77
Sucrose obtained in sugars and molasses ....................... do 744, 44592
Glucose obtained in sugars and molasses.......................do 46, 00 43
Sucrose carried into other runs as '- tank bottoms'" ............. do ... 13. 448. 9
Mechanical loss of sucrose between sirup and product ...... do . 8T o4
Mechanical loss of sucroec- exlracted during entire run ....... do .. 11 16
Loss of extracted sucrose during entire run b- invtrsion and mech an..icallY....-------------...................... ................. pound.. 13,114. 9
Loss of extracted sucrose during entire run, per cent ................ 1.72

TABLE NO. 13.-Rawjuic, cond plant rn


No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Gluco6e. Glucose
l ito.


Per ent Per ,cent. Per ent.
325........... Dec. 3 15. 10 13.15 87. 24
........... Dec. 3 15.12 12.72 8. 13 .74 5.2
334 .......... Dec. 3 15.27 12.99 85A.7 .91 6.9-2
339 ........ De 4 13.9 12.00 8 ,15 .T 7.0344 ........... De 4 14. 12 11. o 81.24 4 7. 0
348........... Dec. 4 14,79 12.5 8.s38 M 7.07
354 ........... Dec. 5 14.31 12.21 83532 .4 6we
368...--. Dec. 5 11.61 12.57 8).93 6 37
303........... Dec. 5 14.93 12.77 8.53 .81 6.5$
Means... .......... 14.69 12.54 856 .30 G 70
.(83--Bnil 23--.-3








34

TABLE NO. 14.-Sulphurd juice, econdplant run.


N o. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose.
ratio.


Per cent. Per cent. Per Cent
326.......... Dec. 3 14.96 12.69 84.25 .77 6.07
331....... Dec. 3 14.31 12.22 85.39 .73 5.97
335 ........... Dec. 3 14.37 12.26 85. 32 .71 5.63
340 .......... Dec. 4 14.03 L1.93 85.03 .81 6.79
345.......... Dec. 4 14.37 12.24 85.18 .82 6.70
349........... Dec. 4 14.93 12.58 83.66 .91 7.23
355........... Dec. 5 14.68 12.30 83.79" .87 7.07
359 ........... Dec. 5 14.87 12.45 83.73 .79 6.36
364 .......... Dec. 5 15.05 12. 86 8.3. 45 .85 6. 61

Means... ......... 14.62 12.39 84.75 .81 6.54


TABLE No. 15.-Clarified juice, Second plant run.


No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose.Glucose
ratio.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
327 ....... ... Dec. 3 15.19 13.06 85.98 .76 5.82
332 ........... Dec. 3 14.77 12.42 84.02 .70 5.64
356 ........... Dec. 3 14. 83 12.70 85.64 .73 5. 75
341.......... Dec. 4 14.38 12.17 84.63 .79 6.49
346- .......... Dec. 4 14.95 12.65 St. 62 .85 6.63
349 .......... Dec. 4 15.24 12.84 84. 25 .88 6.85
356 .......... Dec. 5 14.46 12. 42 85. 89 .85 6.84
360........... Dec. 5 15.00 12. 54 83. 60 .84 6.70
365........... Dec. 5 15.25 13. 06 82.36 .86 6.58

Means............. 14.90 12.65 81.90 .81 6.40


TABLE NO. 16.-Sirup, Second plant run.


Glucose
No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. Glu
ratio.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
337 .......... Dec. 3 49. 60 42.89 86.47 2.61 6 09
351.......... Dec. 4 51. 62 43.78 86.48 3.20 7.31
366.......... Dec. 5 48.50 41.55 85.0 67 2.88 6.93

Means ............. 49 57 42. 74 86.22 2.89 6.76


TABLE No. 17.-First massecuite, Second plant run.

No. )ate. Solids. Suerose. Purity. Glucose. Glucose

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
376 ......... Dvc. 8 89.77 81.2 90.45 5.07 6.24
377......... Dec. 8 89).76 81.6 90.91 5. 5:3 6.78
425 ........ Dec. 20 40. 10 81.2 0. 12 5.59 6. 89
42........... Dec. 20 90.70 82.2 9 0. 3 6. 48 7. 89
427.......... Dec. 21 90.77 81.0 89.24 5.73 .08
428 ......... 1)c. 21 90.84 80.4 >8.51 5.65 7.03
429 ........ Dec. 21 90.81 81.0 8Q. 5.7 6.83
430.......... Iec. 22 89 93 80,8 89. 02 5.67 7.01
431......... Dc. 22 90. 90 81.0 89. 11 5. 09 0. 28

Means........ 904 81..0 .$ 3 5.60 6.89








35


TABLE No. 18.-Second massecuite, Second plant run.


Sucrose, :Sucrose,
No. Date. Solids. single do ble Purty. Glucose.
polarize. polarizatior. ton.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
440........... Dec. 26 84.78 65.6 60. 18 81.60 12.45
441........... Dee. 26 83.18 63.6 67.04 80.65 11.25
442........... Dec. 26 865.30 64.6 68.18 79.94 12.55
443........... Dec. 26 83.97 65.4 68,32 81.36 11.58
444 ........... Dec. 27 84.40 62.4 64.84 76.82 13.51

Means........... 84. 32 64.32 67,51 80. 06 12.27




TABLE NO. 19.-Sugars, Second plant run.



N. Description of Date. Sucrose. Glucose
N sample. Dae uri. Ii cos.


Per cent. Per eent.
435 First sugar. Dec. 24 98.8
436 ....do ......... Dec. 24 99.0 ..........
437 ...do ........ Dec. 24 99.0 ..........
438 ...do ......... Dec. 24 99.0 .........
439 ....<\o ......... Dec. 24 98.8 ...........

Mean .... .......... 98.92 .........

48 Second sugar.. Jan. 7 83.8 4.71
40 ...do ......... Jan. 7 85.2 4.41

Means... .......... 84.5 4. 56

513 Thirdsugar.. Feb. 9 78.8 -. 43




TABLE No. 20.-Molasea, Second plant run.


SuCrose.

N.Decripton of Date. Solids. Single Double Purity. G lucose
polariza. polariza.
tion. tion.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cena
433 First mola.sses. Dec. 22 69. 81 55.0 57.22 81.97 10. 62
434 ....do ......... Dec. 24 73. 31 56. 4 58. 90 80O. 3;4 10. 16

Means.. .......... 71.5 55.7 58. 14 10. 39

493 See'd molasses Jan. 15 77.6 33.4 37. o 47.1l 21. 51
94 ..doJ......... Jan. 15 75.8 33.4 36.88 48.65 21.17

Means,.. .......... 76. 7 33. 4 36. 99 48. 23 ?1. 3M

516 Third molasses Feb. 10 78.8 23. 2 29.11 36.94 3. m







36

.Sumar.-SeCond plant rn.
Cane ground ................................................... toll.. 886.23
Cane ground -pud.-1,7,400
Suio oundaan ............................ .... do.... 226,20.35
Juice extracted ................e .....galn.. 178,230.00
Juice extracted, normal ..................... do.... 156,370.00
Juice extracted, as diluted .................................... .. 174
Juice extract te, normal ....................................... -do-... 1,391,145.00
Sucrose injuice ..o.... 197,281.00
Sucrose inbagasse do.... 28,920.34
Sucrose extracted, per cent of sucrose in cane .......... 87.21
Glucose in juice ........................................... pounds. 13,228.41
Available sugar, at 1. 50 X glucose deducted from sucrose ...... do.... 177, 438.40
Total sugar in juice .......................................... do.... 210, 5C9.41
Sirup obtained ...............................................galons.. 42,540.00
Sirup obtained .............................................. pounds. 436,460.00
Sucrose in sirup ............................................odo 186, 543.00
Loss of sucrose between juice and sirup ........................ do.... 10,738.00
Glucose in sirup ..................................... do.... 12,613.65
Inversion of sucrose between juice and sirup ................... do..,, 106. 37
Mechanical loss of sucrose between juico and sirup ..........do.... 10,631. 63
Number of cubic feet of first massecuito obtained .......... ..... 2, 05. 00
First massecuitt, obtained ................................... pounds.. 229,207.50
Sucrose in first inassecuite ..................................... do.... 186, 116.48
Inversion of sucrose between sirup and first masse cute ....... do.... 210.87
Mechanical loss of sucrose between sirup and first massecuite..do.... 215.65
Glucose in first massecuite .................................... do.... 12,835.62
Commercial first sugar obtained ............................... do.... 126, 616. 00
First sugar of 1003 polarization ................................ do.. 125,248. 55
Second massecuite obtained ....................................do. 9, 272.74
Sucrose in second massecuite, single polarization ............... do.... 60,646.23
Sucrose in second massecuite, double polarization .............. do.... 63,643.53
Sucrose in second massecuite and first sugar .............. do.... 188,892.08
.Excess of sucrose shown by double polarization................do.... 2,997.30
Glucose in second maisecuite do.... 11,567.27
Commercial second sugar obtained ..........................do.... 57,262.00
Second sugar of 1000 polarization ................................ do.... 4, 386.38
Glucose in second sugar. ............................. do .-. 2,611.15
Second molasses obtained ...................................... do..,. 42,367.43
Sucrose in second molasses, single polarization ..............do.... 14, 150.73
Sucrose in second molasses, double polarization ............do.... 15,671.72
Glucose in second molasses ...................................do .... 9,041.21
Commercial third sugar ..................................... ..do .... 8,98.00
Third sugar of 1000 polarization ......... ............... do .... 7,090.42
Glucose in third sugar ......................................... do-.. 578.57
Third molasses obtained ................................... gallons.. 2,550.00
Third molasses obtained .................................... pounds.. 29,962.50
Sucrose in third molasses, single polarization................... do.... 6,940.28
Sucrose in third molasses, double polarization .................. do..-. 8 722.08
Glucose in third molasses ............ .......... .... do .... 8,796.99
Sucrose obtained as sugar .................................... do.... 180.725-35
Sucrose obtained in sugar and molasses ...................... do.... 189 447.43
Excess of sucrose due to error in sampling or analysis ...... .. do.... 555.35
Loss of extracted sucrose during entire run by inversion and mechanically ......................................... o............. pounds .. 10 738-0
Loss of extracted sucrose during entire raun ............. per cent.. 5.44







37

TABLE No. 21.-Raw juice-Third plant run.



NO. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. Glucatio.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
........... Dec. 6 14.37 11.42 79.42 .80 7.00
372........... Dec. 7 13.90 11.49 82.(_6 1.17 10.18
31........... Dec. 10 13.51 11.40 83.64 .92 8.00
385 ........... Dec 10 13.95 11.55 82.80 1.10 9.52
389......... Dec. 10 14.05 11.78 83.13 1.04 8.83
39........Dec. 11 14.50 11.56 80.41 1.11 9.62
402 ........... Dec. 11 14 24 11.39 79.84 1.08 9.48
408 ........... Dec. 11 141 17 11.79 83.20 .84 7.12
413......... Dec. 12 13.47 11.12 82.55 1.03 9.26
418 .......... Dec. 12 13.32 11.09 83.26 .82 7.39
Means... ...........13. 95 11. 46 82. 15 .99 8. 64



TABLE No. 22.-Sulphured juice-Third plant run.


Glucose
No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. ratio.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
369........ Dec. 6 14.38 11.38 79.14 .80 7.03
373...........Dec. 7 13.97 11.44 81.89 1.20 10.49
380 ........... Dec. 10 13.75 11.26 80.43 .95 8.44
388.......... Dec. 10 13.95 11.60 83.15 1.12 9. 66
390........... Dec. 10 14.20 11.88 83.66 1.04 8.76
397.......... Dec. 11 14.73 11.51 78.14 1.09 9.47
4..........Dec. 11 14.35 11.34 79.02 1.08 9.52
409......_ Dec. 11 14.27 12.03 84.30 .93 7.73
414 ........... Dec. 12 13.50 11.17 82.74 '1.01 9.041
419.......... Dec. 12 13.37 11.18 83.62 .77 6.88

Means............. 14.05 11.48 81.71 1.00 8.71



TABLE No. 23.-Clarified juice-Third plant run.



No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose. Glucose
ratio.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
370.........- Dec. 6 14.85 12.39 83.43 77 6.22
374 ......... Dec. 7 14.35 11.92 83.07 1.12 9.40
381.-.... Dec. 10 14.38 12.12 84.94 .91 7.51
387.......... Dec. 10 14.49 11.92 82.26 1.12 9.40
391 ....... Dec.10 14.47 12.17 84. 11 .97 7.97
398 ......... Dec. 11 14.91 12.40 83.17 1.08 8.71
40....... Dec. 11 14.73 12.30 83.44 1.02 8.29
410 ...... ..... Dec. 1 15.00 12.54 83.60 .85 6.78
415 .......... Dec. 12 13.82 11.56 83-65 .92 7. 95
420 .... Dec. 12 13.44 11.58 86.16 .73 6.30

Means .. .......... 14.44 12.09 83.72 .95 7. 86








38

TABLE No. 24.-Si rup-Tir4 plant ru.


No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent
375........... Dec. 7 48.22 41.43 85.92 7.4
39 Dec. 10 47.41 40.22 84.84 33 8.33
411. Dec. 11 49.87 42.06 84.34 1 787
422 ......... Dec. 12 48.22 40.78 8457 2.8 7.06
Means-------------48. 43 41.12 j 84.91 3.16 7.68


TABLE No. 25.-First maecuite-Thirdplant run.


No. Date. Solids. Sucrose. Purity. Glucose.
ratio.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
460........ Jan. 3 89.17 t0. 8 90.61 4. 97 .15
467 ........... Jan. 4 88.89 79.6 89.55 5.73 7.20
470 ......... Jan. 7 89.97 80.0 88.92 5.45 6.81
477 ......... Jan. 7 90.86 80.0 88.05 6.03 7.51
480.. Jan. 9 90.48 80.4 8 .86 5.81 7.23
481......... Jan. 11 91.41 81.0 88.61 0.13 7.57
482......... Jan. 11 90.95 80.8 88.83 5.87 7.26
483.......... Jan. It 90.99 81.4 89.46 5.35 6.57
484......... Jan. 11 90.51 80.8 89.24 5.25 6.50
485......... Jan. 12 90.75 81.2 89.48 482 5.94

Means.. ...... 90.70 80.6 89.16 5.54 6.87


TABLE NO. 26.-Second maecuite-Third plnt run.

Sucrose.

No. Date, Solids. Single Double Glucose.
polariza, polarization. tion.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent
490......... Jan. 15 83.7 64.8 66.90 79.92 13.51
491 ......... Jan. 15 88.7 63.6 65.84 70.48 13.24
492 ........... Jan. 15 85.0 63.2 64.82 76.26 15.58

Means... .......... 85.8 63.86 5. 5 77.55 14.11


TABLP. No. 27.-&gar-Tki'rd plant ran.


0. Description of Date. Sucrose. Glucose,


Pere tt Per cent.
472 First sugar.. Jan. 7 ..........
473 .do ........ Jan. 7 99.0 .........
474 do ....... Jan. 7 9&8 ..........
475 ...do .... Jan. 7 98.8 ..........
4 76 .. .do ........ .. .. . u 2 ..........

Mean ... ......... 98.76 .........
478 Second sugrair Jan. 8 83.2 4.55
517 Ti(dsuar Feb. 11 81.0 5.,







39

TABLE No. 28.-Molasss-Third plant run.


Sucrose.

No. smple. Date. Solids. Single Double Purity. Glucose.
polariza- polarize.
tion. tion.


Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
487 Firstmolasses Jan. 13 74.49 54.6 55.90 75.04 11.21
488 ... do ......... Jan. 13 69.27 53.0 54.04 78.01 11.94

Mean........... 71.88 53. 8 54. 97 76.53 11.57

500 Second molassea .......... Jan. 23 74. 4 39.0 42. 02 57.28 20.23
502 ....do......... Jan. 26 80.6 33.6 37.30 46.28 19.97
5 Third molasses Feb. 11 77. 6 22.0 26.62 34. 44 28.52



Stummary- Third plant run.
Cane ground...................................................tons.. 956.55
Cane ground ................................................pounds.. 1,913,100
Sucrseincane...............................................do.... 221,177.84
Juice extracted as diluted ................................... gallons.. 199,855
Juice extracted, normal ........................................ do.... 173, 010
Juice extracted as diluted ..................................pounds 1,761, 837
Jice extracted, normal .......................................do.... 1, 536,595
Surse in juice ...............................................do.... 197, 317.13
Sucrose in bagasse ........................................do.... 23,860.71
Sucrose extracted, per cent of sucrose in cane ....................... 89.21
Gluc ein juice ................ ............. ... ..........pounds.. 17. 442.20
Available sugar at 1.50 times glucose deducted from sucrose...do.... 171,153. 83 Total sugarsin juice ........................................do ... 214, 759.33
Sirup obtained............................................. gallons.. 46,414
Sirp obtained.............................................. pounds.. 473,422
Sucrose in sirup .............................................do.... 194,671.15
Lo s of crose between juice and sirup.....................do.... 2, 645.98
Gluccee in uirup............. .......................do .. 14,960
Inversion of sucrose between juice and sirap ........................ None.
umber of cubic feet of first massecuite obtained ................... 2,760
First massecuite obtained.................................pounds.. 253, 920
Sucrose in first massecuite ..................................do.... 204 659
Excess of sucrose due to adding "tank bottom "' ...............do ... 9, 987. 85
Glucose in first massecuite ..................................do ... 14, 0O7. 17
Commercial first sugar obtained ................................ do .. 140 431
First sugar of 1000 polarization ................................ do.... 138 689.6
Second massecuite obtained ....................................do.... 102, 789.04
Sucrose in second mas-secuite, single polarization .............. do.... 65, 642. 08
Sucrose in second massecuite; double polarization .............do ... 67, 68. 58
Exoos of sucrose due to double polarization ..................do ... 2, 044.50
Glucose in second imasci41te ......... ........................ do.... 14, 503. 53
Commercial second sugar obtained ............................ do ... 56,742
uSecond gar of 1000 polarization...............................d ... 47, 209.34
Glose in second sugar .......................................do.... 2, 581 76
Second olasses obtained ................................... do ... 0,779. 77
crose in second molasses, single polarization ............... do.... 18.433.06
Scrosein second molasses, double polarization ...............do ... 2,291.60
Gluce insecond molasses ...... ..............................do ... 0o, 0.73
Commercial thirdsugarobtained ..............................do .. 18, 742
Tird sugar of 1000 polarization ........ ....................... do ... 1., 1. 02
Glucose in third suhar .........................................1do .. 1.123.31
Third molasses obtained .................................. do.... 3,06 3
Sucrose in third molasaet, single polarization .................. do ... 6 92.66





40

Summary-Third plant run-Continued.

Sucrose in third molasses, double polarization ............... pounds.. 9,083. 72
Glucose in third molasses ......................................do.... 10 439.18
Excess of sucrose over second molasses due to "tank bottom ".do.... 3, 973.14 Sucrose obtained as sugar ...................................... do. 201,080.02
Sucrose obtained in sugars and molasses .......................do.... 210,163.74
Excess of sucrose during entire run due to "tank bottom ....do .... 13,448.09 Loss of extracted sucrose during entire run............. cent. 1.34



TABLE NO. 29.-Calumet Plantation totals, campaign 1888-'89.


Actual 1unMilling began. Milling ended. ning tie
of milL

Hrs. min.
Total stubble.. Wednesday, Oct. 31, 7.20 a.m.. Friday, Nov. 16,4.40 a. m ..... 214 45
Total plant.... Friday, Nov. 16,8 a. m ....... Wednesday, Dec. 12,5.40 p. m 382 10
Total crop .... Wednesday. Oct. 31, 7.20 a. m Wednesday, Dec. 12, 5.40 p. m. 596 55



Total Total Total
stubble. plant. crop.


Tons ground, no allowance for trash ................ 12,943.39 5,436.53 8,379.92
Average tons ground per hour, actual running time. 13.70 14.22 14.04
Per centjuice extracted on weight of cane ........ 72.72 76.17 74.97
Weight of cane ground.....................pounds.. 5, 886, 770 10,873,050 16,750, 820
Juice extracted (maceration juices being reduced to normal)..................................gallons.. 481,691 931,310 1,413,010
Do.................................... pounds. 4,281,420 8,282,747 12, 564,167
Sirup produced ............................ gallons.. 114,411 242,780 357, 191
Do................................... pounds.. 1,183.,187 2,484,797 3,667,984
First sugar produced ...................pounds net.. 390, 615 760,503 1,151,148
Second sugar produced ..................do... 138, 459 324,717 403, 17
Third nsugar produced ....................... do... 37, 188 81,909 119,097
Total sugar produced .......................do ... 566, 292 1,167, 129 1, 733, 421
MIfolasses produced......................... gallons. 10,750 15, 55)0 26.300
Do..... (at 11.55 pounds per gallon). pounds.. 124, 162 179,603 303,765
Average first sugar, per ton cane ........pounds 132.72 139.88 137.37
Average second sugar, per ton cane...........do.... 47.04 50.73 5.27
Average third sugar, per ton cane...........do.. 12. 63 15.06 14.21
Average total sugar, per ton cane ........... do.. 192.39 214.67 206.85
Average, molasses, per ton cane ............ gallons. 3.65 2.8 3.14
D)o...................................pounds. 42.18 33.04 36.25
Average commercial masseenuite, per ton cane do .. 234.57 247.71 243.10
Average total sugar, per gallon, normal juiice..do ... 1.17 1.25 1.23
Average molasses per 1,000 pounds sugar .gallons.. 18.98 13.32 15.17
Percent first sugar on cane ......................... 6.63 G. 0.87
Per cent second sugar on cane ......................... 2.36 2.99 2.70
Per cent third sugar on cane- ........................ 0.63 0.75 0 71
Per cent total sugar on cane ......................... 9.62 10.73 10.34
Per cent molasnes on cane ........................... 2.11 1. 05 1,81
Per cent commercial mnasecuite on cane............ 11.73 12.38 12.15
Per cent total sugar produced asFirst product .................................... 68M.98 65.16 6. 41
Second product ................................. 4.45 27.82 26.72
Third product ................................... 6.57 7.02 6.97















IND EX.



Page.

Aluiodpercentage of ..,.......a... ..... C,.. *al*.. .... 23
Availableeugar, formula for....... ...... .... 21

C.
Clmtsugar factory, administration o.......... ..........10
boilers of............ ............. ............... 8
conveniences of..... .....s 9
description of__..... .-.......
diffumsion battery o......... ......13
mechanical control of ........................ 13
mills of..... ..... .o...o....................... 86
organization of.. .................. 10
physical laboratory of..... _.- ........... ...... 13
processes of ............. ... ..................... 11
Caronteof lime, use of....... .......... o............................. 14
Cutc lime, use of-------------------------------------14
Claifiaton, neutral versus acid.... .................................. 22
per cent. of sugar recovered in................. ............ 2i3
Crpsummary..eeeee..eee..e..................*. ...... 24

J.

Juice,clarified, first plant run, analyses of ........................ 31
second plant run, analyses of._......... .................. 34
stubble run, analyses o .................. 27
third plant run, analyses of ............................... 3 7
first plant run, analyses of._....... ......... .................. 2

stubble run, aiialyses of .................................. 26J
sulphured, first plant run, analyses of..- .. o...........,.-- 30
secoud plant run, analyses of.,,..................... 34
stubble run, analyses of .......... a......... o...... 26
third plant run, analyses of..... .....*.~.*... 37
third plat run, aalyse sof......,................... 37





Mcrto, effct of ........O....s.,s ........*SS 14 1
inc3reased~ yieldi by ..,....... .,,.. *,..... ...... 2!0
method of adding 'water in .....*......... 4 w. *. .ee*. 20
water ad~ded1 in...... ...................~ 2

7O8&-Buli. 23-44




UNIVE~biIT Ur' r-LJIU

~42 A 11 1 1 ,1


Maseuite, second plant run, analyseso
third plant run, analyses of......34,35.. Molasses, analyses of ........ ................... 242

second plant run, analyses of ................... 3
third plant run, analyses of 0
second stubble run, analyses of ................ 2

P.
Plant run, first..------------1--m aceration in 16 ...--- - - - ,
sec)nd--------------------------------------.......... 1
chetuical control of------------------............. 16
third-....................---- --......, 16,
accident in..-------------Prefatory" note _. ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... .....

R.
Rewmers, B., supervision of-----------. 13.. ,~

S.
Sirup, first plant run, anlayses of ................................. 3
second plan t run, analyses of...... --------stubble run, analyses of...... ..-.......-..-...---------- 2
third plant run, analyses of- - -- ............................... 3
Special inu1e7.------------------,
Stubble run, 14s-----------------------t
second-----------------, 15
inversion in--------------Sugar, first plant run, analyses of--.-------------------------------------------second plan t run, analyses of.. 35--------a----stubble run, analyses of....------------7third plant run, analyses of----------3--Siulpbur dioxide, cooling of---------------------effect of, on products--------- 18inversion due to1.8,------ ctt
investigation of ... .....- e a . t. -.taste,.a.a. a7
use of-------.................................. .........1
Summary, first plant run-----------------for whole campaign..aa *.. ......4..0
second plant run....... .... ~....e. 36.ttaa~
stubble run----------------a a28tateata~~
third plant run.....et9
S uperphosphate of limze, use of... 14 c,*aa---- a ta ttaaa


Fhouipson, W., J'.,report of.... 7*.~etc.ea tc etec a.t~t