Poor Soil and Poverty Compared with Rich Soil and Prosperity.— Most parts of Georgia and Alabama consist of a coastal plain which has been worn down somewhat, so that it now forms belts of varying soil and topography. The outermost belt, bordering the coastal swamps, has a poor sandy soil. Hence much of it is still unculti vated and is covered with pine forests, so that it is known as the " timber belt." Except where large quantities of fertilizer are used the farmers of the timber belt are poor and backward. The soil yields such scanty returns that the population is sparse; schools and churches are rare; and the teachers and ministers very poorly paid; trails often take the place of roads; and few of the roads are improved; physicians are so few and far between that sick people often die before one can be secured; and most of the people know little and care less about what is going on elsewhere.
Inland from the timber belt lies the " black belt," so called because of the rich, deep, black loam. Everywhere the fertile soil is so well adapted to cotton raising, that this region is also known as the " cot ton belt." The land owners are very prosperous and the population dense. Formerly, the rich soil made slave labor especially profitable, and the number of colored people even now is so large that people sometimes mistakenly suppose that their presence is the reason for the name "black belt." Some of the most prosperous cities, such as Selma and Montgomery, are located in this region, and the general conditions of education and culture are unusually high. From some of the counties blessed with this fertile soil the proportion of young people who go to college is remarkable, and naturally many of them become the leading men of the State. Thus while sandy soil leads to poverty and ignorance, a rich soil opens the way to comfort and opportunity.
!Why Transported Soils are Generally more Fertile than Residual Soils.—The character of a soil depends partly on the kind of rock from which its various parts were originally derived. Soils that have not been moved from their place of origin are called residual, because they reside, as it were, where they were first formed. Residual soils derived from quartz-bearing rocks like granite are apt to be so sandy and poor that the farmers can scarcely make a living. The residual soil derived from dark heavy la vas or from limestone, on the other hand, is gen erally rich in essential chemicals, but often has the disadvantage of being clayey and sticky. In wet weather the horses can scarcely pull
the plows and the plowman's boots are almost dragged from his feet. If fine sand could be brought in and mixed with such soils they would form almost ideal foams, soft, pliable, and easily worked.
Fortunately a large portion of the earth's soil does not remain where it was formed. It is carried by running water, glaciers, or wind and mingled with other soils. Thus sand and clay are brought together and form foams. A soil that is poor in one essential ingre dient is mixed with a soil that is rich in that respect. Hence trans ported soils are on the whole much better than residual soils. They are found as a rule in plains and lowlands while residual soils prevail in highlands. That is one reason why plains are much more pros perous than mountains.
How Transportation by Glaciers Improves the Soil.—As an example of the way in which transported soils are better than residual soils let us take the glaciated part of Wisconsin. Two of the most characteristic actions of glaciers are, first, that they scour off the more rugged prominences, and second, that they carry along large quantities of the material thus scoured from distant regions. This " drift " material, as it is called, consists of fine soil mingled with boulders. It is deposited in the low places and tends to fill up the hollows. The transported soil thus formed is improved by the mix ture of materials from one region with that from another. This is especially the case where drift from a limestone area is brought into a region of sandstone. The following table shows how great is the difference between the average crops from the glaciated part of Wis consin and from the " driftless " area of that State where the glaciers did not come: In every case the glaciated soil yields a larger return. The reason is that the sandy residual soil of the driftless areas is poor. Where the glaciers have brought large quantities of drift from limestone areas to sandstone areas, it is as if the farmers had brought large quantities of lime for fertilizer. The presence of such fertilizers is worth millions of dollars to a great many glaciated regions. It is estimated that the value of glaciation to the State of Wisconsin amounts to at least $50,000,000 per year. Most of this is due to the improvement of the soil by transportation. Because of this extra income of the farmers, Wisconsin is able to have better roads, better schools, and a better university than would be possible otherwise.