CORRESPONDENCE 657 



They now heartily endorse the statement on page 156 of The 



Spirit of the Soil that " from the standpoint of the practical 



man nitrobacterine was a failure." Such experiences are not 



readily forgotten. Every repetition of them makes the farmer 



more and more reluctant to adopt the results of scientific 



research. This in itself is a severe handicap to the efforts now 



being made by a considerable body of scientific men throughout 



the country to improve the position of British agriculture, for 



the farmer does not possess the means of distinguishing between 



results which have been thoroughly established by conscientious 



trials and much-advertised " discoveries " whose practical 



bearing on crop production rests on no surer foundation than a 



few haphazard trials carried out under unsuitable conditions 



by experimenters who do not possess sufficient acquaintance 



with farming to enable them to interpret the meaning of their 



own results. For this reason we feel compelled to protest 



when a periodical of the standing of Science Progress lends 



itself to the publication of a statement that an untried discovery 



has made it possible to double the production of food in the 



country. 



T. B. Wood. 



R. H. BlFFEN. 



School of Agriculture, Cambridge, 

 February 28, 1916. 



P.S. (March 8).— The latest report of the Field Trials of the 

 Midland Agricultural and Dairy Institute shows that dressings 

 of 7 cwt. per acre applied to wheat and seeds hay " produced 

 no result in either crop." In a trial with potatoes the 

 results were : 



tons. cwts. lbs. 



No artificial manure 8 4 32 



„ „ „ + "humogen" . . 7 13 64 

 Standard artificials 12 17 16 



T. B. W. and R. H. B. 



*** The Note referred to was inserted during the Editor's 

 absence, the statements in it being based entirely upon state- 

 ments made at a lecture delivered at the Royal Botanic 

 Society on October 18, 191 5, by Prof. W. B. Bottomley, 

 as reported in the Times on the following day. — Secretary. 



