4 6o SCIENCE PROGRESS 



It is essential that some means should be found by which the scientific 

 worker can meet the practical farmer. It is hardly to be imagined that any one 

 but a government official would advocate a system of experimental farms where 

 the subjects for experiment are evolved out of the official inner consciousness. 



Nor can it be said that the present position of science in agriculture is notably 

 satisfactory. The problems connected with the destruction of various fungoid 

 and insect pests have not yet approached solution. A book on this subject by 

 Mr. F. R. Petherbridge, published in 1916 (C.U.P.), is very melancholy reading. 

 Any one who cares to read the various paragraphs entitled " Remedial Measures " 

 cannot fail to be struck by the entirely inadequate treatment advocated in most 

 cases. For anything really definite and conclusive, save in very few cases, the 

 inquirer may search in vain. It is quite true that under the aegis of the Board 

 of Agriculture a number of instructional leaflets are published, but the Board of 

 Agriculture has been so conspicuous in its failures in other directions that, 

 logically or otherwise, it has ceased to be above suspicion. 



Consider the question of milk-testing. The present state of affairs is almost 

 a burlesque. The local magistrates convict, the farmer appeals, and the con- 

 viction is quashed if it is proved that the milk is as it came from the cow. Who 

 was originally responsible for this test ? What other work has been done subse- 

 quently to cause this modification ? If, for example, no better method has been 

 followed than was the case with Thury in 1863, who based his conclusions with 

 regard to the determination of sex on experiments with twenty-nine cows, little 

 wonder that there are continual exceptions in the matter of a fat standard. 



Again, fertilisers have been the subject of much experiment. The results are 

 published, and can be obtained, by those who wish to see them, cheaply enough. 

 Agricultural journalists in their answers to correspondents are lavish in their 

 recommendation of fertilisers ; but who will pretend that there is as yet any 

 certainty that a fertiliser will behave in the way it is supposed to do ? Plenty of 

 farmers will say that they have been unable to notice the slightest difference ; and 

 although the agricultural journalist doubtless performs the useful function of 

 disseminating such scientific knowledge as he can lay hold of, the procedure 

 seems to savour of the quack medicine purveyor who has no personal knowledge 

 of the victims whom he treats. 



The working of the land is a subject that should afford ample scope for 

 investigation. If as good results are sometimes obtained when the land is very 

 indifferently worked as when there is a really good tilth, is it not possible that the 

 farmer spends time and trouble all to no purpose ? Has deep ploughing any 

 advantage over shallow ploughing, or must the decision be governed entirely by 

 local conditions ? 



Much has been said during the war about baby beef. Have sufficient experi- 

 ments been conducted to elucidate this question ? 



It is easy to multiply examples, but we would mention in conclusion the case 

 of silage. What has been done in England on this subject? The information 

 on the feeding value of silage is usually derived from Kellner or some derivative 

 of Kellner. Where ignorance is so widespread, except perhaps in the case of 

 Mr. Wibberly, who expostulates convincingly thereon, how is the farmer to be 

 expected to take up a thing which may result in a complete loss ? Has our science 

 any light to throw on the subject ? 



Lastly, the economic side of farming can never be too much emphasised where 

 experimental farms are contemplated. The purists in agriculture are little better 

 than their teetotal brethren. Farming is a means of livelihood, and if agricultural 



