Horticultural Experimentation for Colorado. 191 



effective as possible, and add if possible to the summation of real science; all 

 of which will help much in encouraging his ability to rightly interpret the 

 results of his work. Misinterpretation and wrong conception of the results 

 of such work have brought much odium on experimental horticulture. The 

 experimenter must be able to cull the grains of truth in a series of observa- 

 tions, and to excel here he must be a good observer, for his knowledge of 

 nature and cause and effect should be complete. Nor must he be above re- 

 cording a failure, because every exi^eriment is not a success. The mere un- 

 folding of truth is not the absolute measure of success in any undertaking. 

 The records of our failures may oftea be as instructive, as necessary and 

 useful as the record of the grandest success. So it will be seen that to place 

 and carry out an experiment or a series of them, requires a peculiar combi- 

 nation of qualities in the individual, and which every experimenter should 

 possess, more or less, but more especially the scientist. Now the question 

 arises : What is an experiment ? A German writer says that an experi- 

 ment is a question put to nature. Now, for an experiment to mean any 

 thing, it should be so simple and eliminated of all entanglements, sources of 

 error and complications, such as would arise from attempting too much, as 

 to elicit an unequivocal yes or no. Too many of the experiments recorded 

 in the public press are misleading and negative as to results, either because 

 they lacked simplicity, plainness and directness, or there is a general as- 

 sumption from local premises, incompleteness in the presentation of essen- 

 tial facts and failure to note the qualifying effect of modifying circumstances. 

 There are results without reasoning and facts without philosophy. Two per- 

 sons may conduct an experiment and too often differ widely in their inter- 

 pretation of the result, both at once correct from the standpoint of each and 

 both equally wrong in deducting a rule for general practice from facts of 

 merely local importance. The lesson taught us is, that we need to observe 

 more closely, investigate deeper, analyze more keenly and deduct with more 

 wisdom, and by so doing the result will not lead astray those who would fol- 

 low our instruction. No matter how accurately and oft-repeated an experi- 

 ment may be made, it will avail nothing if our methods are defective, because 

 we can never reach an accurate conclusion. The effort and desire to discover 

 and apply useful laws in the practice of horticulture is laudable, but in regard 

 to results that border on the doubtful, we ought to be silent, rather than pub- 

 lish them so as to mislead others. We should deliberate when doubtful, seek 

 for knowledge when ignorant, and hesitate to proclaim a discovery upon 

 hasty data. It is quackery in horticulture experiinents that has induced so 

 many i)eople to look on this work with disfavor. Impracticable theories, 

 erroneous deductions and much vaunted, pretended fertilizers have been 

 thrust upon us so that people rebel and look on science as a pretentious in- 

 novator. 



WHO SHOULD EXPERIMENT? 



As I look at it, experiments are necessarily of two kinds; 1st, those that 

 agricultural colleges may perform in regard to determining natural laws; 



