218 RKPoirr ok okfich ok kxpkhimkmi' stations. 



^ess of agrifiilt iinil inccliiinics. This coMf^i'css \v:is iittcndcd by 300 

 (lolcfratcs, roj)rcs('ntin<; 20 countries, 8 foreign f^overnnients h('in<»: 

 ollicinlly rcprosoiited. 



The addresses presented cover nearly every phase of the subject 

 of njrricuhural niuchinery and its application, but interest centered 

 around the (|uesti()U of tlie utility of present methods of testin<r a^i'i- 

 cultural machinery in Kurope, (here being evidence of a general 

 conviction that these methods are defective and calculated to give 

 misleading results, and that unless they can be radically improved 

 they had better be abolished. This criticism, however, was directed 

 more especially against ordinary field trials and the classification 

 of machinery based on su<'h trials. A sharj) distincticm was drawn 

 between mere field trials made with nuichines of the same class at 

 ditl'erent times and under diiferent conditions and the work of 

 machine-testing stations in which a given machine is examined with 

 respect to its construction, the arrangement of its parts, the nuiterials 

 enii)loyed, and their resistance, etc., and then put to work in the field 

 to ascertain its efficiency and the motive power required for its work. 

 Prof. J. Pyro, of the agricultural institute of Gembloux, pointed out 

 that field tests will not allow of a com})arison being made between 

 different machines of the same class unless they are all working at 

 the same time, and if the trials are to give practical results the ma- 

 chines should be tested sinudtaneously upon the same land and the 

 same crops. He advocated holding one important trial every year 

 in connection with the trial stations, each of these trials being devoted 

 to some special class of mechanism and carried out in the most thor- 

 ough maimer possible. Trials, he said, were intended to develop the 

 improvements of machines by means of comparison, since it was only 

 by such a course that it was possible to ascertain mechanical defects 

 and how they could be remedied. Many of the speakers were at vari- 

 ance as to the value of machinery trials, but the general opinion of 

 the congress seemed to be in favor of Professor Pyro's suggestion to 

 organize one large trial every year for a special class of machine, in 

 connection with the trial station. 



The league of exhibitors of agricultural machinery strongly pro- 

 tested against the classifying of machinery in supposed order of merit 

 on the bases of such trials. After a long discussion, the following 

 resolution Avas adopted: 



The first congress of agricultural engineers considers that the methods em- 

 ployed in testing agricultural machinery are devoid of uniformity, and that the 

 results of trials carried out in different countries are not comi)aral)le with each 

 other. Consequently an international commission will he constituted to carry 

 out arrangements to secure uniformity in the regulations for trials. 



The international commission was requested to present a report 

 upon the uniformity of trials at the next congress, which is to be held 



