110 Bureau of Farmers' Institutes. 



not. There is no theory or book farming in the advocacy of the 

 silo, nor in urging the spraying of fruit trees to kill insects and 

 fungous diseases. You might just as well say the silo was a theory 

 because you have never had one, when many of your neighbors 

 have, and are satisfied with results; or reject the separator because 

 ; ou have never used one. 



Question. — Which is the most profitable for the land, feeding 

 hay and putting the manure on the land and feeding off the after- 

 math, or allowing the aftermath to remain on the land? 



Mr. Smith. — When you remove a ton of timothy hay from 

 the soil you take with it $5.75 worth of nitrogen, phosphoric 

 acid and potash. Unless this plant food is restored the yield of 

 hay will decrease. In some parts of the State where timothy 

 is sold, the farmers have resorted to top dressing their meadows 

 with manure; others take off but one or two crops of hay, then 

 plow their meadows, take off two crops and reseed. But, when 

 you feed off the aftermath, and do not put anything back the 

 yield of hay will soon decrease to an unprofitable extent The best 

 way is to buy nitrogenous foods, save all the liquids and solids 

 from the cows and put them back on the land. 



To Mr. Woodward. — Are you in favor of cement floors? 



Answer. — Cement makes a better floor than does anything else 

 except one made of blue clay and gravel, which I like better. 

 Cement is better than plank and will last a lifetime; but some 

 people object to cement, because it is cold, but inside the barn 

 it is no colder than any other floor. Cement is also impervious 

 to water, thus preventing a loss of liquids by leakage. Cement 

 sidewalks will last longer than will stone. 



Mr. Smith. — The cement floors in the barn at the Geneva Sta- 

 tion were put in 15 years ago. They have never been repaired and 

 are now as good as when first laid. 



Question. — Are the standard milk testers, in use at the pres- 

 ent time, strictly reliable? 



Mr. Smith. — I suppose you mean the Babcock test; if so, I 

 will say it is perfectly reliable. The bottles and pipettes are all 

 tested, and are found correct. I have made thousands of tests, 

 compared them with chemical analyses in the laboratory, and found 

 them to agree exactly. 



Question. — Does the Babcock always test correctly ? 



Mr. Smith. — Yes ; when the w T ork is properly done and the 

 acid is of proper strength. I have made a dozen tests from the 



