162 STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE 



of ^^22 a ton, aud the sale suddenly stopped. The party came to Lansing 

 breathiuij: out threateninj^s of prosecution for damages in the sum of 

 $5(),()()() unless the chemist would retract his statement in regard to the 

 small value of this fertilizer. The bluff did not work and the threatened 

 "suit in the United States court for exemplary damages in the sum of 

 $50,000" has been postponed. It is pleasant to state that few such cases 

 have come up. 



Under the operation of this law there have been gathered in the open 

 markot aud analyzed in ten years four hundred and ninety (490) samples 

 of commercial fertilizers, from one hundred and forty-seven (147) manu- 

 factories. Of these total numbers, however, many are duplicated from 

 year to ^ear both as to specimens and manufactories. For example, a 

 tirm sends into our market seven kinds of fertilizers every year, and these 

 seven kinds and the firm are counted year by year in making up the list. 



The first year under this law we had fifteen (15) kinds of fertilizers 

 from six (G) manufacturers; this year, sixty-four (04) from sixteen (16) 

 manufacturers. The larger part of the fertilizers came from Buffalo, 

 Detroit, Chicago and Cleveland, in the order named. 



WHAT FERTILIZERS SHALL BE INSPECTED? 



This (juestion is sometimes raised by dealers in fertilizers who claim 

 that they sell for parties out of the state, who have neglected to take 

 out a license which would cover all the retailers of the fertilizer in the 

 state, that their sales are too small to justfy the exjjense for a license. 

 The state law does not directly reach the manufacturers in other states 

 and can only apply to parties in this state. If the manufacturer and 

 w^holesale dealer will not protect his customers in this state, they would 

 do well to choose wholesale dealers who will look to the interests of their 

 retail dealers. In any event it is necessary to protect the dealers who 

 fully comply with the law, and this can only be done by impartially 

 enforcing the law on all dealers. 



Another party claims that his sales are too small to pay for a license; 

 that he is attempting to establish a trade, and when the trade is estab- 

 lished on a paying basis, the license will be taken. 



In some states the license fee is based upon the number of tons of fer- 

 tilizer sold during the year, but our law makes the license for the 

 year the same whatever the amount sold. The law is explicit, requir- 

 ing every fertilizer sold or offered for sale, the retail price of w^hich 

 exceeds $10 a ton, to be inspected and licensed before the sale is legal. 



Another party claims that certain materials are chemical substances 

 and are sold for other purposes than as fertilizers; such as nitrate of 

 soda and muriate of potash. To exempt a material from the control of 

 this law would throw out the phosphates, nitrates, the salts of ammonia, 

 etc., because they are chemical substances and may be used for other pur- 

 poses. But if any substance is offered for sale as a fertili'^er, it plainly 

 comes under the provisions of this law. It is just as important for the 

 farmer to know how much potash is present in a Stassfurth salt, or the 

 quantity of available nitrogen in nitrates and ammonia salts, as to be 

 told how much of these materials is contained in mixed fertilizers. The 

 farmer needs to know the quantity of useful materials present in the 



