480 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE Off. Doc. 



Board of Agriculture, our Agricultural College, Experiment Sta- 

 tions and Farmers' Insliuiles, ll:e farmer of to-day is better informed. 

 As a result of this education, the consumption of the better grades 

 of fertilizers is increasing much faster than the lower grades, because 

 the farmer has learned that he buys a unit of plant food in a high 

 grade fertilizer for less money than the same amount of plant food 

 can be bought at in a low grade fertilizer. When the farmer is in 

 the market to bu}' fertilizer he wants plant food and* if he buys a 

 low grade goods he must very often buy two tons of fertilizer in 

 order to get the same amount of i»lant food as contained in one ton 

 of high grade goods. It costs the manufacturer as much to mix, bag 

 and sell a ton of low grade goods as it does for a ton of high grade 

 goods; consequently the farmer is compelled to pay the cost of mix- 

 ing, bagging, selling and the freiglit on an extra ton, where if lie 

 was properly educated he could I : y the same amount of plant food 

 in one ton and thereby save the lajor of handling the extra ton. The 

 use of high grade frtilizer would eliminate the question of a filler 

 which is a source of great worriment to many farmers. The fact is 

 that the manufacturer has never made a cejit of prolit on the filler 

 which is used in low grade goods and I am sure that the farmer 

 is not benefited. AVhen the writer is in the market for fertilizer for 

 his own farm, he wants nothing but the highest grade of fertilizer he 

 can get, because in that grade of goods he is sure that the manufac- 

 turer is not obliged to use a filler of any kind. 



A very important point that I want to take up in this report, 

 and that is the source from which the manufacturer derives the 

 different elements of plant food contained in the fertilizer he manu- 

 factures; and this is a point on which the farmer has not got the 

 proper protection. This has reference more particularly to annnonia, 

 as a unit of ammonia in leather scrap or hair refuse can be bought 

 for 11.00, while a unit of ammonia from animal tankage, blood or 

 bone costs the manufacturer $3.00 or more on the present market, and 

 when the State makes an analysis of the two different ammoniates it 

 gives one as, great a commercial value as the other in spite of the 

 fact that one costs $1.00 and the other |3.00 per unit. 



Some of our chemists tell us in the most positive terms that they 

 can tell the source of ammonia ; whether derived from leather scrap, 

 hair refuse or from animal tankage, blood and bone. We have on our 

 statutes a law which compells the manufacturer to print it on the 

 fertilizer bags if he uses leather scrap or hair. W^e do not know of 

 any manufacturers who are printing their bags in this way, but we do 

 know that thousands of tons of leather scrap and hair refuse are 

 used in the manufacture of fertilizers and sold to the farmers of 

 Pennsylvania. If the chemist cannot tell where the ammonia is 

 derived from, then it is very important for the farmer's protection 

 that the State appoint inspectors to visit the difi'erent fertilizer 

 plants to see what materials are used and thereby restrict the use 

 of inferior or worthless materials. 



If this method is not pursued, it will continue to work a hard- 

 ship on the manufacturer who is making an honest fertilizer; be- 

 cause he must meet the competition of low grade materials. If 

 the farmer was more observing to note the results obtained from the 

 use of the different makes of fertilizers on his crops, this matter 



