[20] 



question raised, by an experiment devised* for the purpose: we will 

 shortly find some one else coming forward who has likewise tried the 

 thing, and reached precisely the opposite result. 



Why is this ? Simply because experiments are questions asked of 

 nature, that must be properly put, in order to receive a rational answer. 

 When this is not done, the old adage, that a fool is answered according 

 to his folly, applies here as elsewhere. 



In experimenting we attempt to bring about some natural result 

 under known circumstances and conditions. Now, if we fail to take 

 into account any one of the influencing facts or conditions, our ques 

 tions are foolishly asked, and will be answered accordingly. As it 

 happens, the conditions controlling the results of agricultural experi 

 ments are oftentimes so exceedingly complex, that even in the most 

 experienced hands, and with the best resources of science, correct and 

 decisive results can be attained only by long series of trials, executed 

 with the most scrupulous care. 



No wonder, then, that such great diversity of opinion prevails among 

 farmers, even upon the most vitally important questions. Let me ad 

 duce one as an illustration : 



&quot; Will commercial fertilizers pay ? &quot; 



In a general way, some will ; and some will not, for the simple reason 

 that they are utterly worthless intrinsically. The farmer who tries 

 them must with us, as a general thing rely on the manufacturer s cer 

 tificate and honesty; and some of us know, to our cost, how frail a 

 reed this is in many cases. However much opposed to anything re 

 sembling sumptuary laws, we shall in this matter, I think, have to 

 follow the example of other States ; in the establishment of an obliga 

 tory inspection, by State authority, of this very tricky class of mer 

 chandize. 



But let us suppose that we have the right thing say a superphos 

 phate. One man applies it to his worn-out pasture, and finds a won 

 derful effect say 300 per cent, clear profit on his investment. He 

 becomes excited, and proclaims far and wide: &quot; Mr. N s superphos 

 phate is the thing for 300 per cent, profit ! &quot; 



His neighbor tries it for corn or cotton on /iw soil, and barely gets 

 back his money. Natun lly, he also gets excited cries humbug im* 

 position collusion, etc. Then there ensues a fight on paper at least. 

 Each one pitches a &quot; stubborn fact&quot; at the other; and each one is 

 right so far as the facts go, while both are equally wrong as to the con 

 clusions they respectively drew therefrom. 



