392 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. 



confident that a few years of impartial discussion of the pecu- 

 niary side of the fertilizer question would result in a healthy 

 competition, and thereby indirectly obtain for our farmers the 

 practical benefits which the new law for the regulation of the 

 trade in commercial fertilizers is designed to secure to them. 



The second objection ; namely, that the results of the field 

 experiments mentioned do not agree with the relative values 

 assigned by chemists to two fertilizers, tried by different par- 

 ties, is based on a misconception ; for agricultural chemists 

 distinguish between a commercial value and an agricultural 

 value of a fertilizer, as has been repeatedly explained in pre- 

 vious pages ; they do not assume to determine the latter 

 entirely by chemical analysis ; they merely propose to make 

 known to farmers, as far as practicable, the comparative com- 

 mercial value of its essential constituents. 



Besides, as far as the experiments of the two different par- 

 ties cited in the above-named address are concerned, it is 

 hardly possible to recognize the force of the argument ; for 

 there is neither offered a satisfactory guarantee regarding the 

 identity of composition, etc., of the fertilizers used, beyond 

 a mere reference to the market brands (Wilson's and Brad- 

 ley's) applied ; nor is there any good proof presented con- 

 cerning a corresponding chemical and physical condition of 

 the lands, etc., etc., upon which they have been tested; 

 which renders the experiments, however carefully carried out 

 otherwise, as comparative tests, to say the least, of a very 

 doubtful character. All that can be justly required of dealers 

 in fertilizers is, to make them responsible for their statements 

 regarding the amount of nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potas- 

 sium oxide — as specified by law — contained in the articles 

 they offer for sale. It would be unjust to make them respon- 

 sible for results, which are beyond their control. 



Those who are still doubting that a chemical examination 

 of our commercial fertilizers will ultimately benefit the vital 

 agricultural interests of the country, I desire to notice the 

 opinion of one of the leading agricultural chemists and fore- 

 most practical agriculturists of Europe. Prof. A. Stoeck- 

 hardt, of Saxony, closes his review of my first report "On 

 Commercial Fertilizers," with the following remark : " There 

 can be no doubt that American agriculture will arrive at sat- 



