1916.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 31. 13a 



bacco sickness," how to grow tobacco crops satisfactorily both 

 as to yield and quality, if not continuously at least a large pro- 

 portion of the time, upon the same land. 



The crop failures during the past year were more numerous 

 and more disastrous than ever before, and although it is gener- 

 ally believed that the abnormal weather conditions were in 

 controlling measure responsible for them in most cases, the 

 situation has led tobacco growers to appeal to us for assistance 

 to a degree never before experienced. Several Vvidely signed 

 petitions urging more investigation in the interest of tobacco 

 growing have been received, and the growers on their own 

 initiative have appealed to the Legislature for a special appro- 

 priation of S2,000 to the station in order that such investigations 

 may be more extensively carried on. The importance of the 

 industry and the seriousness of the situation now confronting 

 it fully warrant such an appropriation, for without encroaching 

 upon funds needed to carry on other and important lines of 

 investigation already undertaken, there can be no great in- 

 crease in the attention devoted to tobacco work until we have 

 increased financial support. 



Work for Private Individuals. 

 For a full statement of the policy of the station in regard to 

 private work for individuals, the reader is referred to the 

 twenty-sixth annual report. Attention, however, is once more 

 called to the fact that the experiment station is organized and 

 supported for work in the interest of the public. It is contrary 

 to its policy to undertake work for individuals which has neither 

 a general nor a public interest, and if such work seems for any 

 special reason to be desirable, the station will undertake it only 

 if its right to publish and discuss results be fully conceded. 

 The station will not under any circumstances accept commercial 

 work in the sole interest of the party applying for the same. 

 An apparent exception is the sanitary analysis of drinking 

 waters, for which there is a uniform charge of .S3. This charge 

 is made not with a view to recovering the cost of such analysis 

 (it is hardly one-third the amount which a commercial chemist 

 usually charges), but rather as a restraining influence. It seems 

 to be necessary, in order to prevent the indiscriminate forward- 



