74 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. [Pub. Doc. 



other hand, 224 brands of factory-mixed goods cost on an 

 average |8.72 per ton more than the station valuation, — a 

 diflerence of 36 per cent. 



Now, I do not ])ring these figures forward as an attempt 

 to cast evil reproach upon those engaged in the retail fer- 

 tilizer trade. I would not have you understand that I am 

 suggesting fraud or overcharge on the part of the fertilizer 

 dealers. I have no reason for supposing that honorable 

 manufacturers or sellers of commercial fertilizers have been 

 unduly prosperous. Certainly these business men have had 

 their share of losses and failures. But these data which I 

 bring to you are undeniable facts, nevertheless, — facts we 

 cannot ignore, wdiich mean something, and which deserve 

 the careful consideration of every farmer who wishes to 

 manage his business in the most economical manner possi- 

 ble. These figures are really a com|)arison of two distinct 

 methods of selling the farmer his plant food. If it was 

 found that a diflerence of 30 per cent or "more existed 

 between two methods of supplying families with flour or 

 sugar, would it not become a subject of active thought and 

 investigation ? 



What is the explanation of these figures which I have 

 cited as relating to the fertilizer trade? So far as I under- 

 stand the matter, it is this : on the one hand, the ordinary 

 retail trade in factory-mixed goods maintained by an exten- 

 sive agent system, of both travelling and local agents, which 

 has been used not merely to supply the ftirmers with the 

 fertilizers for which they asked, but to })ush .the limits of 

 the trade to the farthest possible bounds. Farmers have 

 not only been given the opportunity to buy, they have been 

 beset with arguments calculated to win their attention and 

 confidence. The competition has been intense. Such a 

 combination of advertising and selling has been costly. 

 This method, where all classes of men have been buyers, 

 has involved slow sales and an expensive credit system, 

 accompanied by the usual proportion of losses. All of this 

 expense has been added to the cost of the goods, and inev- 

 itably has been met hy the consumers. 



Granting that it Vas necessary to force the growth of the 

 fertilizer trade to such tremendous proportions in so short 



