PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. 761 
was removed by Mr. Beaven, who selected, again with enormous trouble, a pure 
high-yielding strain of Archer barley. Since this strain was introduced into the 
Eastern Counties the demand for it has always exceeded the supply which could 
-be grown at Cambridge and at the Norfolk Agricultural Station, and it is 
regarded by farmers generally as a very great success. 
The conclusion, therefore, is that a ten per cent. difference is well worth 
measuring, that it cannot be measured with certainty by the single-plot method, 
and that it behoves those of us who are concerned with field trials to look to 
our methods, and to avoid printing figures for single-plot experiments which may 
very well be misleading. Almost everyone thinks himself competent to criticise 
the farmer, who is commonly described as too self-satisfied to acquaint himself 
with new discoveries, and too conservative to try them when they are brought 
to his notice. Let us examine the real facts of the case. Does the farmer ignore 
new discoveries? The largely increasing practice of consulting the staffs of the 
agricultural colleges, which has arisen among farmers during the last few years, 
conclusively shows that he does not; that he is, in fact, perfectly ready to avail 
himself of sound advice whenever he can. Is he too conservative to try new 
discoveries when brought to his notice? The extraordinary demand for seed of 
the new Archer barley quoted above, and for seed of new varieties generally, 
the continuous advance in the prices of phosphatic manures, as the result of 
increased demand by farmers, the trade in Scotch and Irish seed potatoes, all 
show how ready the farmer is to try new things. ‘The chief danger seems to 
be that he tries new things simply because they are new, and he may be dis- 
appointed if those who are responsible for the new things in question have not 
taken pains to ascertain with certainty that they are not only new but good. 
Farmers are nowadays in what may be called a very receptive condition. 
Witness the avidity with which they paid extravagant prices for single tubers of 
so-called new, but inadequately tested, varieties of potatoes some years ago, and 
in a less degree the extraordinary demand for seed of the much-boomed French 
wheats, and the excitement about nitragin for soil or seed inoculation. Witness, 
too, the almost universal failure of the new potatoes and French wheats intro- 
duced during the boom, and the few cases in which nitragin gave any appreci- 
able result. The farmer who was disappointed with his ten-guinea tuber, his 
expensive French wheat, or his culture of nitragin cannot but be disillusioned. 
Once bitten, twice shy. He does not readily take advice again. 
Let us, therefore, recognise that the farmers of the country are ready to 
listen to us, and to try our recommendations, and let that very fact bring home 
to us a sense of our responsibility. All that is new is not, therefore, necessarily 
good. Before we recommend a new thing let us take pains to assure ourselves 
of its goodness. To do so we must find not only that the new thing produces a 
greater return per acre, but that the increased return is worth more than it costs 
to produce, and we must also define the area or the type of soil to which this 
result is applicable. This implies in practice that each field trial should confine 
itself to the investigation of only one, or, at most, two, definite points, since 
five pairs of plots will be required to settle each point; that the experimental 
results should be reviewed in the light of a thorough knowledge of farm book- 
keeping, and that accurate notes should be taken of the type of the soil, and the 
area to which it extends, and of the various meteorological factors which make 
up the local climate. At present we are not in possession of a sufficient know- 
ledge of farm accountancy, but there is hope that this deficiency will be removed 
by the work of the Institute for Research in Agricultural Economics, which has 
recently been founded at Oxford by the Board of Agriculture and the Develop- 
ment Commission. The excellent example set by Hall and Russell in their 
‘Survey of the Soils and Acriculture of the South-Eastern Counties,’ an example 
which is being followed in Cambridge and elsewhere, seems likely to result in the 
near future in a complete survey of the soils of England which will make a 
sound scientific basis for delimiting the areas over which the results of manurial 
or variety trials are applicable. 
Reviewing this branch of agricultural science, the outlook is distinctly hope- 
ful. New fertilisers are coming into the market, as, for instance, the various 
products made from atmospheric nitrogen. New varieties of farm crops are 
being produced by the Plant-breeding Institute at Cambridge, and elsewhere. 
