119 
Turning to methods in use in the West Indies we find an 
extremely helpful article in the Agricultural News for May 1916. 
Here the writer brings out very forcibly the value of uniformity of 
method. Thus : 
“ It is thought that were there more uniformity of methods 
amongst investigators, there would in all probability be much better 
agreement as regards results. There has been too strong a tendency 
in the past to lay out manurial experiments according to personal 
ideas rather than to scientific ideas. 
“With present methods the truth about the effects of manures 
on trees can be more usefully expressed in words than in numbers ? ” 
This latter fact is as true as it is desirable that it be changed. 
If investigation has not gone far enough to provide data sufficiently 
precise on which to base actual yield experiments, then it is our task 
to initiate work which will have that end in view. The way may be 
long, but it will undoubtedly pay in the long run. 
As concerns the method in use in Trinidad and Nevis, both of 
which are outlined on the article quoted, to which attention is 
strongly urged, it appears that they also cannot be expected to 
produce accurate results. The two methods are given as follows : 
(1) Trinidad— 
Gain or loss = {(V 1 — V 2 ) — (C x — C 2 )} — m 
Where V x = value of yield from manured plot, 
say 1915-16. 
V 2 = value of yield from manured plot, 
say ... ... ... ... 1914-15. 
Oj = value of average yield from two control 
plots, say ... ... ... 1915-16. 
C„ = value of average yield from two control 
plots, say ... 1914-15. 
m = cost manuring. 
(2) Nevis — 
Gain or loss = value of [{n + (n a — njj — c]— m 
where n = average number of nuts per tree picked 
between two annual applications of 
manure. 
n 1 = average number of nuts per tree picked at 
beginning of experimental year. 
n 2 — average number of nuts per tree picked 
at end of experimental year. 
c = the n + (n 2 — n x ) value of the control. 
