400 
THK RURAIi NEW-YORKER 
April 5, 
open. Remove filler and upper cloth. Examine ker¬ 
nels in each section and discard the weak and dead 
ears. Do not allow corn to grow through cloth. 
OTHER TESTS.—Some corn men advocate the 
“field condition test.” They subject the corn to the 
most severe and trying conditions, then select those 
ears that have best stood the “knocks” of the field 
test” for seed. Personally I prefer to give the corn 
a fair chance, with just as favorable conditions as 
possible. Every live ear will show up to its full 
capacity', and I can select the ears which, if I give 
them a fair chance in the field, will do the best. I 
can then judge them from a standpoint of perfection 
under favorable conditions, rather than by compari¬ 
son in a state of adversity. I have heard of persons 
trying to imitate the weather by placing their testers 
out in the garden over night, and down in the cellar 
in the day time; then soaking the tester and allow¬ 
ing it almost to freeze. They would then set it back 
of the stove and allow it to dry out; then set it in 
a cool damp place, repeating the above as often as 
their whims permitted. That may be all right but 
I consider it unnecessary and pessimistic. It helps to 
explain why so many farmers do not test their 
corn. I have several objections to the “field test.” 
They are as follows: It is first of all a misuse of 
the tester. It is abuse of the corn rather than a 
test for vitality. Abnormally unfavorable conditions 
prevail in the test box which rarely' if ever occur in 
the field. A uniform test can only be obtained under 
favorable conditions. Variations which can be seen 
in a quick test are unnoticeable in a slow test. No 
two field tests are the same. The last up, or slow 
ears will have a better chance of getting into the 
seed pile. Quick sprouting ears insure a better stand; 
and a more even stand; they will often come up 
before a crust has formed, if a dashing rain follows 
immediately after planting. The slow ears are more 
liable to perish in a very dry or a cold wet soil or 
where a crust forms on top of seed bed. No one 
knows what kind of weather to expect, or just how 
to conduct a field test to meet the conditions of 
weather and soil. A “field test” is a general term 
that may mean several different things. A “favorable 
test” means but one thing, the supplying of a soil 
or substitute at proper temperature with sufficient 
moisture to promote best germination. 
ADVANTAGES OF “FAVORABLE TEST.”—It 
is a simpler, more expedient and practical test. It 
takes less time, makes less work and less dirt. It 
is sufficient for all ordinary seasons. It results in 
a more uniform stand. It shows to better ad¬ 
vantage the relative vitality of different ears. It 
leaves no doubt of the vitality of the ear, and does 
not permit of giving “adversity” as an excuse for 
weak germination. It is a convenient and economi¬ 
cal test. Farmers nowadays appreciate the value of 
tile drainage and the thoroughly prepared seed bed 
with a fine dirt mulch on top. They fear neither 
drought nor flood, and cold weather no longer is 
to be feared as formerly. A dry soil is warmer than 
a wet one in cold weather. Bad seed is now the 
farmer’s worst enemy. 
POINTS FROM EXPERIENCE.—Following are 
a few things that I have observed to be generally 
true. However, actual test and count might prove 
the contrary in certain cases. Heavy ears test better 
than light ears. Light ears indicate damaged cob or 
poorly developed kernels. The size of the kernel 
has but little effect upon germination, except in 
very small kernels. Very broad thin kernels or 
pointed very tapering and poorly developed or ill¬ 
shaped kernels are usually weak in germination. 
Loose ears often germinate stronger than some solid 
ears (when picked before maturity). Size of ear 
does not affect germination although a small ear 
with thick kernels usually shows stronger germination 
than a large ear with broad thin kernels. A thick 
kernel usually germinates stronger than a thin kernel. 
A deep kernel if well developed and medium thick 
will germinate quicker and stronger than a shallow 
kernel of same thickness. At least one-third of 
damaged seed corn is due to damaged cobs. About 
one-third of our discarded seed corn was blistered 
over heart or germ (last season). About two-thirds 
of our discarded seed corn was weak or slow in 
germination. Any tester if operated according to 
directions will do good work. The tester is right 
regardless of what the ear appears to be. 
SCORE CARDS.—My germination score card fol¬ 
lows: A dead ear is one from which one or more 
of the six kernels failed to germinate. A weak ear 
is one from which one or more of the six kernels 
showed weak or small sprouts or was slow in germi¬ 
nation. A strong ear is one from which all six ker¬ 
nels germinated good and strong with large root 
and shoot sprouts. 
Report of 900 ears tested this season: Dead, 25; 
weak, 54; strong, 821. Only nine ears were all dead. 
Number of kernels that failed to grow, 123. Total 
number of kernels, 5,400. Last season I tested 6,500 
ears, single ear test (six kernels from each ear, 
making 39,000 kernels). At least 35% was con¬ 
demned by the tester. This season I expect to test 
at least 7,500 ears more. It is safe to estimate that 
corn will test 85% good and strong this year. 
MISTAKES OFTEN MADE.—Picking out the 
wedge-shaped kernels for testing because they are 
easiest to get out. Failure to take kernels from all 
sides of ear and at both ends and middle of ear. 
Taking kernels too near tip of ear. Carelessness in 
numbering ears. Disregarding decision of tester. If 
in doubt test those ears over again. In conclusion 
I wish to add, be patient and careful always. Be 
accurate and slow rather than speedy and careless. 
Operate tester according to directions. Do not try 
to make artificial weather just to see how much time 
and corn you can kill. Test it in the practical way, 
and put in a little extra time in draining the soil 
and in thorough, preparation of the seed bed. You 
will be sure of results. Yours for higher yields, bet¬ 
ter crops and more profit through the proper use of 
a good seed corn tester. wm. l. frank. 
Auglaize Co., O. 
FARMERS’ INSTITUTES IN NEW YORK. 
The close of another institute season in this State 
again brings up the question whether the results 
from this form of agricultural extension work justify 
MARCH JOB IN THE ORCHARD. Fig. 155. 
the expense incurred in its support. The writer has 
been interested for several years in observing the 
attitude of the farmers of his own locality toward 
institute teaching, and its actual effect upon farm 
practice; and he desires to speak of the present status 
of the work, as it appears to him. 
I wish to say, at the outset, that I have no criticism 
to offer of the institutes, as such, or of those who 
conduct them. While this branch of the State agri¬ 
cultural work may have been unfortunate in some of 
its leaders in the past, the present director, Edward 
Van Alstyne, is a man of wide experience and proven 
ability as an agricultural teacher, and the institute 
workers, so far as they have come under niy obser¬ 
vation, have, with few exceptions, been men and 
women who combined practical experience with that 
wider knowledge that can come only through reading 
and study. Whatever failure, then, to reach the great 
mass of farmers whom they would influence may be 
charged against institute work, it cannot be laid at 
the door of inefficient directorship or incompetent 
teaching. 
Two questions arise: Do the farm institutes reach 
any considerable portion of the farmers of the State, 
and is farm practice perceptibly affected by their 
teaching? No general conclusions can fairly be drawn 
from the work of any one year, or in any one locality, 
but as these institutes have been conducted since 
1886, the effect of their work should now be apparent. 
It is probably a fair assumption that any w'ork of 
proven value to farmers will be supported by them; 
to argue otherwise would be to accuse farmers, as a 
class, of stupidity. Attendance, then, may be consid¬ 
ered one measure of the institute’s success, but to 
alvzed, and the proportion of working farmers to such 
alized, and the proportion of working farmers to such 
spectators as are merely curious or are seeking en¬ 
tertainment, must be known. 
At a recent two-days’ session held in the writer’s 
home town, about, one-third of the audience were in 
position to benefit directly from the instruction of¬ 
fered, the remainder being made up of retired farm¬ 
ers, village people of leisure, and children. This 
means that in a town whose population is over 3000, 
and whose chief industry is agriculture, from 30 to 
_ 40 working farmers considered it worth their while 
to attend a meeting provided by the State for their 
benefit and addressed by six, presumably, well-paid 
experts. Another example of the interest shown 
might have been seen in a neighboring town where the 
institutes have always been more popular. Accord¬ 
ing to the local paper, the attendance at that institute 
this year ranged from 50 to 150, while the year previ¬ 
ous the total attendance for five sessions was 1160; 
“The largest of the season, anywhere, at any insti¬ 
tute.” Speaking further of this record-breaking in¬ 
stitute, the same paper says: “It was spoken of as 
extraordinary attendance, yet over half of that was at 
the evening session, when the village people turned 
out largely to be amused, so to speak, and there was 
a considerable entertainment programme.” At the 
real farm sessions of this largest attended institute 
in the county, the attendance ranged from 100 to 149 
(including agricultural students from the high 
school). “As we stated before, at least 50 per cent 
must be thrown out of the practical reckoning as re¬ 
tired old men, or others who will make no practical 
use of the instruction.” At the session in another 
neighboring town, the total attendance was less than 
300. Official statistics of the general attendance are 
not at hand, and if they were they could be of but 
little help in drawing conclusions, since no distinction 
is made in them between farmers and other specta¬ 
tors, and the figures showing total attendance are 
misleading, each person being counted in them as 
many times as he attends different sessions. The 
only conclusion that can fairly be drawn from the 
attendance seems to the writer to be that the ma¬ 
jority of farmers do not consider the* institutes of 
sufficient value to them to warrant their time and at¬ 
tention. Just why they assume this attitude is a dif¬ 
ficult question to answer; there seems to be but little 
disposition to dispute the value of the teaching, but 
a tremendous amount of inertia when it comes to put¬ 
ting it into practice. Whether this is due to an un¬ 
derlying conviction that, after all, the new methods 
are not superior to the old, or whether the attitude is 
less one of skepticism than one of spiritlessness, it is 
difficult to say. 
The effect of institute teaching upon general farm 
practice in the State is not easily observed, as the 
source of the inspiration leading to the adoption of 
improved methods cannot always be known. Here, 
farm institutes must compete with other educational 
methods. State agricultural colleges and experiment 
stations are studying farm problems and publishing 
the results of their work from time to time in bulle¬ 
tins and circulars. The better class of farm jour¬ 
nals carry the same teaching into the farmer’s home 
each week, thus providing him with 52 institutes per 
year instead of one, while boards of trade, railroad 
companies, and even private mercantile establishments 
now vie with each other in begging the farmers to ac¬ 
cept a dole of “education” at their hands. Indeed, 
the frantic efforts now being made in many quarters 
to “educate” the farmer, presumably for the benefit 
of his educators, closely approach the ridiculous. 
The new county farm bureaus now bid fair to be¬ 
come dangerous rivals for public favor and State ap¬ 
propriations ; the idea of these seeming to be to keep 
one expert upon the ground all the time instead of 
sending several there for a short time and at long 
intervals. The value of this method is yet to be dem¬ 
onstrated. Whatever the proportion of credit for 
agricultural advancement the farmers’ institutes are 
entitled to, and whatever their future may be, they 
must be accorded a share in the educational awaken¬ 
ing which has come to rural interests, and if they 
are to be superseded by more effectual methods of 
reaching the goal which they seek, their discharge 
from service must be an honorable one, with full rec¬ 
ognition of the fact that they have played well their 
part in the evolution of modern agricultural teaching. 
M. B. DEAN. 
No use talking—many of the smaller dairymen are 
going out of the business. Under the new regula¬ 
tions milk supplying does not pay them. Dairy but¬ 
ter might pay if they would learn the business, but 
most of them do not seem disposed to t£y. They 
are more inclined to try poultry. With the growing 
shortage of beef there will be an increased demand 
for eggs and poultry. That is the history of older 
countries. At the same time there will be an in¬ 
creased demand for good milk. 
