164 
STATE AGRICULTUEAL SOCIETY. 
The general arrangement and disposition of the agricultural implements 
on the fair grounds was admirable, and great credit is due to Major Rufus 
Cheney for the skill and industry he has displayed. The committee, however, 
would suggest for the future, one improvement, and that is, to exhibit plac¬ 
ards over the entrance of the superintendent’s headquarters, stating at what 
time the judges would examine each class of implements. This would notify 
all exhibitors to be ready at the proper time to exhibit and explain the 
operation and nature of the machines. These suggestions are deemed neces¬ 
sary, because the judges in several instances could find no representatives to 
explain the machines on exhibition, and as the mass of labor was so great, 
a second examination was out of the question, and hence complaints passed 
unheeded, and dissatisfaction was the result. 
As a general thing, the judges have the confidence to believe their decis¬ 
ions were satisfactory. The greatest contest seemed to be on drills and 
broadcast seeders, of which there was a large and splendid display. Many of 
them were manufactured in our own state. Without a practical test it 
seemed difficult to decide as to relative merits, because nearly all were of 
superior workmanship, varying but little in appearance in general character¬ 
istics. The display of reapers and mowers was magnificent, and shows great 
progress in the refinement of workmanship and the adaptation of the various 
parts to their general uses. 
As to grain binders, the judges found themselves in somewhat of a q<ian- 
dary. The chairman being engaged in working up an automatic binder, felt 
a delicacy—perhaps a false one—and declined to ‘act in reference to that 
subject. The other judges, therefore, as reported elsewhere, determined the 
award in the premises and their action was not without some misgivings in 
reference to the following facts : 
There had been three entries under the head of “grain binders,” one of 
which did not reach the grounds till after the examination and award, leav¬ 
ing the contest between the hand binder of Mr. Butler of Ripon, and the 
Marsh harvester entered by S. L. Sheldon & Bro. The perplexing question 
was,—Is the Marsh harvester a binder ? The two acting judges did not hesi¬ 
tate to say it was not, technically, nor was the Butler binder—each required 
hard labor, and each was only a means of binding. Taken in this light, and 
arguing they had no right to change the letter or to determine the spirit of 
the entry, they examined the two machines as competitors, awarding the pre¬ 
mium to the Marsh harvester, for the following reasons: Mr. Butler stated 
that his bands must all be made exactly of a length, and of course every 
bundle must be substantially of the same exact size. The committee be¬ 
lieved that such exactness could not always be relied on, nor by the most 
expert operator. Mr. Butler claimed the bands could be made for half a 
cent each. Allowing this to be so, it was conceded that it would cost $1.60 
per acre, average, for the bands; and allowing that one man could bind ten 
acres per day (on which point the committee were skeptical), it would cost 
$18 to bind 10 acres, while by the Marsh harvester it would cost but $6 for 
