es % sr Woe. me XS eS ed ae Tt en 
* j ‘ Pe feos he wit So. Wy oy i +t * \ 
AAT gs An eS Oe ne ‘iw? 
ane | 
fails to respond to the test, then its title to acceptance must be — 
invalid. Agriculture, in its practice, is a complex art; it deals with 
factors of varied character, and great divergency. Under the concrete 
terms of seed, soil, fertility, climate, protection, etc., we express the 
; ‘ ~ ; . ~ i ay ¥ = ey 
die. eo Vy aed ER 
dd) * [ASSEMBLY 
) Me 
. 
Vis? . 
‘ 

* 
+a 
ee 
combined results of also varied and divergent factors. Were if possible — 
to give expression to the values of each and all of these factors, not 
only by themselves, but in their relations, then we could hope to have 
an exact science, admitting of definite expression, admitting of verifi- 
cation, admitting of duplication in experimental trials. It seems to 
me that a thoughtful consideration of the principles involved in this 
idea must give hope that progress can be made, and that sooner or later 
the results of a careful study into the prineiples and relations govern- 
ing agricultural pursuits will enable tables of constants to be established 
which shall avail to interpret for us the discrepancies now so familiar ~ 
to practice, and will enable us to secure with accuracy the results for — 
which we may plan. If a practice be claimed as successful, then — 
should we be able by trial to verify its claims, eliminating the effect 
of local conditions, and getting an understanding of the truth or 
falsity of the principles upon which the claim may be founded. An’ 
- illustration may be sought in the potato. Some observers claim that 
hilling is preferable for crop; others assert with equal confidence the 
claims to level culture. Any verification of these claims becomes 
impossible, because founded upon local conditions alone, and what- : 
ever the results of a trial the question will yet remain unsettled for a 
different soil or a different climate. If, however, we go behind pro- 
cesses to seek the causes, we then have a true subject for investigation, 
‘and our conclusions, if correct, admit of verification and allow of 
generalization into formule which may become accepted with confi- 
dence by the farmer. 
What are the relations of the process of planting to soil and climate ? 
‘What do we effect thereby to influence the growth habit of the plant ? 
Can similar conditions, procured in other or divergent ways, procure - 
like results? By seeking verification to suppositions like these, and wa 
_ by clearly apprehending the value of the plant and the conditions, 
we may hope in time to determine with accuracy the conditions required, — € 
and to furnish proof of accuracy by- the gaining of equivalent results .— 
through successful trials. 
There is another kind of verification, however, which is deserving - 
of notice. This kind is general in its nature, and gives reply in terms — 
of greater or less, rather than in accurate numbers. Thus for illustra- 
_ tion, in our report for 1882, we put forward the results of some trials. 
-with corn, in order to determine whether the position of the kernel 
on the cob had an influence on: growth and crop. This year we de- 
vised a series of verifications in order to test the accuracy of our gene- 
ral conclusion that tip seed yielded larger crop than central seed. The 
reply to our questioning must not be interpreted in bushels, for the 
exact yield and differences may be dependent upon circumstances of a 
local nature, but in terms of greater or less. So also we may seek to 
verify other questions of practical concern, and of a like nature. 
Dissemination of the results of our work is another important ob- — 
ject of the station work. Good work may be done by us, and yet but — “a 
little benefit accrue unless brought to the attention of those who will 
- 
ce 

