New York AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. DAT 
by bugs. Although the unsprayed rows were thoroughly 
poisoned the plants did not recover as promptly as on the 
sprayed rows. ‘The sprayed rows outlived the unsprayed ones 
by about four weeks. 
Experiment No. 5. Mr. Williams reports that there seemed 
to be no blight in this experiment. There was no rot, flea 
beetles were not troublesome and the unsprayed rows were 
not injured by bugs. The contrast between sprayed and un- 
Sprayed rows was not marked. The weather was very dry. 
Experiment No. 6. The yields given are for unsorted 
potatoes. 
Experiment No. 7. Mr. Mannix states that the unsprayed 
rows were considerably injured by some kind of blight; also, 
that some damage was done by “small green flies” [probably 
leaf hoppers] which were unaffected by paris green. 
Experiment No. 8: The unsprayed rows died about a week 
earlier than. the sprayed ones. The chief enemy fought was 
the flea beetle. It is doubtful if there was any blight in this 
experiment. 
Experiment No. 9. Although the potatoes used for this ex- 
periment were the property of Mr. Charles Parry the experi- 
ment was, in reality, conducted by Mr. M. Bowes, who did the 
spraying and superintended the digging of the test rows. 
Eaperiment No. 10. Mr. Faulkner states that there was no 
noticeable difference between sprayed and unsprayed rows. 
There was no blight on either. 
Experiment No. 11. In this experiment the test rows were 
of the variety Early Harvest. 
