288 TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY REPORT. 
been favorites of days gone by we give names of a few sorts that 
have stood at or near the head of the lists in different years: 
White Whipple, White Star, American Giant, Rose’s Invincible, 
President Arthur, Nott’s Victor, Defiance, O. K., Mammoth, Cor- 
less Matchless, Buffalo Bill, Putnam’s Junks, Burbank, Green Moun- 
tain (twice), Grange, Governor Foraker, Stump of the World, Sum- 
mit, Morning Star and Lombard. Rural New Yorker No. 2 was 
tested for the first time in 1888, and then led the list: but Carman 
No. 3, Sir Walter Raleigh, Early Ohio, Irish Cobbler and other 
favorites of to-day appear in inconspicuous positions on the list or 
not at all. 
SUGAR BEETS. 
During the last five years of the Nineteenth Century, New York 
State farmers were greatly interested in the sugar beet question. 
The growth of the crop had been found not only possible but 
profitable in other states whose conditions are not dissimilar to our 
own; several factories had been established or planned in this 
State; and the managers of these factories were urgently soliciting 
farmers to make contracts for growing beets. The conditions for 
success with the crop were not thoroughly known, however, nor 
was it possible to estimate the cost of growing, the yields or the 
profits from any reliable data collected in the State. 
The Station accordingly undertook certain lines of investigation ; 
and has grown some beets every season for ten years. In 1897 a 
comprehensive bulletin°? was issued, based to some extent upon 
Station experience, but more largely upon well established prin- 
ciples and facts regarding the growth of the crop. This gave a 
full discussion of the conditions required for the successful pro- 
duction of sugar beets; with special attention to the factors lead- 
ing to increase or decrease in the sugar content and coefficient of 
purity. The outlook for the industry in the State was carefully 
and conservatively discussed, and farmers were told that “they will 
not realize unusual profits for any exterided periods from sugar- 
beet growing. The facts appear to justify the belief, however, 
that this crop may come to rank among those which for some time 
will be regarded as giving satisfactory returns. It will be a busi- 
ness of moderate profits and one that will not spring into unin- 
terrupted success. If it is a success at all it will become so through 
education and experience.” This conservatism, though somewhat 
disappointing to the promoters of sugar-beet culture, has proven 
* Bul. 135; same, Rpt. 16:188-203, 581-595 (18097). 
