462 QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. {1 Nov., 1901 
most delicate wild flowers also are seen blooming amongst the sprayed pear, and 
once the latter is got rid of, the growth of grass is astonishing. 
The following preparations for destroying the pear were suggested by the 
chemist to the Department, Mr. J. C. Briinnich :— 
1. Sulphate of iron (green vitriol), from 4: to 10 lb. being dissolved in 
10 gallons of water. 
. Hydrochloric acid (coml.) dissolved in about 50 pints of water. 
Coal or gas tar, making a spray by boiling 15 lb. resin and 8 lb. 
commercial caustic soda, for a few hours with 20 gallons of water 
and adding about 5 gallons coal tar, keeping the whole boiling and 
stirring, and adding while still hot another 20 gallons of water 
stirring vigorously to form an emulsion. 
. Creosote oi! might be used as above. 
. Sodium arsenite—4 lb. of white arsenic and 3 lb. washing soda in 1 
gallon of water, boiled and stirred for half-an-hour, 5 0z. to 8 oz. to 
be used per gallon of water. 
6. Ammonium sulphocyanide—4 lb. ammonium sulphocyanide dissolved 
in 1 gallon water, 16 oz. of the solution to 1 gallon water. 
7. Lime sulphide.—20 lb. quicklime dissolved in 10 gallons boiling water 
with 5 Ib. flour of sulphur. 
8. Various quantities of a strong solution of copper sulphate, sodium 
‘ nitrate, and potassium chlorate, in addition to the arsenious mixture 
No. 5. 
The Department finally decided on the Sodium Arsenite spray (No. 5), 
and this is what has proved so successful in the destruction of the pear. 
It is said that a new specific has been found which will destroy the plants 
without their being first cut down. If this is so, and the Department is about 
to make experiments with it at Bunker’s Hill, a great saving of labour and 
consequent expense will be the result. 
On) 
oe 
CO-OPERATION FOR FARMERS. 
Queensland farmers appear to have an insuperable objection to combining 
even for their own benefit. We have often shown howa number of neighbours, 
by co-operation, are enabled to buy implements, seed, household requirements, 
artificial manures, machinery, &c., at a considerable reduction on the price 
which each individual would haye to pay acting on his own account. Just by 
way of proof of our assertion that co-operation or combination—call it what 
you like—is distinctly financially beneficial to a farming community and to 
each individual composing that community, we select from a score of articles 
on the subject the following one written for Garden and Field :— 
Some years ago a political association of farmers was formed at Congupna, 
Goulburn Valley, Victoria. The farmers of the district became very interested 
in political questions, which were keenly debated to the improvement of the 
members as public speakers. But some farmers objected that “they got 
nothing out of the association.” They considered it possible to form an 
association for trading purposes. Eventually five farmers joined together to 
form a co-operative association. None but producers could be members. No 
one could hold more than five shares, each valued at £1, payable in 2s. 6d. 
instalments. No dividends are paid on the shares, but instead a bonus on 
purchases is paid. 
The association did £200 worth of business the first year, £1,100 the 
next, and last year their turnover was £4,200. Now there is a membership of 
450 shareholders, and eleven branches of the association. 
As cash purchasers of large quantities the association gets things much 
cheaper than the individual farmer could. A commission of 33 per cent. is 
charged. 
