The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1897-08-05

law on April 20, 1892. Under this act the
experiment
STATION WAS TO BE PAID
for the collection Of fertilizers, analysis,
printing. distribution of bulletins. etc, from
the fees paid annually by the fertilizer manu-
facturers 10 the general treasurer, the bill
being subject 20 approval by the state board
of agriculture
Upon the completion OF the work in lS-e the
station sont its bill 30 the secretary OF the
state board OF agriculture as required, but
the executive committee of the board refused
to approve 10 upon the ground OF lack OF au-
thority, and by virtue Of the fact that there
was no regular meeting OF the board between
that time and the first Of January following,
and that no special meeting was called for
the purpose, the bill failed to be approved be-
fore the money derived from the license fees
lapsed to the state. Accordingly, for the sec
ond time, through no fault OF the experiment
station, IL was obliged to go to the general
assembly to recover payment for the work
done.
From that time until a recent date all mat
ters relating TO the fertilizer inspection
SEEMED TO PROGRESS
in manner satisfactory to all parties con-
cerned.
During the last January session Of the gem
eral assembly the secretary of the state board
OF agriculture is said 10 have prepered certain
amendm snts TO the fertilizer law, designed to
remove IL entirely from the experiment sta
tion. This action was said 10 be authorized
by the executive committee of the board, but
il was taken without the knowledge or sane
tion of the entire board. or even that OF the
entire executive committee, since one Of the
members of that committee has stated that
he knew nothing about IL. II was also taken
without the knowledge OF the authorities at
Kingston, or an understanding of i:s import
by the president Of the board of managers OF
the station, who was at the time a member OF
the senate, and the amended law passed both
branches of the general assembly in the last
days Of the session without public hearing.
In the meantime the experiment station had
nearly completed the collection of fertilizers
for the season ana had been
PURSUING THE WORK
as usual without any intimation that a change
was contemplated The above mentioned bill
became n law on May 2l, and considerably
later, on Juno I, after the adjournment Of the
May session Of the general assembly. the
secretary Of tho state board OF agriculture
sent an official notification Of the change to
the director of the experiment station at
Kingston.
The reason said 10 have been advanced by
the executive committee of the state board Of
agriculture for securing the above mentioned
changes in the law was that the state board
of agriculture could have the work done
equally as faithfully for less than onehalf the
amount that the experiment station had been
receiving. This stateme.t was based upon
bids or estimates which had been secured by
the executive committee or the secretary Of
the board from various chemists.
THE BIDS OR ESTIMATES
made by these chemists we-e so far es has
boon learned, for the chemical work alone,
and without specification as TO tho making of
tests in duplicate and tho methods of analysis
TO be employed, or other important details
which have the greatest bearing upon the ex-
actness of the work.
The experiment station had collected ferti-
lzers, conducted practically all of the official
corresp ondence connected with the fertilizer
inspection. had published three bul etips and
had mailed the same to the farmers of the
state, besides preparing a special report for
the board Of agriculture containing retabu-
lation Of all Of the analytica data so that the
bill Of the station at Kingston embraced many
things aside from the chemical work. The
analyses made by the experiment station were
made by the
MOST APPROVED METHODS,
with oil tests in duplicate order that the re-
suits should be as nearly accurate as possible
and in order that both farmers and manufac-
fturers might have confidence in the work.
1t was intimated in The News article of
Tai. M hat tln In M xrnn ta1
to get the Job" originally, and that they pub
lished a statement ''that the work of analyz
ing fertilizers could bo done at the experiment
station for the cost of the chemicals and the
cost OF the time OF one assistant" In fsct
the published matter was simply copy OF tho
agreement which had been arrived at on the
part Of the state board of agriculture and the
board Of managers of the station, as a result of
the original proposal emanating from the
board of agriculture. This agreement went
out of effect April 90 1892, by virtue Of o
change in the law and not due TO any
VIOLATION OF PROMISE
on the part Of the station.
The statement in The News Of the amounts
OF tho bills OF the station from 1923 to 1895 in
elusive would mako il appear that the charges
had been increased with no good reason there
for. In 1870, the last year Derore tne WORK Oh
analysis was done at Kingston, but 1888 de-
examinations were made. The number made
at Kingston in 1891 was s92. and in 1892 IL was
e5i Below are given comparisons Of figures
which show conclusively that the station was
doing the work much more economically than
II was ever done before:
Number of determinations made-lS93, 67l 1;
1904. Cos; 1895, s5i 1896, 96i.
Bill CT station for collection of samples
analysis, correspondence, publishing bule-
tins, etc, as taken from The News Of July 22-
1893, sl666 80; 1894, si69 45 1895. s2676si; 1885,
s2S5654
Cost for chemical work alone at 81 80 per do
termination. the not price paid by the state
beard of agriculture before the station under
took the work-ls93, s9olo. 50; 1891. s3in; 1885,
S3S43; 1896. ss32450.
From the above II will be seen that in 1890,
al the price which the state board of agricul-
ture mad been paying TO parties elsewhere.
the chemical work alone would have cost
slss9.17 more than what the station was paid
for all of the services rendered.
A comparison o. the fertilizer laws of other
states shows that I'm one New England state
Al. /, .i... a.