ANALYSES OF COMMERCIAL FERTILIZERS.

The act of June 28, 1879 (section four) provides that "it shall be the duty of the Board of Agriculture to analyze such specimens of commercial fertilizers as may be furnished by its agents, such samples to be accompanied with proper proof, under oath or affirmation, that they were fairly drawn," and the act of March 13, 1895, transfers this duty to the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture.

As Secretary of the State Board of Agriculture, and more recently as Secretary of Agriculture, I have given my personal attention to the enforcement of the provisions of this act, and have at all times supervised the selection of samples, the analyses and the reporting of all analyses to manufacturers and others interested. The analyses are made by Dr. Frear, of the State Experiment Station, and are paid for under the provisions of section fifth of the act of June 28, 1879.

During the past year the special agents of the Department have sent in 1,514 samples, selected in all portions of the State and under all possible conditions, from the warehouse at the railroad station, from the grain drill of the farmer, from his barn and, in fact, from all possible localities and positions. They have been selected by men not in any way interested and under oath or affirmation, as required by law. I am fully satisfied that they fairly represent the fertilizers which are being sold to consumers in our State. Of these samples 1,482 have been officially tested and reported upon and copies of the analyses sent to the manufacturers and published and distributed in bulletin form for the benefit of the consumer.

As has been the case heretofore, the year is necessarily divided into two distinct portions, which embrace the fertilizers intended for the spring and fall trade. Many manufacturers send out brands for the spring trade which differ in name and composition from those intended for application to wheat and other autumn crops, and from five to seven special agents have been employed in the selection of samples. Following this division of the year, I find that during the Spring portion, commencing April 1st, and ending May 15th, 550 samples were selected and are found with selling prices attached, in the following table:

During the fall or second portion of the season, the selections

amounted to 964 samples divided as follows:

By combining the two seasons and considering the year as a whole,

we have the classified results as follows:

During the year 1897 licenses were granted for 967 distinct brands of fertilizers, all of which were offered for sale in our State. As compared with 1896, the work of recording and licensing fertilizers shows the following totals:

With the number of agents, all working independently, there is, of course, more or less duplication of samples, especially of the leading brands; these samples, however, usually come from different portions of the State. In order to obtain a fair average test of the fertilizer as represented by the whole of these samples, Dr. Frear was requested to make "composite" samples by mixing all of the same brand and obtaining the composite sample from the mixture. This rule was applied to all samples of which there were two or more and in this manner 173 composite samples were obtained and tested. In making these, 465 distinct samples were used, the greatest number of any one brand being six.

There is probably no one of the numerous duties assigned to the Department of Agriculture which yields to the farmers of our State such immediate results at so little cost to them. It is estimated that we annually expend not less than $3,750,000 for fertilizers controlled by this law, and it is estimated that its results give our farmers a saving of ten per cent., or $375,000 per year. Inasmuch as the whole cost of the work is paid by license fees from manufacturers, the law is practically self-enforcing and causes no expenses to the taxpayers of the State.

FERTILIZER SUPPLIES.

When the act of June 28, 1879 (to regulate the manufacture and sale of fertilizers) became a law, farmers had not commenced to mix their own fertilizers but in anticipation of the fact that such a time would probably arrive, the law was so drafted that it would cover the

case.

Section first of the act provides: "That every package of commercial fertilizer sold, offered or exposed for sale for manurial purposes within this Commonwealth, shall have plainly stamped thereon the name of the manufacturer, the place of manufacture, and an analysis stating the percentage therein contained of nitrogen, or its equivalent in ammonia, in an available form, of potash soluble in water, of soluble and reverted phosphoric acid, and of insoluble phosphoric acid: Provided, That any commercial fertilizer sold, offered or exposed for sale which shall contain none of the above named constitu ents shall be exempt from the provisions of this act."

Section sixth provides that: "The term 'commercial fertilizer' as used in this act, shall be taken to mean any and every substance imported, manufactured, prepared, or sold for fertilizing purposes, except barnyard manure, marl, lime, and wood ashes, and not exempt by the provisions of section one of this act."

During the past year there has been a considerable increase in the use of home-mixed fertilizers and large amounts of nitrate of soda, sulphate of ammonia, sulphate of potash and similar single ingredient materials have been purchased by our farmers for the purpose of compounding their own fertilizers.

The trade has increased to such an extent that it would seem that this class of purchasers were entitled to as much and the same protection as those who purchase their fertilizers ready mixed. They are quite as liable to imposition in the composition of each ingredient as the other class are in the mixed goods, and it has been the desire of the Department to extend to them all possible and legal protection.

These "fertilizer supplies" are composed of one or more of the following ingredients as named in the act alluded to: Nitrogen or ammonia in an available form, of potash soluble in water, and of soluble and reverted phosphoric acid and of insoluble phosphoric acid," and are clearly within the limits of the first section of the law and are certainly not exempt under the sixth section, and the Department therefore held that they should be licensed and recorded according to law, and that they should be branded or marked in accordance with the provisions of its first section, as quoted above, but in order that there might be no mistake about it, the opinion of the attorney General was asked.

In reply to my statement of the question, the Deputy Attorney General gave the following opinion:

Harrisburg, Pa., August 10, 1897.

Hon. Thomas J. Edge, Secretary of Agriculture, Harrisburg, Pa.: Dear Sir: This Department is in receipt of your communication of recent date asking for instructions upon the question whether certain chemical compounds sold for fertilizing purposes should be branded

as required by the acts of 1879 and 1895. It seems very clear to me that the two acts above mentioned are intended to require such a marking of the packages or bags in which fertilizers are sold as will ensure protection to the purchaser thereof. Whether the fertilizers are mixed and sold by regular manufacturers, or are purchased in their chemical constituents and mixed afterwards, I think is not material so far as the proper marking of the packages or bags is concerned. It is the intention of the law to give proper notice to the purchaser of fertilizers of the constituents therein contained, and this can only be accomplished by requiring that all packages or bags containing fertilizers should be properly marked. It is my opinion that the Department is entirely right in its view of this question. Very respectfully yours,

(Signed.)

JNO. P. ELKIN, Deputy Attorney General.

Manufacturers of mixed fertilizers have, with some reason on their side, claimed that it was unjust that they should be compelled to license their mixed fertilizers and that those selling fertilizer supplies should be allowed to sell their goods on the old plan without a guarantee as to their composition or purity, and instanced the fact, already known to the Department, that, fertilizer supplies, known under exactly the same trade name, but varying considerably as to their value, were upon the market and were being purchased by farmers for the purpose of compounding their own fertilizers.

After a correspondence with some of the leading manufacturers of commercial fertilizers, not only in this State but also at the ferti lizer centres of the county, it was found that dealers in such supplies outside the State claimed that the inter-state commerce law protected their sales in Pennsylvania, and that the "original package decision" protected their sale after arrival in the State and until they reached the consumer.

In arriving at such a conclusion the dealers have probably failed to note the difference in the action between the ordinary trade regulations of a state and its police regulations; the act which regulates the manufacture and sale of fertilizers is a police and not a trade regulation, and it is claimed that, while it will not affect sales made from points outside the State to dealers or consumers in the State, it will not protect any sale made in the State, and that its protection ceases with the first offer to sell or sale made in the State.

This reasoning applies with equal force to goods brought into the State from foreign countries or imported goods; as soon as they cross the State boundary and are offered for sale in the State, they are subject and are regulated by the police laws of the State, and that while sales can be made, from points outside of the State direct to the con