act, the County Board of Agriculture in each county of this State, the State and Pomona Granges of Patrons of Husbandry, the State Agricultural Society and the State Horticultural Society shall each have power to select and appoint two directors to the State Board of Agriculture, who shall hold that office for two years, and that the State Board of Agriculture shall have the right and power to elect their officers and committees, or any of them, either from among the directors or from among any of the members of the Board who are not directors."

This act was approved March 10th, 1885.

The Executive Committee has prepared a programme for this meeting, which they hope will meet your approval and approbation. They have fewer papers and essays than they had on their programme a year ago. This change was in accordance with the express wish of a large number of the members of this Board, and in keeping with the judgment of the committee. The present programme will afford more time for a general discussion on all topics which come up before the meeting. The discussions will be reported in full, and they will be printed in the annual report.

When the subject of "Dairy Interests" is under discussion, it may be well to take up the matter of the present method of evading the law in the sale of oleomargarine, under what may be termed false pretenses, the details of which will be stated when the subject is under discussion. Another and very important matter is that of carrying on field experiments with special fertilizers, and keeping an accurate record of the same to be reported at these annual meetings. Such experiments, properly and intelligently conducted, would be of great value in helping to solve many knotty questions now unsettled.

Again, we have in our State a large surface of the very best land devoted to fruit raising. Among the lists of fruits which succeed in our State the pear is prominent. At present the largest profits are only realized by extending its season of ripening. This has been successfully accomplished by several large growers of pears in Essex county by means of retention houses, and ice as the agent. A description of the process would prove a profitable topic, if the meeting finds time to reach it before adjourning. With this brief history of the year's doings, and suggestions submitted for your consideration, with the earnest hope that the present meeting will be a success, we remain,. Yours very respectfully,

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF 1885.

Judge Holcomb.-In regard to the question of the English sparrow, I am very much interested. If the members would care to hear it, I would like to tell them my plan for getting rid of these pests. They became so bad and so troublesome that I tried this plan: I took cracked corn and soaked it in strong brine and scattered it around where the sparrows could get at it. In a few days the corn all disappeared, and the sparrows, too.

The Secretary. While that subject is up I would like to say one word. I understand there is an effort being made to repeal the law that was passed last year. In fact, the subject was under discussion I, as a fruit grower, would not like to see this present law. interfered with at this time.

in the Senate last night.

The Chair.—The Chair would like to hear the subject discussed. I think we should be heard on this subject before the Legislature before the subject is acted upon. Let the members speak their views on this subject fully and freely.

Mr. Williams, Essex.-I for one do not want to see the sparrow law repealed. I was very glad to see that the Legislature has passed a law about the sparrows. He is a very troublesome cuss [Laughter]— that is about what he ought to be called. You can't call him anything else. I understand there is to be an effort made to place the robin in the same class. If so, I would like to know what charges they can bring against him. If he has committed or been caught in any crime I would like to know of it. I think this is also a matter which may be profitably discussed here, with the sparrow question. The robin is included, as I understand it. The sparrow is among those we are now allowed to destroy. I understand there has been a law introduced in the Legislature at this session to place the robin on the same footing-in the same category as the sparrow. I hope this question will also be discussed while we are discussing the sparrow question.

Mr. Rogers, Essex.-I should be very sorry, indeed, to see the sparrow protected. In the West, but a short time ago, the cry among the farmers was that the sparrows must go, because they were making such depredations in the wheat crops, and other crops-that in fact they were becoming an alarming evil. I think there is no bird which causes more trouble to the seed and fruit grower and agriculturist than this same sparrow. As to there being any reason for the repeal of this bill passed last year so as to protect the sparrow again, I know of no reason, and if there is a reason why he should be placed on the list of the protected birds I don't know what it is.

Mr. Stiles, Sussex.-In reference to the robin question, I think there was a bill passed last Winter to protect song birds from slaughter, for the reason that a great many people came over into New Jersey and killed many of these birds to be used for the ornamentation of women's bonnets. This destruction has been carried on to such a very great extent that only last year in the New York State Horticultural Society an effort was made to get their Legislature to pass a law like that of New Jersey, to protect the song birds. The law passed in New Jersey is the first of its kind in the United States, and it is a good law. I learned last night that there has been a bill offered repealing this law, so far as the robin is concerned. I do not agree with those who claim that the robin is a bad bird, and the worst I ever saw of his doings was the picking off and eating of dangerous insects. The great trouble with some of these people who are crying out about the robin being a destructive bird or a dangerous bird is due to the fact that they make good pot-pie. They want him on the list of game birds, so they can get him for pot-pie. This is where the trouble lies, and if this Board sees fit to take action on the sparrow question, I think we should also take some action jointly on the robin question.

Judge Holcomb, Hunterdon.—I hope we will take some action, especially on the sparrow question. A short time ago one of the farmers in my neighborhood took the trouble and pains to ascertain that there were 800 farms in the county. Put the estimated damages by sparrows to each farm at $3.00, multiply the $3.00 by 800, and you will see the immense amount of damage done in our county by the sparrows. Three dollars is a very low estimate, and I do not think it would begin to pay me for all the damage they have done on my farm.

Mr. Crane, Essex.-I would like to ask upon what ground the repeal of this law is asked for.

The Chair. The Chair is unable to state the ground for repealing the law-in fact I did not hear until I arrived in town to-day that there was to be an attempt made to secure the repeal of this law. I am surprised that any effort should be made to kill off the robin. He is a very dear bird to me, and I am very fond of having him around my place. I am satisfied, although I am a lover of all birds, that the sparrow is a very great nuisance. I think the law passed making him a bird that might be killed whenever and wherever found was a good law, and a necessary one.

Mr. Forsythe, Burlington.-Mr. President, I would like to say one word in favor of the much-abused sparrow. I think they should be encouraged all that we can. He is a great help to us if we will but see it in the right light. If the farmer has never had any hope of getting rid of his surplus wheat, he can at least hope the sparrow will help him. [Laughter.] To dispose of our crops at a fair price is out of the question, so let us propagate those insects which will destroy our crops. [Laughter.] Let us dispose of our crops in this way and have a short crop to sell at a high price. That is better than a good crop and no sales. [Laughter.] I, therefore, speak one good word for the poor sparrow. [Loud laughter.]

Mr. Dye, Mercer.-I am opposed to this; the sparrow must go. He has driven out the wren and the blue birds and the robins-he has driven them away from my place. We know that the wrens and blue birds and robins are always busy, and we should endeavor to encourage them, but we put up boxes for the wrens and the sparrows drive them out and occupy the boxes themselves. Let us do away with the sparrow.

Mr. Burrough, Camden.-I am glad that this subject has been discussed so fully, and that so much information has been brought out, and so far from seeing the sparrow protected it is very evident that it is the sentiment of this Board that the sparrow is to have no protection-that he must go.

I wish to say, sir, that there is hardly a man within the sound of my voice who is more fond of birds than I am, or who is a greater lover of our native songsters. But this sparrow is a foreigner; he is not only a foreigner, but he is a depredator. [Applause.] He is driving away all our native songsters. Why, gentlemen, I prefer the crow to the sparrow. [Laughter.] As regards the sentiment of this Board as to the bill now before the Legislature, I would offer the following resolution:

Resolved, That in the estimation of the State Board of Agriculture the law of 1885, exempting the English sparrow from the protection of the insectivorous bird laws, meets our earnest and emphatic approval;

Resolved, That we hereby protest against any repeal of said laws, and we call upon our Legislature to aid us in their extermination.

Mr. Minch, Cumberland. There is a misunderstanding in regard to this law we have been discussing. I was present last night in the Senate and heard the proposed bill discussed at some length. The

intention of the bill is entirely different from what this Board has supposed; it is to protect the American and not the English sparrow. The bill does not refer to the English sparrow, nor to protect the robin. It makes the robin a game bird.

The Chair. I do not altogether understand you. Is there an English and an American sparrow? I was not aware that there were two different birds.

Mr. Minch. I understand that last year when the Board wanted the protection withdrawn from the English sparrow they supposed that the American and English sparrows were the same bird, and that was where the confusion arose. They are two birds, and the law is only referring to the American sparrow and has nothing to do with the present law in regard to the English sparrow.

Mr. Rogers.-There is a great difference between the American *parrow and the English sparrow. The American sparrow is an insectivorous bird. The English sparrow, on the other hand, is not. The Chair. I am obliged to you for the information. I was not aware that there was an English and an American sparrow.

Are you ready for the resolution presented by the gentleman from Camden?

Mr. Williams.-That we may protect the robin also?

The Chair. Is not the robin protected by the law as it now stands without any further action being necessary to secure his protection? Mr. Williams.-I offer as an amendment to that resolution, that we are opposed to the repeal of the present law, or any portion of it. The amendment was accepted.

Mr. Haines, Burlington.-I move to refer this resolution back to a committee for explanation, and let them present it at a future session of this Board.

The motion was carried.

The Chair appointed on this committee:

Mr. Burrough, Camden; Mr. Williams, Essex; Mr. Rogers, Essex.

Mr. Haines.-The Executive Committee, in making their report, have referred to another very important matter-a matter that is of importance not only to us, but to all the farmers throughout the United States. The question I refer to is that of the manufacture of oleomargarine or deceptive butter. Their reason for referring to this so strongly doubtless comes from a very significant fact, and that is that