out there, with the exception, I think, of one year. Mr. Harvey, the first superintendent at the Eastern experimental farm, refused to inaugurate them. When Mr. Carter resigned, and Mr. Shelmire took charge of the farm, he, through instruction from the local committee in Chester county, plowed up the lots and destroyed them so far as future experiments of the original programme were concerned.

Q. Did the board of trustees recognize such authority to exist in the local committee?

A. As I understood it, they did not.

Q. Did the local committee make any effort to modify the instructions of the board of trustees?

A. No, sir; their instructions to the superintendents to plow up the plots were unauthorized.

Q. Did the board of trustees acquiesce in this new arrangement, or did they dismiss the local committee?

A. The result of it was the local committee resigned.

Q. What year did this conflict of authority occur in?

A. 1879 and 1880.

Q. Is there a local committee now in existence in connection with this experimental farm?

A. Not with that farm; with the Indiana farm there is.

Q. Is that found to be a useful addition to the running of the farm? A. It was supposed by the trustees that the local committee would take special interest in the running of that part of the farm, upon which no programme of experiments had been impressed by the board, and that the superintendents of the farm farmed the balance of the farm according to the principles and practices of good husbandry, and that they would audit his account at the end of the year, and make report to the board of trustees with regard to the running of the farm outside of the experiments that were prescribed by the board.

Q. That was the expectation. How was that expectation realized in practical operations?

A. In Chester county the local committee seemed to take a great deal of interest in the farm. In Indiana county not so much. There the local committee part of the time consisted simply of the trustee, residing near the farm, and at other times consisted of the trustee and a member or president of the agricultural society. And at the college the committee were the professor of agriculture and the president of the Centre County Agricultural Society.

Q. Now, Mr. Hamilton, you have stated to the committee that a portion of these experimental farms was devoted to actual experiments, and that the balance was placed under the care and management of the local committee. May I inquire the amount that was devoted to experiments?

A. About thirty acres of each farm was devoted to experiments; the balance was to be run as a model farm. More than thirty acres at one time was in experiments upon the central farm.

Q. How did the model farm experiments turn out in each case?

A. Well, I think, with regard to the central experimental farm, that it is in better condition than it was when it was purchased. I know that it is in a good deal better condition than it was. In Chester county I should suppose that the portion farmed as a model farm is no worse, at all events. Q. Has any benefit been derived from that portion of the farm that you term model farm?

A. Why, yes; the community derive benefit from that portion.

Q. Have they been of any practical value so far as information to the public is concerned?

A. Well, the purpose of the model farm is to conform as nearly as possible to the name that is given, " The Model Farm."

Q. You say that was the purpose; does it in fact come up to the expectation?

A. No, sir; I do not think they come up to the expectation. I think the expectation of the public, as a rule, is that they should be kept as parks, rather than practical farms; but I consider the model farm a profitable farm.

Q. Take it in that aspect of the case, have they proved profitable-you have stated that they did pay something of a revenue on the amount of money invested? Would a practical farmer consider it paying anything at all on the investment, if it paid as little as the model farms paid in the way of revenue?

A. The farms expend all that they raise in their own improvement and for maintaining themselves, and, like most farms, do not pay a large interest on the investment.

Q. I understand you have stated in some portion of your answers to interrogatories, that there were certain revenues derived from these model farms. Now, I ask you, does that represent a paying investment; in other words, if you had, as a practical farmer, a farm that yielded you no more than this model farm, would you consider that farm a paying business? A. I think, so far as the Central Experimental farm is concerned, it has been fully as productive as any in our community.

Q. How is it as to the other two?

A. In Indiana the farm is not in good condition. In Chester county I see no reason why it should not be as productive as other farms around there. I think it is.

Q. You say that in Centre county and Chester county the farms are fully as productive as other farms in that vicinity. But on the amount of money invested, actual cash value of the ground, taking the entire investment and the possible return on that investment, do you consider these farms a paying investment to the practical farmer; would you consider the return on that portion of the farm which is used and called the model portion, profitable? State whether the return on that investment would make it a paying investment.

A. Well, with regard to the Central farm, I believe just as I have stated, that the product of the soil is equal to that of neighboring farms that pay their owners a liberal remuneration. It must be taken into account that these farms must first pay a salary to the superintendents.

Q. You count that part of the revenue derived from the farms?

A. He gets his salary, and the men we employ upon those farms, as common laborers, are more expensive men than an ordinary farmer keeps upon his farm, because of the necessity for extreme accuracy in the carrying on of the experimental operations of the farm; and the consequence is, that the expense of keeping up the model part of the farm is greater, because of the fact that there is that experimental portion attached to it; and besides, it is expected, upon a model farm, that the implements, animals, buildings, &c., shall all be in prime condition. If this is done upon an ordinary farm, to any great extent, there would not be a very large revenue in the pocket of the farmer at the end of the year. With regard to the Eastern farm, I think that they paid their superintendent too large a salary for the requirements of the situation. The farms have had to have an appropriation each year, in addition to their other income, in order to maintain themselves.

No account, so far as I know now, was kept with the model part of the farm so as to answer your question from figures. I can only give you what I believe to be the fact, that the Eastern and Central farms are productive, but they are necessarily attended with greater expense in carrying them on than would be incurred upon an ordinary farm farmed in the usual way. Where a man superintends his own laborers and is willing to use ordinary cheap labor, and often an insufficient quantity of it, he will doubtless have more cash on hand at the end of the year than if he hires a superintendent and skilled labor. At times it is found necessary, on those farms, to employ quite a number of men in order that the products may be harvested promptly, and that the operations be performed as nearly together as possible. This is attended with considerable more expense than would be necessary upon an ordinary farm.

Q. What disposition is made with all the products of these farms? A. The farms are permitted to use their own income for the purpose of maintaining themselves.

By Mr. Alexander:

Q. You stated that in 1879 the local committee in Chester county resigned. How has that farm been managed since that time?

A. During 1879, up to April 1, 1880, Warren Shelmire was superintendent. On the 1st of April, 1880, Mr. J. F. Hickman, a graduate of the college, was appointed superintendent, and he is at present upon the farm, and is directed in his operations by the professor of agriculture at the college.

Q. Has he re-organized the experimental plots-that system as prescribed by the board of trustees?

A. After the plots upon the Eastern farm had been plowed up, I, as professor of agriculture, was directed by the executive committee of the board of trustees to make out a new programme of experiments, to be entered upon by all these farms, to be submitted to the executive committee of the board of trustees for approval before going into effect. I made out such programme, and it was adopted by the executive committee of the board of trustees, and ordered to go into operation. It was claimed by the superintendent upon the Eastern farm that it was too late in the season to undertake it, but upon the Central farm, the part of it that could be undertaken in the spring was entered upon, and in the autumn of that year the entire programme was in operation upon the Central Experimental farm. It was never, I believe, put into operation on the Eastern farm. The midsummer of that year there was some difficulty between the superintendent and myself with regard to matters of management. I was partly in charge at the time, and was awaiting the election of a new professor of agriculture, and so this programme never went into operation upon the Eastern farm. When Mr. Hickman was appointed superintendent, and Professor Jordan had been elected Professor of Agriculture, another programme was made out by Professor Jordan, and put in operation on the Central farm and Eastern farm.

Q. How about the Western farm, the programme of experiments? A. The original one prescribed by the board of trustees was impressed upon the Western farm, and for a number of years was attempted to be carried out, but it was found out that the experiments were of little value, inasmuch as some of them were upon upland and some of them upon low land that was wet, and consequently there could be no comparison, and in winter the grain would freeze out whilst the grass crop would show very well. It was considered, after several years of trial, by the board inadvisable to continue the experiments there in the form they had been pre

scribed, until the land had been properly drained. The board were in financial difficulty at the time; there was no money to drain the land, and so the matter was continued up to the present time; and there are, therefore, no experiments conducted upon the Western Experimental farm. If the farm is continued at all, something, I doubt not, will be done to bring it into condition to carry out this system of experiments that has been prescribed.

By Mr. Hall :

Q. Do you mean this spring?

A. No, sir; I suppose not this spring.

You understand I am not pro

fessor of agriculture now, and so can not speak for the future. By Mr. Newmyer:

Q. Still you are familiar with the operations of the farm?

A. Yet I cannot speak as to the operations in the future.

By Mr. Alexander :

Q. In your opinion is it necessary that three experimental farms should. be maintained?

A. I do not think it is necessary at present.

By Mr. Roberts :

Q. What is your idea as to that; whether or not three experimental farms will be more beneficial to the science of agriculture than one, taking into consideration the difference in soil in the Western farm, Central and Eastern farms, and taking into consideration the means that the college has at its disposal to conduct these three farms?

A. It would depend a great deal, of course, upon how these farms were conducted. My idea of the kind of work that should be done upon these farms is somewhat different from that which has been done upon them, and would require a larger expenditure of money than has been expended upon any one of them. If but one farm were established I think we could establish a station such as is found in some European countries for advancing the science of agriculture, and equip that station with men of attainments in the various departments of science, and conduct experiments not only in the soil but upon cattle feeding and fertilizers and investigation of the various manufactured products, foods, &c., and so advance the cause of agriculture in Pennsylvania through a higher kind of experimentation than what has been conducted heretofore.

By Mr. Newmyer:

Q. What do you mean by station?

A. Perhaps you could get my idea better, Mr. Newmyer, by reading an article that I have written on the subject and published in the Agriculture of Pennsylvania for 1880.

Q. You do not mean by a station necessarily a farm?

A. A farm should be connected with it in order to carry on experiments in agriculture.

By Mr. Roberts:

Q. It would be strictly an experimental farm, and greater consideration extended to the experiments?

A. Yes, sir, and the subject of them would be much wider. My idea is that experiments that are conducted there should be accurately conducted and no expense should be spared to get at accurate results, even to the analyses of products. And in order to scientific investigation, it would be necessary to conduct it by scientific men, skilled in the various departments of science. It seems to me, were such a station established it could be more economically managed by placing it near a college and requiring

the professors to do most of this scientific work, and then publish and distribute their reports as widely as possible.

By Mr. Alexander:

Q. If you had a sufficient amount of money, however, would it not be better to have three experimental stations than one? Is it not a question of dollars and cents?

A. I think it would be better, but I doubt whether it would be enough better to justify the additional expense.

By Mr. Newmyer:

Q. With the present resources, does it justify you in maintaining three experimental farms?

A. I think not, sir.

Q. Will you please give the number of pupils in attendance last year? A. In the catalogue, 1880 and 1881, it is one hundred and sixty-four. Q. In all departments?

A. Yes, sir.

By Mr. Roberts:

Q. What proportion of these are in the collegiate department?

A. I cannot tell.

By Mr. Newmyer:

Q. Can you give us the average length of the attendance of the students at the college?

A. No, sir; I cannot tell.

By Mr. Alexander:

Q. I do not think you answered Mr. Newmyer's question as fully as the question deserves, Mr. Hamilton. You have stated in your answers to interrogatories the number of graduates of the institution within a certain period of years. Can you account for the comparatively small percentage of students who graduate and complete their course?

A. I think there are various reasons. In the early part of the history of the institution, I think that it was due to what seems to me now to be a mistaken policy that was adopted at that time, in the matter of labor; that students, in some instances, were dissatisfied with what they considered an excessive amount of practical work.

Q. Labor required?

A. I think another reason is the limited circumstances, financial circumstances, of a good many of our students, who were on that account unable to complete the college course.

Q. Not by reason of the actual expense, but by reason of the loss of time?

A. Time and expense.

Q. Do you know, Mr. Hamilton, whether or not the curriculum laid down in the catalogue is rigidly adhered to?

A. I believe that the curriculum as laid down in that circular is carried out in every particular.

Q. Do you not require students to perform practical farm work?

A. I believe they are not, on the farm, now. They work in the garden, and in the orchard and in the vineyard and on the campus.

Q. Is that required or optional?

A. It is required. The rule is that each of these classes of students, during the entire time that they are engaged upon their practicum work, shall be superintended by a professor. And the value of the system of practicums lies in the instruction feature. The student works not for profit to the college, but for instruction or information for himself.

Q. Practical instruction?