The Oats crop of 30,958,768 acres, with an average yield of 291 bushels per acre, making a total of 964,904,522 bushels, at an average price of 31.7 cents per bushel; total value of same being $306,292,978 for oats alone.

Next comes Barley, there being 6,323,757 acres at an average yield of 28.3 bushels per acre, making a total of 178,916,484 bushels, at an average of 41 cents per bushel, making $74,235,979 for that crop.

The next crop in value comes Rye. Now, I do not think they base their estimate on this crop from what it costs the consumer when made into whiskey and sold at from 10 cents to 15 cents per glass-and if you notice, the glasses are not as large either-but we find the total acreage to be 2,001,904 acres, making an average of 16.7 bushels per acre, which makes 33,374,833 bushels at an average of almost 60 cents per bushel, making $19,671,243 for rye alone.

Buckwheat, considered by a large number of farmers as not a profitable crop, shows up an acreage of 789,208 acres average bushels per acre 13.6, making a total of 14,641,737 bushels, valued at 59.6 per bushel, making $8,727,443 worth of buckwheat.

Of Flaxseed there were 2,505,927 acres, making an average of 10 1-5 bushels per acre, or a total of 25,576,146 bushels, at an average of $1.012 per bushel, making a sum equal to $25,899,165. And the Rice crop shows an acreage of 575,014 acres, at an average of 31.1 bushels, making 17,854,768 bushels, at an average of 90.2 cents per bushel, making the sum of $16,121,298.

The state that shows the largest acreage of corn is Illinois, 9,616,886 acres. The state showing the lowest number of acres is Wyoming, 2,528 acres. Ohio ranks first in number of bushels per acre, 42.6, and good old Pennsylvania third. Florida, the lowest, with 11 bushels per acre. Iowa produced the greatest number of bushels, 373,275,000, and Wyoming the lowest, 68,256 bushels. Arizona, the highest price per bushel, 85 cents. Oklahoma, the lowest, which was 30 cents per bushel. Illinois ranks first in the value of the corn crop, being a total of $124,981,051, and Wyoming the lowest, $40,271. Kansas leads in acreage of winter wheat, with 5,131, 800 acres, and Alabama the lowest, with 1,761 acres. Idaho leads in the number of bushels per acre, which is 25.4, and North Carolina lowest, with 9.1 bushels per acre. Kansas leads in the total number of bushels, having 78,516,540, and Mississippi the lowest, with only 17,610 bushels. South Carolina shows the highest average price per bushel, with $1.10, and Oklahoma the lowest, 55 cents per bushel.

In Spring Wheat growing states, North Dakota leads in acres, with 5,992,000, and Arizona lowest, with only 15,542 acres. Colorado has the greatest number of bushels per acre, 324, and Minnesota the lowest, being 10.9 per acre. North Dakota leads in the total number of bushels, having 77,896,000, Arizona lowest, with 391,658 bushels, and she also leads with the highest average price per bushel, being $1.03, and Nebraska the lowest, at 57 cents per bushel. North Dakota leads in the total amount of dollars, with $49,074,480, and Arizona lowest, with $403,408 to her credit.

Oats is produced in every State and Territory of the United States. Iowa leads in the number of acres sown, with 4,165,000 acres, and Arizona lowest with only 914 acres. Utah leads in aver. age of bushels to the acre, being 43.7 per acre, and Florida the low

est, with 14 bushels, per acre. Iowa produced the greatest number of bushels, having 140,777,000, and Arizona the lowest, with 31,442 bushels. Florida had the highest average price per bushel, being 68 cents, and South Dakota the lowest, with 25 cents per bushel. Jowa leads in total amount of dollars, being $38,009,790 to her credit. In the Barley growing States and Territories California leads in number of acres, with 1,425,000 acres, and New Mexico the lowest, with 556 acres. Utah leads with the highest number of bushels per acre, being 44 bushels, and New Hampshire the lowest, with 21.4 per acre. California leads in the total number of bushels, with 38,760,000, and New Mexico the lowest, with 15,072 bushels. Arizona shows the highest average price per bushel, being 76 cents, and Nebraska the lowest, with 31 cents per bushel. California leads in dollars, having $20,930,400 to her credit, and New Mexico the lowest, having $9,458.

All but ten of the States and Territories produce rye, Michigan having 400,000 acres, leads, and Wyoming only 428 acres. Idaho has the best average per acre, being 25 1-5 bushels. Georgia, the lowest, having only 8.2 bushels per acre. Pennsylvania leads in total number of bushels, having 6,025,011 bushels to her credit, and Wyoming the lowest, with only 8,132 bushels. South Carolina having the highest average price per bushel, being $1.25, and Nebraska the lowest, with only 44 cents per bushel. In total value of crops Pennsylvania leads, having to her credit $3,856,007, and Wyoming the lowest, having $5,855 to her credit.

Buckwheat is grown in only twenty-four or twenty-five states. New York leads with 321,552 acres, and Tennessee lowest, with 527 acres. Maine has the highest average bushels per acre, being 28 bushels, and Iowa the lowest, with 12 bushels. New York has the greatest number of bushels, 6,109,488, and Tennessee the lowest, having 8,432 bushels. Tennessee also has the highest average price per bushel, being 83 cents, and Minnesota the lowest, at 54 cents per bushel. New York leads in dollars, having $3,726,788 to her credit, and Nebraska the lowest, having $8,007.

Flax is raised in thirteen to fifteen states. North Dakota leads, with 1,465,745 acres, and California lowest, with 1,042 acres. Wissonsin has the highest average yield of seed per acre, being 14 bushels, and Missouri lowest, with 7.3 per acre. North Dakota leads with total of 14,510,876 bushels, and California lowest, with 12,504 bushels; California and Oregon having the highest average price per bushel, $1,25, and Idaho the lowest, with 85 cents per bushel. North Dakota leads the list with the value of $14,801,094, and California the lowest, with $15,630. About nine states grow rice. Louisiana leads the list, with 308,377 acres, and North Carolina the lowest, with 668 acres. Texas gave the largest yield of rough rice per acre, which is 36 bushels, and Mississippi the lowest, with 20 bushels per acre. Louisiana has the greatest number of bushels, 8,634,556, and North Carolina the lowest, with 19,305 bushels. South Carolina, Florida and Alabama have the same average price of $1.00 per bushel, and Arkansas the lowest, at 85 cents per bushel. Louisiana has the largest total value, being $7,771,100, and North Carolina the lowest, with $18,340.

Taking the total value of these crops they are immense, making a grand total of $2,107,906,860.

The CHAIRMAN: What shall be done with this report?

On motion, duly seconded, it was received and filed for publication.

The CHAIRMAN: Some of the reports have been omitted. The first of these is the report of Dr. Leonard Pearson, State Veternarian, who is now with us, and will read his report.

Dr. Pearson's report is as follows:

REPORT OF THE VETERINARIAN.

BY DR. LEONARD PEARSON, Harrburg. Pa.

The subject of tuberculosis continues to be one of chief interest in connection with the veterinary work of the State. It is a little embarassing, sometimes, to speak on this rather threadbare theme to this body, that has in recent years heard so much about it. But, so long as there is such need for information in respect to this disease, and I find evidence of it in my daily work, I am sure that you will not resent a brief discussion of it. While the general topic of tuberculosis is an old one, a vast number of men are making investigations in relation to its occurrence in man and animals, and so, from time to time, new facts concerning its nature and new developments in means to combat it are being brought to light.

I take it that the plan of operation of the State Livestock Sanitary Board is known to you, and it has been described in the annual reports of the Department of Agriculture. You are aware that inspections and tuberculin tests of herds are made only upon request of owners of cattle. It has been the opinion of the Board that there is no permanent advantage to the State in completely freeing herds of tuberculosis, by the use of the tuberculin test, and in undertaking a large share of the cost of such operations, if the herds are permitted soon to become reinfected. And it is quite impossible, excepting at enormous expense-by the use of much more money than is at all likely to be made available for this purposeto keep herds free from infection unless the public authorities have the co-operation-the active assistance of the owner. Hence, such inspections are made only upon application from herd owners. But, under a new law (No. 56, P. L., 1905), it has become possible to deal with all cases of advanced tuberculosis of cattle that are reported. Still, there is no organization for searching for such particularly dangerous animals, and I regard this the point that next requires consideration.

While we have found that the majority of farmers are alert to the importance of excluding tuberculosis cattle from their herds, and many report tuberculosis when examination shows that this disease does not exist, there are others who are so careless as to keep and use cows with advanced tuberculosis, even with tuberculous udders, and permit such cows to scatter germs of disease for months, until their entire herds become infected-to say nothing of poisoning the milk supply.

Tuberculous cows are dangerous in proportion to the number of tubercle bacilli that are escaping from their bodies. Advanced

cases of disease excrete infinitely more germs than light cases, hence the advanced cases constitute the greatest menace to the live stock industry and the public health. For the purpose of discovering and extirpating these particularly dangerous animals, a systematic inspection of dairy herds is necessary. I have been loth to recommend such an inspection, because I know how unpopular the idea of inspection is. It should be remembered, however, that it is not fair to the careful, clean dairyman to have to compete in the market with a man who has no pride in his work, or regard for the quality or wholesomeness of his product. And it is unfair to permit the worst managed herds to reach such a degraded state as to cast reflection on the whole milk supply. I feel that unbiased consideration of this suggestion must lead to the conclusion that objections to it are based chiefly on sentimental grounds.

Remember that it is not proposed to use the tuberculin test in connection with this inspection, unless it should be necessary to do so to remove doubt in relation to the condition of individual animals. To propose to test all herds with tuberculin would be absurd, and such a suggestion could not be made by any one who knows what he is talking about.

If such an inspection is provided for, the inspectors should, and no doubt would, feel that they are selected to aid, and not to oppress; to assist, and not to hamper; to co-operate, and not to oppose. It would—and I speak advisedly, and from long experience— be in the rarest case that the inspector would have to make the least show of authority. Such inspectors would be of great value to dairymen as peripatetic advisors in relation to the control of other diseases of importance, as abortion, calf cholera, infectious gargets, etc., and in relation to general questions of animal, stable and milk hygiene.

In New York State, there are a dozen or more dairy inspectors appointed by the city of New York, and a project is being considered to increase this corps to nearly one hundred. Such inspectors, appointed and paid by a city, have in mind, first and foremost, the interests of the city. The farmer is not helped by such men-unless most incidentally-and, indeed, one could scarecly expect appointees of Tammany Hall to be able to render much help to farmers, if they would.

If there is to be such an inspection, it should not be conducted by the cities, but by a department of the State government that is affiliated with the agricultural interests of the State, so that it will be with, and not against, the best agricultural sentiment. But, of course, the organization must be of such character that it will meet the very proper and growing sentiment in cities for a purer and more wholesome milk supply.

There are numerous other subjects that I might report to you, but I esteem this to be one of such importance that I wish not to obscure it by other topics. Moreover, I wish to be brief now, because I am on the program for another paper at another session. I hope this subject will receive careful consideration at the hands of this representative body.

A Member: Has there been any attempt made to vaccinate calves?

DR. PEARSON: The vaccination of calves in our experiment work has been very successful. We are now practicing it very freely on quite a number of farm herds throughout the State.

A Member: Is it a protection?

DR. PEARSON: I think it is a protection for the time, but for just how long I do not know. A German authority has stated that the protection is for life; I criticised it, and was severely criticised myself for it; I said it was ridiculous to claim that it protected for life when it had only been tried for a few years. And French tests show that the immunity expires after a certain time, and then the animal is liable to contract the disease. They have found by their experiments that the animal is usually protected for about three years. They have proven this by putting the vaccinated animals in among a herd in which there are some advanced cases of tuberculosis, and noting results, and animals that have been vaccinated for more than that length of time, and which are exposed, show decided lesions of tuberculosis. I find, however, that animals should be re-vaccinated after a period of two years. I look upon the whole treatment as exceedingly interesting and instructive, and of great importance to the farmer.

MR. VAN ALSTYNE: I would like to ask the Doctor how expensive it would be to the farmer?

DR. PEARSON: All the herds that are now being vaccinated are treated at the expense of the State.

MR. VAN ALSTYNE: Exactly what will be the cost to the farmer where the State does not pay for it?

DR. PEARSON: Well, if the Live Stock Board continues to conduct the work it will not be more expensive in the future than it is now; I do not know whether this will be done, but I think it ought to be.

MR. VAN ALSTYNE: But what will it cost the farmer now? DR. PEARSON: It does not cost anything; the State does it for you.

MR. VAN ALSTYNE: Exactly; but if the State did not do it, what would it cost the farmer?

DR. PEARSON: I do not know what the veterinary surgeon would charge for doing the work, but that would be the chief cost.

The CHAIRMAN: Are there any further questions to ask the Veterinarian? If not, what disposition shall be made of his report? It was regularly moved and seconded that the report be received and placed on file. Agreed to.

The CHAIRMAN: As Chairman of the Committee on Credentials, I would say that the Lancaster Agricultural Society has elected Hon. W. H. Brosius a member of the Board for the next three years, and I would move that he be elected a member of the Board. Duly seconded, and agreed to.