STORING THE CROP.

Potatoes keep well, either in cellars or pits, if they are dry and in good order when harvested. It is better not to put too many in a pile or pit. They are more likely to heat, as also to sprout, in winter or early spring. They must also be entirely excluded from the frost. If they sprout in the cellar, shovel them over or remove them into a new box, bin or place.

Fergus Anderson moved that when the Convention take a recess, it be until half-past seven P. M., and that they then proceed to the election of members of the State Board of Agriculture. Carried.

A paper upon "Artificial Fish Culture" was next read by J. H. Klippart, of Franklin. (See Essays, in Part II. of this volume.)

DECLINATION.

D. MCMILLAN, of Greene: Some kind friend announced my name as a candidate for member of the State Board of Agriculture. I thank him for the compliment, but would state that circumstances are such that I could not serve.

W. P. Wickerham, of Highland, and A. H. Kling, of Marion, placed on file the following resolutions to be read at the evening session.

WHEREAS, A bill to provide for the removal of noxious weeds from the roadways, to prevent their spread over contiguous fields, was considered in the House of Representatives last winter, and failed to become a law; and

WHEREAS, The farmers of the State are greatly interested in proper legislation upon this subject; therefore,

Resolved, That a committee of five be appointed by the Chair, whose duty it will be to consider and report, by memorial, to the present General Assembly, at an early day, upon this subject; embodying in said memorial such recommendations as the said committee may decide upon, particularly with reference to the best time of cutting or mowing the weeds; also whether, in the opinion of said committee, the duty of removing weeds should devolve upon the owners of lands along highways bordering on said lands, or whether this duty should be committed to the supervisors of roads, and thereby involve a public expense.

On motion, a recess was then taken until 71 P. M.

EVENING SESSION.

The Convention re-assembled at 7 P. M., President Buckingham in the chair.

The Chair appointed Frank Browning, of Clinton, and W. E. Bolin, of Pickaway, tellers to canvass the vote.

President Buckingham remarked that he was much obliged to some friend for proposing his name as a candidate for the State Board. His associations for the last eight years with the members of the Board had been very pleasant indeed, but he must decline a re-election at the pres ent time.

The Convention then proceeded to ballot for five members to fill the vacancies in the State Board of Agriculture, with the following result:

The Chair announced that the number of votes cast was sixty-nine, necessary to a choice, 35, and that six candidates had received a majority of the votes cast, while only five were to be elected. After some little discussion, the Chair decided that the five candidates who had received the highest number of votes were elected.

On motion of W. B. McClung, it was declared the sense of the Convention that the five having received the highest number of votes were elected.

After this motion had been carried, Judge J. M. Pugh, of Franklin, called the attention of the Convention to the fact that there must have been fraud in the ballot just taken, as if each member of the Convention had voted but for five candidates, it would have been impossible for more than five to have received the number of votes necessary to a choice.

Major J. M. Millikin concurred in the opinion that the election was null and void, and the only way to correct the action of the Convention would be for some one who voted in the affirmative on the former motion to reconsider it.

Mr. McClung moved a reconsideration of the motion that had prevailed declaring the five persons receiving the highest number of votes elected. The motion was carried.

On motion of J. M. Millikin, the election just had was declared void, and the Convention proceeded to ballot again, with the following result:

Edwin Phelps.

D. McMillan

Wm. A. Humes..

17 1

Number of votes cast, 72; necessary to a choice, 37.

Messrs. Richmond, Stevens, Harmount, Warder and Sprague were declared elected.

Major J. M. Millikin offered the following:

Resolved, That the Legislature be requested to pass a law making it a tresspas to hunt over the inclosed grounds or possessions of another, subject to such penalties as may be nesessary to protect the public from the depredations of sporters and hunters and others with or without their dogs.

W. B. McClung thought that the passage of House Bill No. 39, for the protection of land-holders, would give them a fair protection, and offered as a substitute to Major Millikin's resolution the following:

Resolved, That we most respectfully ask the Legislature to enact House Bill No. 39 into a law.

By request, the provisions of the bill were read. The substitute was accepted by Major Millikin.

Mr. MCCLUNG said: There is no one measure that has come before this Convention in which the farmers or land-owners of this State are more directly interested than this. It is a notorious fact that there is a great deal of stock annually killed by persons who consider themselves hunters, who go over our farms destroying stock with perfect impunity. And it is farther known that when invited to go off of our grounds they not infre quently curse the owners of the land, and tell them to attend to their own business, and if their dogs are threatened they will reply to the owner of the premises, that if he shoots their dog they will blow his brains out. These men come out thus upon the farms, interrupting the peace and quiet to which the owners of the land and stock are entitled, and act as if they themselves owned the land, and as if the real owner had no right there. The dogs of the hunter pursue the quail, perhaps the sheep, or a flock of poultry, but it makes no odds so these men can train the dogs. Now, is it not a very fair proposition that the General Assembly of Ohio should protect these land-owners and farmers in their rights? Under the law as it is, farmers are compelled to give notice that they forbid persons hunting upon their grounds, and if they do not give this notice these hunters seem to think they can roam over their premises with impunity. Now, what right has any man to come upon another's premises and do that which every gentleman here knows is done every winter-hunting upon your grounds and destroying your stock in utter defiance of your requests to leave. In my judgment, there is no bill that would protect farmers in their rights as the enactment of such a law as contemplated in this bill

D. McMillan inquired if this bill could be brought up at this adjourned session, after having been defeated last winter.

R. C. THOMPSON, of Lucas. That bill passed the House with a fine majority, but when it came into the Senate it was defeated by just such gentlemen as those spoken of, who came down from Cleveland and some other cities to work against the passage of it.

us.

Judge T. C. JONES. The difficulty in regard to the passage of this bill is just what the gentleman from Lucas has stated. There is no reason why farmers should not have the same rights as other people have. It may be supposed by those who have had no experience in this thing that it is a small matter. But there is no country in the world where there is so much lawlessness in relation to game upon other people's property as with You have heard a great deal about the enormity of the game laws of England and the oppression and injustice worked to the farmers there. The farms in Europe are rented with the understanding that no one is to hunt over them but the owners of the land, and the owners in renting them reserve the right to hunt over them themselves. In England at this moment there is a great agitation over this very subject. By the way, they have just found out lately there that what the farmers want is education, general education, so as to enable them to present and defend their rights in these matters as well as others. While there the owners of the property have a right to the game, with us it is supposed that men have an absolute right to go upon the property of other men to hunt and shoot, with the liability to do great injury, as if the property was their own.

Nor is it in regard to the property upon the farm alone that this unwarranted liberty is taken. There is another mistaken idea that people have with reference to property in the country. As you travel along the road now you will find every tree almost and every fence daubed over with advertisements; just as if men had a right to come in the country and do what they pleased. No such idea prevails in respect to town prop. erty. Why is it that the rights of property of men in the country is not just as sacred as any other man's? I do not think because the Legislature at one time has refused to pass such a bill as will afford farmers the proper protection, that therefore they never can pass such a bill. Of course it can be introduced as a new measure. It may be this bill here can not be taken up, but any gentleman can introduce a bill just exactly like it any time he pleases, and they understand what we mean when we say we want this bill passed--that is, a bill of this sort. I hope members of the Legislature here will not understand by any thing I have said that I mean to censure their conduct at all. The Legislature of Ohio, as a rule, has been obedient to the wishes of their constituents. It is obvious that there should be such a law as would protect the farmers from the depredations

of those who go hunting over their grounds to amuse themselves, or from those persons who go into the country to kill all the game for the purpose of selling it, and from those who when ordered away threaten to shoot the owners of the land. The only thing that is asked by this measure, is that the country people shall have the same protection from depredations on their property that by universal consent is awarded to every other people.

ERWIN JOHNSON, of Ottawa. If we have a law to protect game which allows any one the privilege at certain seasons to kill it, of course they can devote any time or any amount of time to hunting, while the farmer can only take an hour, now and then, to kill a little game for his own use. And persons go hunting over all our grounds, killing all they possibly can, in defiance of us. Not three weeks ago, two men came out to my farm for the purpose of killing game, and were warned off by my son and a hired hand, and replied that they would stay as long as they had a mind to, and kill all the birds and quails they pleased-that they had a right to do so.

Now must we, when we send men here to make laws for our protection and for the benefit of the commonwealth of Ohio, petition for every law that should be made? We suppose that we elect men here that have brains, and who know what is right and what is wrong, and that they will make laws to protect the right and punish the wrong. If we as farmers, attending to our daily avocations, have to leave them to make a memorandum of the various laws that should be made, and get every body to sign petitions to have such laws passed as will protect our interests, it is time we had different men as members of the Legislature of Ohio. I hope the Legislature will see fit to pass a law that will protect the farmer as well as the game for the sportsmen.

Judge T. C. JONES. Last winter, two of these men came on to the place of a delegate here from my own county. His terriers ran out, and they shot one of them, and not long after another charge of shot was put through one of his horses' legs. It may be said that he could have had his remedy; but it was not known by whom it was done.

Mr. CARLISLE. I wish to state a few thoughts in reference to the county in which I live. The trespasses committed upon farmers are becoming almost too intolerable to be borne. A very respectable old gentleman, a neighbor of mine, ordered two worthless chaps off his premises. They said they would go off when they pleased. He threatened thereupon to shoot their dog. They replied, "If you shoot our dog we will shoot your dang'd old head off." This has incited our people to ask for protection against such trespassers, and they have petitioned the Legislature for a law like that mentioned by Mr. McClung, or one more stringent, having