The impossibility of securing a sufficient number of capable and satisfactory farm hands in these days, when the majority of young men are turning to the populous centers for their livelihood, is perhaps the most compelling reason why machines which can be substituted for manual labor are a decided advantage to the up-to-date farmer. Their adoption as a part of the permanent equipment for the farm should render their owner comparatively independent of some of the problems of supply and demand for farm labor, the solution of which problems is an important factor in determining the success or failure of the farmer who disposes of his produce in open market. This condition is supplemented by a commendable tendency for farmers to live better, to place the home life of the farm on a higher plane, and to make farming a means of pleasurable livelihood rather than the mere eking out of a bare subsistence from the products of the soil. These conditions, together with the greatly improved quality of illumination and convenience which electricity affords, are creating a growing demand for a reliable and reasonably economical source of energy with which to supply both light and power on the larger estates and farms. [Illustration: Motor Lifting a Ton of Hay, Hydro-electric Power] [Illustration: Electric Toaster] That electric light is much cleaner and more convenient than kerosene lamps must, of course, be admitted by all. It must also be admitted that a kerosene lamp of any considerable illuminating power has also certain heating propensities which render it an unpleasant companion on a warm summer evening. However, when it comes to a consideration of mere dollars and cents, there seems to be a widespread belief that kerosene as a source of illumination is cheaper than electricity. Statements to this effect are too often allowed to go uncontradicted, and too many people accept this view without taking the trouble to investigate. It is a comparatively simple matter to compare the cost of the two kinds of light, knowing as we do exactly how much current an electric lamp of a certain filament and candle-power will consume. Such a comparison will frequently result in a choice of electricity as the cheaper light. In many cases the selection of electricity to supplant kerosene lamps would result in no considerable saving of money, but would do away with considerable inconvenience and furnish much better illumination. If cost is the controlling consideration, the comparison cannot always be so much in favor of electricity. An important consideration, often overlooked, is that with electric lights the interiors of living rooms do not require such frequent repapering or refinishing as they would require with kerosene illumination. [Illustration: Motor-driven Sewing Machine]