No. 63. j 301 



The reports from Ausable and Cliazy siin})ly state that there was 

 only one farm in each town presented, neither of which was exa- 

 mined. 



The above are the only premiums awarded on farms. The com- 

 mittees for the remaining towns making no reports, it was presumed no 

 other farms were olfered. This is much to be regretted, as also the 

 very small number of applicants in the towns which were represent- 

 ed. The premiums offered, it is true, atlord in a pecuniary sense, 

 but a scanty compensation for the trouble, (if it be regardetl such,) 

 of preserving the necessary memoranda, and making out the required 

 " statement." Still it were to be hoped that in this flourishing coun- 

 ty, a very large number of intelligent and practical farmers might be 

 found, whose zeal for the promotion of the public good is not to be 

 estimated in dollars and cents; whose co-operation in public measures 

 for such an object, would be promptly and cheerfully rendered, even 

 though it promised no returns by way of private benefit; and doubt- 

 less many such there are. Why then were they not out] Are there 

 no more th^n thirteen good farmers in Clinton county] This certain- 

 ly cannot be. The publishing committee do indeed feel confident that 

 there are several times that number whose farms and farm manage- 

 ment would have entitled them to a respectful hearing. And it is to 

 be hoped that in future the number of competitors may be greatly in- 

 creased. The object of the Society, in this department of its mea- 

 sures, is certainly laudable; and we cannot doubt, that if promptly 

 and efficiently seconded by individual effort, it would prove a means 

 of advancing the private mterests of those engaged in it, and of ag- 

 riculture in general, to a degree hitherto unknown in this county. 

 From the tardiness which has been »nanifested by farmers generally 

 in reference to this measure of the Society, it would seem that its 

 object has not been fully understood. In agriculture, as in every 

 other pursuit, knowledge gained by practice is a treasure of inestima- 

 ble worth. Who is there amongst us that would be willing to part 

 with the knowledge thus accjuired during a single year, for any con- 

 sideration. If, then, one year's experience be of so much worth, of 

 what inestimable value is that volume of experience which may be 

 treasured up during an active life of forty or fifty years! But is not 

 the experience of forty practical f^irmers during a single year, worth 

 as much as that of one during a period of forty years? And why may 

 not farmers, in this " rail-road age," when every thing else " goes 

 by steam," take a hint and apply to their mutual benefit the experi- 

 ence of each other which is already acquired, as well as plod on in- 

 dependently, each in his own way, a period of forty years, to 

 learn a hundredth part as much? It was to open a channel through 

 which this principle might be carried into practical effect — in other 

 words, it was to render the experience of our best practical farmers 

 available to the benefit of others less expeiienced, that the premiums 

 on farms were offered. It was also with special reference to this same 

 end, that applicants for such premiums were required to render full and 

 explicit statements of their management in conducting their farming 

 operations, and of the results. It is however, to be regretted that 



