56 



V. RURAL ECONOMICS. 



Most of ths topics under rural economics are too Inroad to l:>e included in a 

 brief course in agriculture, or too coniplex fr the comprehension of common 

 school pupils. It is thought, however, that some of the general principles of 

 marketing and farm accounts might be taoght in this connection. The main fac- 

 tors in marketing will probably be l)est considered in connection with the dis- 

 posal of particular jtroducts as indic.-ited above under plant production, animal 

 production, and dairying. TJie following topics are appropriate for this course: 



(1) Marketing. 



(8) Farm accounts. 



Preparation for market. 

 Choice of market. 

 Transportation. 

 Method and cost of sale. 



Feed and milk records. 

 Crop records. 

 Breeding records. 

 Inventories. 

 Bookkeeping. 



This to include only the most 

 general suggestions and a dis- 

 cussion of the importance of 

 keeping full and accurate rec- 

 ords. 



A. C. True, 

 H. H. Wing, 

 T. F. Hunt, 

 H. T. French, 

 J. F. Duggar, 



Committee. 



The report was accepted. 



The Social Phase of Agricultural Education. 



A paper on this subject was presented by K. L. Butterfleld, of Rhode Island, 

 as follows : 



I have been asked to speak in behalf of the study of " rural economics." This 

 term is. I presume, supposed to co\er broadly those subjects which treat of 

 the economic and social questions that concern farming and farmers. The 

 whole range of social science as applied to rural conditions is thus apparently 

 made legitimate territory for discussion. In view of the importance and char- 

 acter of this field of study, it seems wise to ap|)roach it. if possible, through the 

 avenue of its underlying i)hilosophy. Only in this way can the validity of the 

 subject be established and its place in agricultural education be justified. I 

 have therefore chosen as a specific title " The Social I*hase of Agricultural 

 Education." In the treatment of the topic an endeavor has been made to hold 

 consistently in mind the point of view of the agricultural college. 



It is a principle in social science that the method and scope of any social 

 institution depend upon its function. Therefore the organization, the methods, 

 and the courses of the agricultural college should be made with reference to the 

 function of the college. What is this function? What is the college designed 

 to accomplishV What is its social purpose? Why does society need the agri- 

 cultural college? Answers to these (pu'stions are of two kinds — those that 

 explain the contemporary ajid passing functions of the college, and those that 

 illustrate its i)ermanent and aliiding sei'vice to society and particularly to the 

 rural portion of society. The college of yesterday was obliged to train its own 

 teachers and experimenters ; to-day it may add the task of training farm 

 sui)erintendents ; to-morrow it may organize an adequate extension department. 

 Courses and methods will change as new contemporary needs arise, but there 

 remains always the abiding final service of the agricultural college — its per- 

 manent function. This function will be defined in different ways by different 

 men, but I venture to define it as follows: The permanent function of the agri- 

 cultural college is to serve as a .social organ or agency of first inq)ortanct> in 

 helping to solve all phases of the rural problem. We shall not attenqU at once 

 to argue this proi^osition. We niust, however, try to answer the question. 

 What is the rural i)roblem? And in the answer may be revealed, without need 

 of extended discussion, the mission of the college. 



(1) The days are going by when agriculture may be classed with the mining 

 industries. Soil culture is supplanting pioneer farming. Skill is taking the 



