51 



than the students of the agricultural college. Michigan was also the first to make an 

 appropriation for farmers' institutes, as well as the first to establish a permanent insti- 

 tute system. It is also the only State that has held farmers' institutes continuously 

 for the past twenty-eight years. 



MINNESOTA. 



Farmers' institutes were not held in the State under the auspices of any governing 

 board nor were they .-supported ])y State funds until the year 1880. Prior to that date 

 the efforts that had been made to l)ring the farmers in touch with a higher agriculturd 

 education and with improved methods of farming had not been successful in any 

 marked degree. They looked at such an educat ion and at such methods with suspicion 

 and kept themselves and their sons at what they considered a safe distance from it. 

 The agricultural branch of the university languished. Overshadowed l>y the luxuri- 

 ance of the other branches, it could scarcely be seen. The university was virtually with- 

 out agricultural students. The farmers were not only not in sympathy with such an 

 institution, but a majority of them were hostile to it. In a word, a great gulf existed 

 between them and the higher education offered to their sons by the university. Before 

 anything could l)e done this gulf nnist be bridged over. The necessity for such a 

 bridge had much to do with the origination of the farmers' institute in Minnesota. 



Hon. H. E. Hoard, of Montevideo, was among the first to agitate in favor of farmers' 

 institutes in the State. In 1883 the annual meeting of the Xorthwestern Dairyman's 

 Association was held in Mankato. It was at that meeting that Mr. Hoard, A. H. Reid, 

 of Glencoe, and P. B. Netlleton, of Montevideo, became imbued with the idea that 

 farmers' meetings of some kind should be called occasionally in various parts of the 

 State for the discussion of topics relating to the farm. Meetings were held at Monte- 

 video and Glencoe, respectively, in 188J. 1885, and 1886. A bill was introduced into 

 tlie legislature of 1885 to appropriate §5,000 annually to sustain the institutes, but it 

 failed to pass. In 1886 a series of farmers' institutes was inaugurated by the agricul- 

 tural committee of the board of regents. Profs. E. Porter and O. C. Gregg were the 

 chief speakers at these meenngs. As the students had failed to attend the agricultural 

 classes at the university. Professor Porter concei-Ted the idea of going out among the 

 farmers and holding meetings in their midst. It was in support of this idea that an 

 appropriation of $1,000 was made by the agricultural committee of the university board 

 of regents to defray the expenses of the thirty-one institutes held in 1886. Many of 

 these meetings were in connection with county fairs, a most unsuitable place for hold- 

 ing institutes, as has since been proved by experience. Meanwhile Mr. Gregg had 

 been accustomed to hold what may be termed little institutes of his own at certain 

 fairs which he chanced to attend. They were convened in the open air, somewhere 

 near the cattle sheds. The theme was dairying, and more especially the dairy cow. 

 Ex-Governor Pillsbury, endeavoring to solve the problem of interesting the farmers 

 in higher education in agriculture, heard of this work and after a conference with 

 Mr. Gregg, requested his assistance in the work of establishing farmers' institutes in 

 the State. 



In February, 1887, Hon. H. E. Hoard, at that time a State senator, introduced intc 

 the legislature a bill providing for the continuance and maintenance of the farmers' 

 institute. The bill was championed in the house by the Hon. W. R. Estes, of Madelia. 

 The bill, as finally past, provided that §7.500 per annum should be devoted to farmers' 

 institute work. 



In 1889 the annual appropriation for institutes was increased to $10,000; in 1895 \>> 

 $12,500; later to $1,'^,500; then to $16,500; and in 1901 it was made $18,000 per year. 



The members of the first board of control were H. H. Sibley, president board of 

 regents; D. L. Kiehle, secretary board of regents; W. R. Merriam, president State 

 Agricultural Society; W. H. Denny, secretary State Agricultural Society; S. M. 

 Emery, president State Dairy Association; Frank D. Holmes, secretary State Dairy 



