Farmers' Week in Agricultural College. 231 



again by the application of science, and, as in any industry when we 

 commence tlie application of science, that industry must be prepared 

 for by our colleges. It can no longer be taught by the apprentice 

 system. We must either recognize Home Economics in our college course 

 or else put the home on a static basis. If we are to dignify home 

 making as a profession and as a profession to which we want brought 

 all that is worth while from the sciences, then our girls must have 

 some training for this profession. 



If our girls are to have this training, most of them must get it in 

 the high schools, many even in the rural district school. We should make 

 a stand to have it taught there, and also in our girls' colleges, where 

 so much attention is paid to music and art. Is it not also worth while 

 that along with these accomplishments she should be taught some 

 of these principles which will apply later in home making — not just 

 cooking and just sewing, but the principles underlying these and other 

 household duties? But you may argue that the training as given 

 often times fails in after life. Your farmer fails under either of two 

 conditions — either if he simply does without knowing why or if he is 

 full of principles which he does not know how to apply. The same 

 is true of your Home Economics girls. She must both know how to 

 do and why she does. 



There is as much science needed in cooking as there is in phar- 

 macy. Sewing may be made an application of artistic principles as 

 truly as picture painting. Household sanitation will do more in the 

 conservation of the human race than hog cholera serum has done for 

 pigs. Economically about 80 per cent, of the world's income is spent 

 by women. Should they not be taught to spend it wisely? Is not 

 this as important to our general idea of conservation as the increase 

 of our crop of corn? But you may say a woman gets some of this by 

 experience. Let me quote you a few words from an article written 

 by a graduate of one of our women's eastern colleges: "But I resent 

 bitterly the fact that during the eight principal years of my educa- 

 tion when I had, if anything, too much leisure, no responsibility, a 

 receptive mind, an unimpaired nervous system and a great adapta- 

 bility, I was not at least in the last four years, in connection with 

 other technical information — none of which I have ever happened 

 to use except as everything one has read probably affects one's char- 

 acter — constantly receiving some training that would have saved me 

 hours and weeks and what will probably amount to years of painful 

 and in every sense expensive experiment." 



But what is to be the part of the University Department of Home 

 Economics? First of all, its purpose is the training in home making 



