EDITORIAL. 177 



In studying the system of jigricultural investigatiou and education 

 in France as portrayed by M. Tisserand, one is deeply impressed with 

 the clear distinctions which have been drawn between the institutions 

 for research and instruction. In France the experiment station is an 

 institution for the discovery of new truth. Even the scientific work 

 required iji the analysis of soils, fertilizers, and feeding stuff's, or other 

 work required for the protection of the farmers against fraud, is largely 

 done in separate institutions designated agricultural laboratories. The 

 stations are to find out what is now unknown, and their methods are 

 strictly scientific. When they have discovered and announced to the 

 world a new principle or a new application of well-known principles 

 which will benefit agriculture their duty is fulfilled. It then remains 

 for the teachers of agriculture to explain this new truth to their stu- 

 dents and hearers, for the i)ress to disseminate it, and for the model 

 field to make of it an object lesson which may be copied by the practi- 

 cal farmer. No doubt there arc many advantages in this thorough 

 classification of institutions for the advancement of agriculture. The 

 workers in each can concentrate their efforts on their duties, whether 

 they be of research or instruction, and there is a better opportunity for 

 the scientist to make thorough work of his investigations and for the 

 teacher or model farmer to consider the needs of his pupils and to' 

 adapt his methods of instruction to their requirements. In France it 

 would appear that somewhat more of sympathy between the scientist 

 and the farmer is desirable; in the United States the scientist should 

 be allowed to pursue his proper work without so much interruption to 

 answer questions which it should be the business of the schoolmaster 

 or the lecturer to explain to the farmer. 



