FOURTH ANNUAL YEAR BOOK — PART I. 25 



The topic that has been assigned to me for discussion is "The Value 

 of Organization in Institute Work." I understand that in your State the 

 several counties have separate institute organizations; that the law fixes 

 the constitution of these organizations and the method of their support: 

 that there is no central authority to which these institutes are expected 

 to report, or that has supervision over their work; that each county insti- 

 tute is in fact an independent entity. 



I think that I am voicing your sentiments when I say that we are all 

 in favor of organization. Certainly our whole social system is based tipon 

 that principle. Our forefathers tried for awhile to get along without or- 

 ganization or union. The colonies, you will remember, did not co-oper- 

 ate until driven together by the war, of the Revolution. After the war 

 they realized the absolute necessity of centralization so that when 

 occasion demanded the whole power of the country could be concentrated 

 in a single direction. 



Our State governments have similar constitution; a central authority, 

 and then local organizations. Our coimties likewise are based upon the 

 same principle; a central or county organization, and then the townships 

 which take care of local affairs. We carry the same method into our 

 church government. The churches are organized upon the conviction 

 that the infltience of the societies will be much more powerful, and their 

 benefit to the public be much more beneficial if there is some central 

 controlling authority. In the light of our experience and practice in 

 state, and church, and business management there would seem to be no 

 good reason why our institutes should not be organized on the same basis. 

 Why there should be. lack of united effort and cooperation by institute 

 societies, and they continue independent of each other when in all other 

 affairs in which we desire the greatest efficiency we unite, is incompre- 

 hensible. 



Perhaps I can do no better in showing the value of central control 

 than by giving yoti one or two examples of things that institute organiza- 

 tion has accomplished. I have in mind one of the Eastern States that 

 had an institute organization similar to yours. When the institutes 

 started they were very much in the condition that they are now in your 

 State. The various cotmty organizations held their institutes independent 

 of each other. There was no central control. 



This condition of things lasted until about eight years rgo, when a 

 Department of Agriculture was organized at the Capitol of the State, In 

 organizing that Department it was provided that the Deputy Secretary 

 of Agriculture should be the Director of the Farmers' Institutes. To him 

 was committed the general oversight and control of the institute work, 

 and at the same time he was required to co-operate with the county agri- 

 culttiral societies and all similar county agricultural organizations in pre- 

 paring programs, selecting speakers and fixing upon places where insti- 

 tutes shall be held. 



Upon beginning the work under the new system there were several 

 things that it was found possible to imderlj.ke that were impossible 

 before, and it is to two of these that I desin to call your attention in 



