200 THE FARMER AND THE NEW DAY 



viction against the policy of centralized control of local 

 enterprises by the federal government. 



On the whole, it is advantageous to have federal 

 appropriations for the larger interests of agriculture, 

 provided these appropriations are supplemented by 

 state appropriations. A federal law of this character 

 at once tends to nationalize and broaden all good move- 

 ments. Agriculture and country life are national, not 

 state, concerns; it does make a difference to the whole 

 country if one single state has neglected, for example, 

 the development of an adequate system of agricultural 

 educatio i. A measure of control should follow every 

 public appropriation; consequently, a degree of federal 

 control should follow all federal appropriations. The 

 real difficulty comes in deciding upon the extent of con- 

 trol. The federal government should determine 

 through the law itself what are the main large ends or 

 objects to be pursued with the money thus appropriated, 

 and should require of the states plans or projects which 

 appear to be promising and effective in reaching these 

 ends. There should be detailed accounting for the use 

 of the money, and a day of judgment at least once a 

 year in which the projects are checked up to determine 

 whether the money has been used for the right pur- 

 poses and in a reasonably effective way. The contin- 

 uance of federal appropriations should depend upon 

 the proper use of federal money. Beyond this federal 

 control should not go. The moment it attempts to de- 

 cide details, to determine personnel, to pass judgment 

 on local needs and particularly when it attempts to se- 

 cure uniformity of method and standardization of pro- 

 jects throughout the country, it is in danger of becoming 

 bureaucratic, ineffective, and wasteful. 



