170 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



April 



so little interest in, that it tends to make them id- 

 iotic. 



Ho was opposed to establishing new schools ex- 

 pressly to teach agricultural education, as he con- 

 sidered it would be folly, but he would begin in 

 our common schools. He said he had told what 

 was done and could be done in our lower schools, 

 but he would consider the higher ones. Here pu- 

 pils were found studying algebra and geometry, 

 things that in ninety-nine cases in a hundred 

 would be of no use to them, although much time 

 was spent in their study ; it v.-ould be far better 

 to teach the boy how to raise and feed stock. He 

 would not ignore algebra and kindred studies, but 

 he would give the boy a term or two of these, and 

 then teach him what would be useful to him as a 

 farmer or mechanic. 



It had been asked, where shall we get teachers ? 

 He would answer, do the best we can, and he 

 felt sure that when the want was expressed it 

 would breed the supply. Should this M-ant be 

 manifest, those who are preparing themselves for' 

 teaching would attend to this, and in a short time 

 we should have all applying for situations thor- 

 oughly conversant and able to go creditably 

 through an agricultural examination. 



The difficulty, said he, is not that we have not 

 educational machinery, educational power or edu- 

 cational interest, but that we keep along in the old 

 scholastic method of teaching. He thought that 

 if our Board of Education required agricultural 

 education to be taught in our four Normal schools, 

 the want of teachers would be quickly supplied. 

 He had no faith in any great establishment for 

 teaching agriculture at present, nor had he at any 

 time, as he thought the present educational facili- 

 ties of the State Avere ample, if they were proper- 

 ly directed. 



In closing, he again urged the importance of this 

 education, as the theoretical knowledge thws ob- 

 tained by a boy, with his father's practical knowl- 

 edge, would unite the two more every day, and 

 thus make the profession a pleasure. 



jNIr.WETilERELL, of Boston, said he thought the 

 arguments used in support of agricultural educa- 

 tion had been erroneous. If, as had been said, no 

 one knows how to feed stock well, how are we to 

 teach our children ? There is so much diflference 

 of opinion in regard to chemical analyses that the 

 most celebrated professors do not agree, thus 

 making it impossible to teach. In educating the 

 mind of a child we must discipline it, and not lum- 

 ber it with facts. He spoke of the indisposition 

 there was in the mind of both teachers and pupils 

 to study agricultural works, and as an illustration 

 of this, instanced the work of Prof. J ohnston, en- 

 titled "Agricultural Catechism," which had been 

 generally introduced into the schools of New York 

 State some time since, and was now scarcely 



known. Speaking of Chemistiy in its relation to 

 successful agriculture, the speaker said he did not 

 see the necessity of a thorough knowledge of this 

 to raise large crops, as the Chinese, who know 

 nothing of this science, produced larger crops on 

 a given area than any other people in the world. 

 He thought that if a child was taught a good com- 

 mon education, he would learn farming fast enough 

 without being specially taught it in school. 



Rev. Mr. Steebins remarked that he would 

 have all that would be useful in after life taught 

 to children, and this teaching commenced when 

 they were young. In our higher schools, said he, 

 the age of the pupils ranged from 16 to 20, and he 

 thought young persons of this age were fully able 

 to understand and analyze the soil ; indeed, he 

 thought that in the common schools the major- 

 ity of the scholars were of an age and capacity to 

 take an interest in learning this study. 



Mr. D. W. LoTHROP, of West Medford, said he 

 had attended the meetings of the Society and 

 listened to the discussions on the different sub- 

 jects, and he had come to the conclusion that far- 

 mers seemed to think that all they wanted was 

 capital or manure, and apathy was in a great 

 measure the result. This question of teaching ag- 

 riculture in our schools is a new thing, and the 

 first thing to be established is, that we need this 

 science of agricultural chemistry before we ask to 

 have it introduced as a study. In his opinion, we 

 should not introduce a system of any one class, 

 thus forestalling the minds of our youth in select- 

 ing a trade or profession. He said he thought 

 there was not more than one boy in forty, in the 

 schools of our State, who designed becoming a far- 

 mer, and this was a strong argument against in- 

 troducing this new feature. An agricultural col- 

 lege, in his opinion, was not needed here, and an 

 inquiry into the aims of those in England he con- 

 sidered would settle this matteP. In the English 

 agricultural colleges it was sought to give the 

 children such an education as should fit them for 

 farm laborers, as the pupils were composed of the 

 children of this class, and by this means make 

 them more valuable on a fiirm, but still keep 

 them from rising, and he quoted from Coleman's 

 work, in proof of his deduction. It must be borne 

 in mind that, here, a man having three or four sons 

 has only one farm, and consequently has to leave 

 that farm to one, thus cutting off the others, who 

 have to get a living in some other way. Now, if 

 it was, as had been stated, a fact, that these far- 

 mers' sons helped to infuse life into the learned 

 professions, and to make successful merchants and 

 statesmen, why check this immigration, as the pros- 

 perity of ovu' country and State as much depended 

 on the success of our cities as our farms. 



Hon. Joseph White, of Lowell, said the ques- 

 tion in his mind was. not Avhether men shall be 



