446 



NEW EXGLAXD FAR:MER. 



Sept. 



neighbor who has made some $10,000 or 

 $l:i,0'JO during the last twenty years. He has 

 but little training, and not a large amount of 

 general intelligence, but is industrious and 

 frugal ; qualities which have enabled him to 

 become "a moderately successful farmer." 

 Yet it would be worse than useless to tell any 

 one that is acfiuainted with his mental ability, 

 that it is possible for him to attain to the front 

 rank of the professional or mercantile classes. 



If farmers are thus moderately successful 

 without any special education, study or train- 

 ing for tiicir business, how will it be when 

 they have the full benefit of these advantages? 

 Law and medical schools, and comnierciol 

 colleges, are of great advantage to the classes 

 they are intended for. May not agricultural 

 schools be a great help to young fiirmers, also? 

 I believe they will be, and that thousands 

 that otherwise would be rather ordinary form- 

 ers, mi^fht, with their help, attain to the front 

 rank of their calling. 



True, men have succeeded in all pursuits, 

 "without any special education or training (or 

 their business. But while this has only been 

 the case in regard to few and rare exceptions 

 in other callings, it is the general, if not uni- 

 versal rule with farmers — that is, as far as 

 success is attained. In fact, I believe we have 

 no farmers that have been thoroughly educated 

 and trained in agricultural schools for their 

 business ; that we have yet to learn, at least 

 practically, the full advantages of such prepa- 

 ration. 



But do the editors of the Farmer intend to 

 encourage farmers' sons to leave the farm, by 

 holiling out such inducements as, that it is 

 easier to reach "the front rank in the piofes- 

 sional or mercantile classes," than to become "a 

 moderately successful farmer?" Not only are 

 all kinds of business avocations crowded, but 

 we hear of thousands in the cities that <*an't 

 find anything to do. But a few months since 

 the Tribune said there were 40,U0U idle men 

 vainlv S(>eking employment in New York city. 

 And on the tenth of April the Weeldy Tri- 

 bune said : 



"Ami now let us once more exhort the surplus 

 popiilatiim of this and every other great American 

 city to tlisptrse. There are at least one million of 

 them this day hanging on where they are not 

 wanted, and are not likely to be. 'Can't you give 

 us somc:hing to do ?' is their incessant wliiue, 

 when I here is work cnousli and good pay for all, 

 if they would only go where it is needed. They 

 cannot (ind work on a few square miles i)f pave- 

 ments, because there arc tou many people here 

 and too few on the farms and in the rural factories 

 and work-hops. The world does not need so many 

 clerks, salesmen, bookkeepers, musie-teachcrs, 

 governesses, &c., &c.,as seek employment in those 

 capa'jitics ; so thousands nmst be starved back into 

 productive labor; and the sooner this is done the 

 better for us all." 



Now this i" a very serious matter In the cit- 

 ies ; and yet it is the ca>e when help is very 

 scarce and hinh in the coimtry. Here wages 

 are about double the price paid before the 



war, and men very scarce at that, "o that one 

 of the most serious difficulties farmers have to 

 meet is the scarcity and high price of help. 

 Now does the Farmer wish to add to this dif- 

 ficulty by encouraging a still greater number 

 of young men — liirmers' sons — to leave the 

 farm? And will not this be likely to be the 

 case with those that believe there is a better 

 chance to succeed, in other occupations than 

 in farming? But still as the general tenor of 

 the editorials of the Farmer has been in favor 

 of "sticking to the farm," it may be there is 

 some mistake — some misap()rehension in this 

 matter that may be explained. F. 



Western New York. 18G7. 



Remarks. — We admit the force of our cor- 

 respondent's strictures, from his standpoint. 

 We contemplated the subject under a different 

 aspect — an aspect in which we think the occu- 

 pation of the farmer is too often contemplated 

 — that of its inferiority as compared with the 

 other vocations of life. Our remarks were the 

 result of a strong conviction that those who 

 wish to satisfy the ambitious young man with 

 agriculture would do well to pursue some oth- 

 er course of argument than that which demon- 

 strates the assumption that "any fool Is bright 

 enough forafarmer," — orthatthe "front rank" 

 of that profession may be attained with a very 

 small "amount of tact, talent, energy and en- 

 terprise." To such teachings we trace the re- 

 gretful remark, so often made both by parents 

 and children, and the sense of degradation it 

 hnplles, that "William" or "George" or "Jo- 

 seph" "has no trade, as he always had to stay 

 at home." After a familiar practice of per- 

 haps thrice seven years in every branch of 

 farming, and with every agricultural imple- 

 ment, the poor boy has no trade, — no "special 

 education, training or study for his business," 

 — while he who drives pegs into a shoe or 

 shoves a plane upon a board is entitled to a 

 rank several degress above that of the "un- 

 skilled laborer." 



True, Mr. "F.," the New England Far- 

 mer most heartily advises the boys to stick to 

 the farm, not because It is the place for block- 

 heads and dunces, but because it is an appro- 

 priate and promising field for study, tact, tal- 

 ent, energy and enterprise ; while at the same 

 time it cautions the "professions" and all who 

 have not "learned the trade," against engag- 

 ing in farming with the belief that it is an easy 

 thing to attain "the front rank of the tillers 

 of the soil." 



