112 



SCIENTIFIC AGRICULTURE 



March, 1921. 



difficulties do uot obtain, perhaps in a modified way, 

 in the present day. Said on« writer: "Some men 

 object that new seeds will not grow here with us, for 

 our forefathers never used them. To these I reply 

 and ask them, how they know? Have they tried? 

 Idleness never wants an excuse ; and why might not 

 our forefathers upon the same grounds have held 

 their hands in their pockets, and have said, that 

 wheat and barley would not have grown amongst 

 us?" Another writer presents his tale of woe as 

 follows: "The fourth and last abuse is a calumniat- 

 ing and depraving every new invention; of this 

 most culpable are your mouldy old leavened hus- 

 bandmen, who themselves and their forefathers have 

 been accustomed to such a course of husbandry as 

 they -H-ill practice, and no other; their resolution is 

 so fixed, no Issues or events wliatsoever shall change 

 them. If their neighbor hath as much corn of one 

 acre as they of two upon the same land, or if an- 

 other plow the same land for strength and nature 

 with two horses and one man as well as he, and 

 have as good corn, as he hath been used with four 

 horses and two men yet so he will continue. Or if 

 an improvement be discovered to him and all his 

 neighbors, he'll oppose it and degrade it. What 

 forsooth saith he, who taught you more wit than 

 your forefathers?" I prefer to size the situation up 

 in the wise and kindly words of a later agricultural 

 writer who says, "It took a heavy hammer and 

 many blows to drive a nail tlirough the heart of 

 oak." So much for the difficulties in the way of 

 those pioneers in agricultural experiment and exten- 

 sion work. Let us look at the other side of the case. 



Much of the delay of progress must be blamed 

 upon the agricultural \\Titers of those days. In the 

 first place they were too impatient to have their 

 new ideas put into practice by the farmers, and 

 tlu'ir language was often the cause of tlie very lack 

 of appreciation of which they comi)hiin. No farmer 

 of that day would care to be described as a "Mouldy 

 old leavened husbandman" and one writer advo- 

 cates compulsory legislation to force farmers "even 

 like brutes to understand their own good." This 

 language, to say the least, was imprudent, if the 

 writer wished to get results. But that is only one 

 phase of tlie story. To quote the words of a critic, 

 "their promises were often exaggei-ated beyond the 

 bounds of belief." The writers of that day are 

 justly charged with the guilt of retarding agricul- 

 tural progress, because they made such .sweeping 

 claims that in the mind of the practical fanner they 

 bred distrust of all book farmers, no matter wliether 

 their claims were based upon aclual experiment. 



Let us take some examples. A vei'y important crop 

 was introduced into the country, one which had a 

 good deal to do with revolutionizing English agri- 

 culture, and here is what an .advocate of this crop 

 has to say about it: "It is the only food for cattle, 

 swine and poultry, sovereign for conditioning 'Hunt- 

 ing dogs,' an admirable ingredient for bread, afford- 

 ing 'two very good crops' each year, supplying 'very 

 good Syder' and exceeding good Oyl." This crop 

 was turnips and the date is 1659, not 1920. "Here is 

 a remedy for trouble among live stock — place a piece 

 of fern root under the tongue" Today we are more 

 up-to-date and advocate potassium iodide. About 

 tlie same time there were writers who advocated the 



odd special crop of enterprise — Black Poxes, Muske- 

 eats, even elephants were advocated by one writer. 



Briefly, there appears to have been enough short- 

 circuit scientists, hot-air artists and cranks in the 

 agricultural world of that daj' to make the prac 

 tieal farmer look askance at what was written about 

 his profession and the introduction of flax, turnips 

 and clover coupled with new advances in agricul- 

 tural practices, failed in what they might have ac- 

 complished because of these people, who claim they 

 were trying to serve the needs of the agriculturists 

 of that day. " Tusser, teaching thrift, never throve. 

 Gabriel Plattes. the corn setter, died for want of 

 l)r?ad. Donaldson, the author of the first Scottish 

 agricultural treatise, admits that he took to writing 

 books because he could not succeed on the land. 

 Even Arthur Young failed twice in farm manage- 

 ment before he began his invaluable tours." 



All this presents a lesson so plain that he who 

 runs may read. I firmly believe that we are on 

 the threshold of a great advancement in agriculture 

 practices because there is such a constructive de- 

 mand for accurate and honest agricultural experi- 

 ment. It may be true that new crops, new prac- 

 tices, all of these combined, are awakening public 

 interest, but it is the spirit of the thing that counts, 

 and if on the part of technical men of our Colleges 

 and Departments we can restrict the too entluisias- 

 tic boosters aiul short-circuit scientists so that our 

 farmers will have a desirable respect for what we 

 jniblish and what we advocate, we shall be .showing 

 evidence of having profited by the mistakes of others. 

 And to the farmers I would say that while I do not 

 fear a repetition in our day of the old conservatism 

 which bases everything on the practices of fore- 

 fathers, I do fear that there is always a danger 

 of your being lead away and confused by a possible 

 multiplicity of advice on the part of the people wlio 

 are in public places as your investigators and ex- 

 perimenters. In other words, I counsel you to sep- 

 arate the wheat from the chaff. Get your infor- 

 mation from those who are directly concerned in 

 experimental work or as nearly directly as you can 

 get it. Th;> Exiieriment Stations which have stood 

 the test of time and which now enjoy the re- 

 spect and confidence of all in touch with them are 

 the few who have refused to issue statements with- 

 out definite authorily and exjieriencc back of tliciii, 

 and Avhose experiments have been carried on for 

 at least five years before any definite conclusion 

 has been drawn. The leaders in our various com- 

 munities must shoulder a certain responsibility in that 

 they should advise the !)eo|)le to be careful about new 

 varieties, new cro])s, new treatments, until they have 

 found out what reputable Exiieriment Stations have 

 been able to report upon these. We need co-operation 

 in this work of purging the enterprise of experimental 

 service to the farmers from all that is spurious and 

 superficial. We will never reach our goal entirely, 

 but we will have the satisfaction of having tried for 

 something which is wcu'tli while, and as our country 

 becomes older, more settled and more standardized, 

 the short-circuit artists will find the field harder and 

 harder to work. 



