cxciv 
Monthly Council, November 5, 1890. 
proposition, although he did not alto- 
gether agree with Mr. Pell as to the 
reasons for the establishment of a 
normal farm. Still, he supported the 
view which Mr. Pell had put forward, 
that this subject should be more fully 
considered. He would have preferred 
an affirmative vote from the Council 
that day in favour of a Normal School 
of Agriculture, but perhaps, consider- 
ing the magnitude of the subject, it 
was better that it should be more fully 
discussed before they arrived at a 
final decision. He did not for one 
moment quarrel with the proposition 
made respecting the establishment of 
a chair of agriculture at one of the 
great universities of the country. In 
fact, he made this suggestion himself 
when he gave evidence before the 
Royal Commission on Agriculture, 
which was so ably presided over by 
their noble friend and colleague, the 
Duke of Richmond and Gordon. He 
did not think that any harm would be 
done to scientific agriculture in this 
direction. On the Home Rule prin- 
ciple, he thought they might say that 
as Scotland had a chair of agriculture 
established in connection with its Uni- 
versity, and that as Ireland had a 
similar chair, he believed at Glasnevin, 
and the University of Wales also had 
a chair of agriculture, it would only 
be fair to the English section of agri- 
culturists that a similar institution 
should be raised at one of the great 
centres of education in this country. 
But a chair of agriculture at one of 
their great institutions would be a 
medium by which agricultural know- 
ledge would be communicated to the 
landed and higher classes of this 
country alone. 
What he wanted — having considered 
the matter from a practical point of 
view — was a system by which the 
teachers of the future farmers of the 
country could be trained, and these 
teachers, who would probably be 
drawn from the ranks of the elemen- 
tary schools, would receive both prac- 
tical and scientific instruction in 
agriculture that would enable them 
to impact information to the general 
rank and file of the middle-class and 
smaller agriculturists throughout the 
country at a moderate cost. And if 
such a school were established, they 
would be in a better position to attain 
that end than would be the case if the 
teaching were confined to the higher 
institutions or universities. In that 
he differed from Mr. Pell. He attached 
importance to the institution of a 
farm in connection with this Normal 
College ; he thought that the theo- 
retical knowledge of agriculture would 
be imparted there, and he thought 
that the practice of agriculture would 
be show r n to the students by such a 
college also. It was true that there 
were great diversities in the practice 
of agriculture throughout England, 
but still the various systems of culti- 
vation and the courses of husbandry 
could be developed at one school, and 
certainly the different breeds of stock 
should be concentrated there ; and 
the principles of breeding and the 
practice of veterinary science also 
could be gone through by the students 
at such an institution. Those were 
the reasons which induced him to 
attach very great importance to the 
establishment of this Central Normal 
School. He saw no reason why they, 
as Englishmen, should set themselves 
up as being wiser than other nations 
of the world. Most foreign countries 
had these schools. The United States 
had, he believed, Normal Schools for 
each State. They made for England 
the modest request of only one. It 
should be principally used for the 
teaching of teachers. Ontario had a 
school where the practice of agricul- 
ture was carried out in much the same 
manner as that which he had de- 
scribed, and he hoped at some future 
time that the recommendation of the 
Joint Committee that a Normal School 
of Agriculture should be established 
in this country would be adopted. 
Earl Cathcart heartily supported 
the proposition of Mr. Pell, thinking 
that, in consideration of the late 
hour and the importance of the sub- 
ject, the Council would be inclined to 
agree with him that postponement was 
the wisest course. 
Mr. Dent pointed out that the 
matter had been hung up since the 
meeting of the Council last June. 
The matter would be left in a very 
unsatisfactory position, and he 
thought it was very unfortunate that 
they could not carry the discussion 
rather further than they had done. 
Mr. Bowen-Jones suggested that 
