The Principles of Foresiriji 
349 
sisted — can bring tlie course of instruction within reach of such 
a class. But can any sensible man who understands the subject 
recommend such a course ? In a limited country like this, and in 
such a limited area of woodland as we possess, men educated in 
this way could not expect to find employment. 
I do not for one moment underrate the value of education, 
and I believe fairly educated men make the best and most intel- 
ligent workmen ; but this education should be general and not 
of a special character. A man with a general education will be 
more intelligently observant — he will inquire into and find out 
reasons for this and that operation, and will not work like a 
machine. The present system of national education is rapidly 
bringing about this class of men, for those who cannot read and 
write are yearly becoming more rare. 
A man whose duty it is to fell a tree, and who has acquired 
his knowledge by long experience, cannot be taught better by a 
professor of forestry ; other of his daily duties, purely practical 
as they ai-e, cannot be taught by theoretical teachers ; but an 
educated man will be able to acquire the knowledge why such 
and such an order is given, and why such and such an act is to 
be performed. 
Technically educate the landowner and the land-agent, and 
the knowledge will soon percolate among the men. There is no 
room in this country for a middle class of woodmen, except such 
as may rise above the ordinary level by sobriety, honesty, and 
manual skill. If a system of promotion were encouraged it 
would do more than anything else to stimulate a knowledge of 
forestry among the working woodmen. 
What would be the result of a national school of forestry ? 
An implied national idea and belief that a large number ot 
woodmen were required. Nothing could be more unfair, I may 
say unjust, than to spread abroad such a false belief. Many 
would in times like these enter the school, and leave it to find 
all their hopes disappointed. In a limited area such as we 
possess educated working foresters are not required. 
I will presently show what the Government may do; but now 
it will be well to turn again to the evidence given before the 
Select Committee, and gather from it the opinions of acknow- 
ledged authorities on the necessity of a forest education. 
Colonel Pearson in 1886 says: — 
" I am very stronglj^ impressed with the desirability of doing something 
to promote forest education in this country ; or, rather, to put it in the way 
of young men who may he desirous of obtaining it. . . . The main object, 
then, seems to be to provide a certain amount of practical education in 
forestry to supplement the present generally very useful education given to 
the land-agent class, and at the same time to teach the wood-bailiffs and 
