352 
The Principles of Forestry. 
minute detail, especially as to tbe causes of diseases of ^ood and the diseases 
of plants. It is very difficult to get an accurate account of what the man 
really sees, imless he has gone through a certain amount of training to fit 
him for accurate ohservation." 
This is a most important statement, coming as it does from one 
who has evidently acquired the power himself ; and it fully agrees 
with my own often expressed opinion. 
Mr. Gilchrist, head woodman to Lord Powerscourt, says : — 
" I have a very strong opinion with regard to the scientific instruction 
that a forester requires. It would have been of great advantage to the 
country if there had been more of it years ago. ... Of course, as regards 
the working forester, if he means to remain a working forester all his days, 
do not let him bother his head about science; but if he wants to improve 
his position and become a really scientific and practical forester, let him take 
advantage of that scientific education." 
Mr. John Glutton says : — 
" There was no scientific training in my day ; when I began life GO years 
ago, I had no opportunity of being taught forestry of any kind. All I know 
I have learned from my practical experience of woods, which has been very 
extensive." 
" I think the land-agents should instruct the lower class of men under 
them. If a land-agent is well instructed, I think the lower class will acquire 
from him suflicient knowledge for practical purposes without their going to 
any school." 
Sir J. D. Hooker says : — 
" I think that an establishment teaching forestry would exceedingly 
useful. ... I think that a sound elementary acquaintance with five or 
six branches of science would be very useful to a student of forestry, but not 
more than a young man could pick up at such a course of instruction as I 
should contemplate, and as is, I believe, to be obtained at the agricultural 
colleges. . . . The branches of science I would suggest he should be acquainted 
with would be meteorology especially, and the organs and tissues of plants, 
physiological botany, geology, and elementary chemistry." 
Here, then, is ample and conclusive evidence that a know- 
ledge of the science of forestry would materially advance the 
interests of individual landowners, and the nation as a whole. 
It seems to me that, with this before us, doubt as to the 
necessity of such knowledge should be at once dismissed. What 
remains, then, is to determine upon the course to pursue. The 
evidence is almost unanimous that landowners and land-agents 
should be first educated, and that the teaching of woodmen 
should be left to their enlightened operations. Common sense, 
too, points to this as the correct course and the correct outcome 
of a purely practical inquiry. 
If the labour of the Select Committee ended here, it 
would not have been in vain. This irrefragable evidence will 
stand and bear fruit indirectly if not directly. Further, it is 
not too much to say that the result of their inquiry up to this 
