1913. 
THE RURAL, NEW-YORKER 
711 
“NOT EDUCATION, BUT FALSE IDEALS.” 
The Burden of the Non-Producer. 
In connection with your editorial on page G58 
dealing with the California race question, I beg to 
state that not education but false ideals and unjust 
desire are at fault for the condition where “young 
and strong white men refuse to get out and work on 
the land because they have been taught that manual 
labor is degrading.” Not “high-school training,” 
but a diseased public opinion and a selfish desire on 
the part of fathers and mothers are responsible for 
this condition. I have talked with many a horny- 
handed and bent-backed old man who has toiled be¬ 
yond his strength for years that he might give 
“Willie an education so he would not have to work 
for a living.” And many a wrinkled-faced and gray¬ 
haired farmer’s wife has not only slaved herself, 
but has driven her husband to slave also that her 
children “might have a better chance than she ever 
had.” In fact, mothers are far more apt to pamper 
children than are fathers, and almost always to 
their own disadvantage in the long run. 
As a consequence our cities are filled with doctors 
who have to keep people sick so that they themselves 
may be able to maintain their front and still not 
starve; with lawyers, who must fleece someone to 
dress and eat, with bankers and merchants who 
must tax the people for their own selfish success. 
And to these classes must be added the would-be 
“soft hands” who sell ladies’ hosiery and pink rib¬ 
bons over counters or drive pens and typewriters to 
pay their liall-room rents. 
Though the connection is not too easy to see, this 
is the cause of the 35-cent dollar 
—too many non-producers to 
live from the fruit of too few 
actual producers, too many blood 
suckers drawing at the veins of 
production and commerce; and 
all easily traced back to the 
father and mother, who, in an 
excess of parental love, have 
been unjust to themselves so that 
their Percy or their Willie might 
not have to work for a living. 
Not too much education, but too 
little individual morality and 
contentment of mind, not too 
much education, but too much 
education along wrong lines and 
gained with a wrong spirit. 
Education which makes of any 
one a more unfit man, or a man 
designed, to live from off the 
labor of others, is wrong, and 
those who encourage such edu¬ 
cation are wrong. 
And, as all government and 
social conditions depend upon 
the diffusion of morality and 
honesty and firmness among the 
people, it is not surprising that 
35-cent dollars prevail, that 
young folks neither respect nor 
obey parents, that criminals escape punishment be¬ 
cause of a weak public sentimentality and that the 
honest worker lias to lug the whole load upon ever- 
drooping shoulders. b. w. dow. 
FUTURE OF FARMERS’ INSTITUTES. 
The discussion going on in your columns regard¬ 
ing the future of farmers’ institutes is timely from 
every point of view. It is not a pleasant fact, but 
one not to be neglected, that we have fallen upon a 
time when instruction, by established methods, is 
becoming irksome. The most serious obstacle in the 
path of rural development is the well-defined indif¬ 
ference to church services. No matter if this be but 
the reflex influence of city life, the effect is the same 
as though originating at home. Growing out of this 
spirit there is coming the clamor for amusement, 
under the guise of “a good time.” The Grange 
faces a parting of the ways, when those who lead 
must determine whether it is to stand decidedly for 
the substance of true living, as in the past, or be 
taken over as a great social organization meeting 
for entertainment.* For 30 yenrs I have been ac¬ 
tively engaged in institute work in the Eastern 
States, and, for 25 years, regularly in Massachusetts 
!| nd New Hampshire as well as Maine. Keeping 
a record of attendance during these years I find 
'hat in these three States there has been, during 
'iie last 10 years, a decided increase in attendance 
und more general discussion. In Maine and Massa¬ 
chusetts the growth has been steady; in New Hamp- 
bnc more rapid the last five years. Attending a 
’lumber of institutes in that State the past Winter 
11 was no unusual thing to face an audience of 150 
U> 200 in a strictly farming section. In New Jersey 
at the Winter Board meeting there was an attend¬ 
ance of fully one thousand, and at Connecticut 
I’omological annual five to seven hundred, coming 
from all parts of these two States. Surely in these 
figures there is no evidence of the passing of the 
institute. At the same time a radical change has 
taken place in the public mind concerning these 
gatherings. With a wealth of reading matter so 
freely scattered, with agricultural, and special, 
newspapers full of sound matter, with our scientific 
men digging for another fact to distribute, and help, 
the province of the platform speaker must be modi¬ 
fied to meet present conditions. Formerly the live 
preacher hurled his texts at his adversary and built 
up a logical argument in support of a system. To¬ 
day he stands as the inspirer of nobler purposes, 
loftier conceptions, a more vital faith in the essen¬ 
tials of a Christ-like life. So, to my mind, the insti¬ 
tute speaker must move and drop the how, and give 
increased attention to the why. 
An old farmer, a stranger, met me at the door of 
a hall one day the past Winter, saying abruptly: 
“What do you know?” “Very little,” I replied, “not 
a fraction of what I once thought I knew.” “What 
are you going to talk about?” he said. My reply 
was: “ ‘Lessons taught by experience,’ in which I 
shall discuss failures I have met and what they 
taught me.” 
“Well,” said he, “I have become tired of having 
men tell of their successes and just what I must do 
to obtain the same, when they know nothing of my 
condition or location. If you are going to tell about 
your failures I think I can learn something.” 
Isn’t it a fact that we have preached too much at 
the farmers and not talked enough with them? 
Every man knows far better than he does, and to 
my mind the work of the institute is not to instruct 
but inspire, not to lay down the law, but help kindle 
afresh the fires of enthusiasm and faith. To do this 
speakers must hold close to what they know and let 
go of theories. What can you do, not what can you 
sa 3 ', is fast coming to be the standard. The genuine 
purpose of the institute is to help, and until man 
has reached the highest possible there will be a call 
for assistance. 
The government, National and State, has spent 
money lavishly to encourage production. There 
must now be discussion of means, methods and 
agencies necessary for distribution and sale in such 
manner as to insure the producer a fair shai’e of 
the consumer’s dollar. The biggest problem now 
facing the institute worker is how best to arouse 
producers to a realization of the gravity of the 
situation now facing them in the market, and bring 
about that spirit of co-operation which alone can 
insure just returns. Farmers’ institutes, where 
everyday workable subjects shall be treated from 
the standpoint of the producer, will continue to be a 
necessity, if for no other reason than to stir the 
gray matter and lead men and women to think out¬ 
side the groove of everyday labor. Help a man to 
sidestep and get a new viewpoint and the way is 
opened for material advancement and moral uplift. 
What we all need is a clearer vision of life, a 
clearer conception of what we are working for. 
Whatever will clarify, whatever will arouse, what¬ 
ever will inspire, whatever will unite, becomes a 
necessary factor in agricultural development. Here 
is peculiarly the province of the institute. Through 
it the State can officially touch and benefit everyone 
who will come within the circle, and we all need 
that uplift. GEO. M. TWITCHELL. 
Maine. 
A CONCRETE ROLLER AND PACKER. 
We recently spoke of work done in North Dakota 
in packing or firming the soil in the cultivation of 
flax. All through that Western country it has been 
found necessary to follow this plan of thoroughly 
packing the soil after plowing, and for the reasons 
which were given on page G50. Years ago when 
settlers went from the East out to that Western 
country, they undertook to handle the soil as they 
had been in the habit of working, their soil in New 
York or Pennsylvania. At home they plowed the 
ground, gave it a fair harrowing, and put in the 
seed, and with a reasonable amount of rainfall they 
usually succeeded in obtaining a fair crop. When 
they went to the Far West, these people did not 
realize the situation. They had come to a country 
of dry, hot winds, where the rainfall was compara¬ 
tively light, so when they plowed the ground and 
scratched it lightly over with a harrow, they did 
not properly fit it, for the hot winds worked into 
this open soil and dried it out quickly. In the East¬ 
ern States this very thing might happen in May or 
June, yet it would not mean disaster, because more 
rain usually followed to keep the soil moist. In 
the West, however, this rainfall did not follow, and 
so these people were dried out and starved away 
from their land, because they did not understand 
the necessity of handling the soil so as to re¬ 
tain its moisture. Therefore all over the West the 
study has been to devise meth¬ 
ods and tools for keeping this 
moisture in the soil. The roller 
or packer has become a neces¬ 
sary tool on these Western 
farms. Thus the Experiment 
Station at Bozeman, Montana, 
issues a circular showing how to 
make a concrete roller or packer, 
the tool being of sufficient impor¬ 
tance to warrant this work. 
Such a tool is shown complete at 
Fig. 243, with the parts marked 
to show their proportion. Some 
of these rollers have a steel face 
outside the concrete, while 
others have no steel about them. 
Fig. 238 shows how the steel- 
rim rollers are made. The rim 
is patented. It is laid on a flat 
floor: the hub pieces are put in 
position, and the space between 
the rim and the hub filled with a 
wet mixture of one part Portland 
cement, and three parts of clean, 
sharp sand. These wheels are 
cured from 45 to 00 days, and 
then assembled for use. The 
rims or molds are left on the 
wheels and thus form a steel cov¬ 
ering for them. The wheels are 
also made without the steel cover if desired. In this 
case a reinforcement is put in of a few rings of 
barbed wire or baling wire to prevent breaking. 
The hubs are generally made of gas pipe cut about 
four inches long. A pipe 1 V> inches in diameter is 
used for the short roller. For longer rollers use a 
two-inch pipe. These fit over a shaft one-sixteenth 
of an inch smaller than the hub castings. The 
frames are made of hard or soft pine as desired. 
There are many farmers in the East who could use 
such a roller to good advantage. We give the de¬ 
tails of this one to show the development which is 
being made in Western farming, and the adapting 
of these homemade devices to improved methods. 
RYE FOR THE SILO. 
I would like to know liow to put rye in silo. I have 
some rye that I would like to put in silo, will it make 
good feed for cows? If so, when and how shall it be 
put in? c. e. 
Blaekhorse, Pa. 
There are two mistakes usually made in putting 
rye into the silo. Most people let it stand too long 
before cutting, and then do not pack it down hard. 
For silage rye should be cut before it comes into 
bloom, and while the plants are soft and tender. Do 
not wait until the pollen flies from the flowers of 
the rye. Cut it into the silo as fine as possible, and 
when it is in cover with plank and pack on several 
tons of stone, or anything else that will give weight, 
and crush the silage down hard. The rye carries a 
good deal of air in its stalk, and if left open and 
loose it will ferment badly. If crushed or packed 
down tight it will give a much better feed. The rye 
does not make the best of silage, yet it will make 
fair feed if handled in this way. 
