1852, 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
107 
The Necessity for a Proper System of Instruction 
in Agricultural Science. 
Analytical Laboratory, Yalk College, 1 
Neu'-Haven. Cornu. Jan. 31. 1851. j 
Eds. Cultivator —I do not propose to take up the 
above subject in its broadest sense, but to confine myself 
to a comparatively limited field. I shall say little at 
present as to the want, felt more and more every day by 
an increasing majority among our farmers, of education¬ 
al institutions especially adapted their wants, but would 
call attention to a point which has been overlooked by 
many in their zealous advocacy of the general cause. It 
seems to me, that a chief reason for the annual failure 
of so many plans bearing upon the educational interests 
of the farmer, may be found in a real scarcity which ex¬ 
ists, of men competent to take charge of the proposed 
institutions. To those who have never reflected upon 
this subject, my assertion may seem a strong one, when 
I say that if any six states of the Union were within the 
present year to make provision for the establishment of 
state agricultural schools, or colleges, within their re¬ 
spective borders—-were to endow them largely in every 
department, to furnish them with libraries, implements, 
museums, apparatus, buildings, and lands, they could 
not find on this continent the proper corps of professors 
and teachers to fill them. I will even go farther than 
this, and say that if iri your own state of New-York, a 
large institution were planned out, and all proper de¬ 
partments of instruction pecuniarily provided for, it would 
be a difficult matter to fill them satisfactorily with tho¬ 
roughly competent men. Enough of those who would 
gladly accept such appointments as might be offered, 
could doubtless be found, but the question is, would they 
be just such instructors as the farmer requires ? 
There are certain points relative to which he demands 
information from various branches of science, and this 
information to be of value must be correct. Mistakes, 
blunders, misconceptions, from the heads of a great state 
school, sent forth under authority, and promulgated ra¬ 
pidly, would cause infinitely greater mischief than out¬ 
going without a school altogether for some years to come. 
For such reasons, extreme caution should be used in the 
selection of instructors for any large or influential school, 
and for such reasons among many others which might be 
adduced, I have ventured to say as above, that we really 
have not in the country the men that are needed. 
If the farmers of any state were to select persons to 
impart instruction, or to serve as examples, in any prac¬ 
tical department of their business, would they be con¬ 
tented with mere professions, or mere hearsay reports, 
of their success or skill? Above all would they not be 
disposed to question the expertness of one who professed 
to have made himself familiar with every department of 
mere mechanical labor, in the lapse of a very short time? 
If teaching the use of the plow in the best possible man¬ 
ner, and under every circumstance, were for instance the 
object, would they be content with a man who could only 
show the experience of one or two years in the use of 
that implement? By no means; they would say—we can 
do as well as he can ourselves, and do not need such in¬ 
struction as this,- we want a master of the subject, one 
who has studied it thoroughly in every department of 
practice, and has brought an intelligent mind to bear up¬ 
on all the variations of use and construction in different 
districts. With a man of less acquirements than these 
in any practical matter, no community of farmers would 
be satisfied; they would not receive his advice with re¬ 
spect, and would not consider his opinion as worth much 
more than that of any other intelligent individual. 
I think all will agree with me, that these views are 
correct with regard to subjects of pure practice, and that 
most farmers would act in accordance with them. Now 
I ask, why do not the same views obtain with regard to 
the teaching of science? We see men who are in all or¬ 
dinary circumstances, shrewd and sagacious, swallowing 
every fable that comes to them in a scientific guise. 
The merest charlatan may take up his books and mys¬ 
terious looking apparatus, and having familiarized him¬ 
self with a few hard names, is able to persuade the mass 
of those who meet him that he knows everything with¬ 
in, upon, and above the earth, that explains the action 
of nature’s laws. Allow me to say a few words in direct 
reference to the falsity and even absurdity of such pre¬ 
tensions. 
In speaking of the mechanical operations of husband¬ 
ry, such as plowing, I have said that as a general fact, 
entire proficiency could not be attained within one or even 
two seasons; a long course of experience was necessary. 
Is it then so much easier to read the laws of nature, or 
rather of God, which bear upon those wonderful struc¬ 
tures of plants and animals that we see about us! In 
the growth of the humblest weed that flourishes by the 
wayside, a series of changes, transformations, and me¬ 
tamorphoses, goes on, which as yet the highest effort of 
the human intellect has failed to fully explain and eluci¬ 
date. 
To produce the feeble stem which we crush under our 
feet in passing, the powers of earth, air and water, have 
joined with those of the far distant sun, and during its 
short life, it has been an example of a complication of 
most wonderful laws, imposed by the Almighty Maker 
of all. He has seen fit in his wisdom to ordain, that 
every step in knowledge must be won by toil and exer¬ 
tion, and thus it is in the present case; we are only able 
to slowly unfold the wonders that are occurring on every 
side, during the every-day experience of life. The field, 
too, widens as we advance, until we find that every step 
has its consequence, every breath of air its appointed 
mission, every drop of dew its office to perform; we dis¬ 
cover that we are in the midst of causes and results, of 
which our knowledge is quite limited; that the threads 
we have seized only guide us to new and more difficult 
labyrinths of investigation. What we know dwindles 
away, when we compare it with the sum of that which 
we desire to know. 
The true student of natural science, then, the true fol¬ 
lower of patient, earnest, truth-seeking research, grows 
not bolder, but more modest, as he wins his way; he 
knows that his highest reach of knowledge is, and ever 
must be, limited; he feels each day so many wants yet 
unsatisfied, sees so many problems yet partially solved, 
or totally inexplicable, that he leans constantly towards 
caution, rather than rashness, and is disposed to qualify 
his strongest convictions on all theoretical points. 
