THE CULTIVATOR. 
187 
from barbarism to civilized life, the arts necessarily precede science. 
Application comes later; the arts continue slowly progressive, but 
their realm remains separated from that of science by a wide gulf, 
which can only be passed by a powerful spring. They form their 
own language, and their own conventions, which none but artists 
can understand. The whole tendency of empirical art is to bury 
itself in technicalities, and to place its pride in particular short cuts 
and mysteries known only to adepts; to surprise and astonish by re¬ 
sults, but conceal processes. The character of science is the direct 
contrary. It delights to lay itself open to inquiry; and is not satis¬ 
fied with its conclusions till it can make the road to them broad 
and beaten : and in its applications it preserves the same character; 
its whole aim being to strip away all technical mystery, to illumi¬ 
nate every dark recess, and to gain free access to all processes, 
with a view to improve them on rational principles.” 
The measures we have proposed are not untried experiments, or 
of doubtful tendency. They have been adopted by governments 
which we are taught to consider less friendly to, and less interested 
in, the general diffusion of knowledge, than our own, and the results 
have justified the experiment. The British government has caused 
agricultural surveys to be made of every county in the kingdom, 
and published these surveys, comprising fifty or sixty volumes, for 
the benefit of her agriculture. The French government has had 
collected and published, under the supervision of her minister of the 
interior, the agricultural works of her most enlightened citizens.— 
She is now, through her central agricultural society, giving a new 
and remarkable impetus to improvement in her agricultural labors. 
As an evidence of her zeal and liberality, and of her wisdom in call¬ 
ing forth useful competition, we are able to state, from documents in 
our possession, that she has offered to her farmers, for improvements 
in the beet culture, and in the domestic fabrication of sugar, alone, 
bounties to the amount of seven or eight thousand francs, or one 
thousand to fifteen hundred dollars. These premiums are to be 
awarded the coming spring. The effect of the competition which 
these bounties to skill and industry are calculated to excite, cannot 
fail to be greatly beneficial and abiding. She has in a few years in¬ 
creased the products of sugar from her soil to 80,000,000 pounds; 
while her arable and stock husbandry have been immensely bene- 
fitted by the extension of her beet culture ; and she is likely success¬ 
fully to compete, ere long, in our own grain markets. 
The scramble for political power having for at least a time abated, 
and our means of improvement being now ample, the hope has been 
fondly, though perhaps vainly indulged, that considerations like those 
we have suggested, would press upon the notice of our statesmen, 
and induce them to adopt such efficient measures for improving the 
arts of productive labor, as should command the generous applause 
of the age, and live in the grateful recollections of posterity. 
However apt we may be, in our fervor or frenzy to subserve the 
interests of self or •party, to forget the obligation—we owe duties to 
our country—to our whole country—and to our God—for the per¬ 
formance of which we must be amenable—w r hich are paramount to 
all others ; and the faithful performance of which, while it imparts 
to life its purest enjoyments, affords the only safe hope of a happy 
immortality. The evil we do, benefits but for a time ; the good we 
do, benefits for time and eternity. 
ON THE REPEAL OF THE DUTY ON PROVISIONS. 
The President has recommended a repeal of the duty on provi¬ 
sions coming from abroad, and several of our political journals have 
endorsed his recommendation. We dissent from their opinions, and 
will briefly state our reasons. 
It is the conceded policy of all civilized nations to protect their 
home industry. Five sixths of our home industry is employed in ag¬ 
riculture, and hence this branch of our labor deserves the special 
protection of the government. A small duty upon foreign provi- 
sions is the only protection it receives, and this duty it is now propo¬ 
sed to take off. This principle of protecting home labor, which 
forms one of the great elements of national prosperity and inde¬ 
pendent.led to the adoption of the tariff; which secures to our manu¬ 
facturers a fair compensation for their labor, by subjecting foreign 
fabrics to an import duty. Without this protecting duty they could 
not have survived, and but for it we should now have been depen¬ 
dant upon the workshops of Europe, for many of the indispensable 
necessaries of life. What are our manufactures, either in magnitude 
or importance, compared to our agriculture 1 A drop in the bucket. 
And is it politic to jeopardise this great interest, or to paralyse its on¬ 
ward course in improvement, by bringing it down to a level with the 
servile labor of Europe 1 Is it just to protect the labor of the minor 
classes, and to leave unprotected that of the great agricultural class? 
Because from a bad season, and a series of other casualties, the far¬ 
mer has this season realized only half of an ordinary crop, is he 
therefore to be deprived of a fair profit upon this moiety ? Would 
the temporary high price of woollen goods justify a repeal of the du • 
ty upon foreign woollens? No. The manufacturer would not con¬ 
sent—the farmer would not consent, to see the great woollen busi¬ 
ness of our country prostrated by unrestricted foreign competition. 
And yet woollens, as well as provisions, are among the indispensa¬ 
ble comforts of life—and it is unsafe to rely upon those with whom 
we may be invaded in war for either. We must be clothed as well as fed. 
It is well known that labor is much higher in the United States than 
in Europe—that the European laborer lives poor, and works low— 
that his wages would neither hire nor support a freeman here—and 
that consequently the price of farm produce is ordinarily much low¬ 
er on the European continent than it is with us. France, Germa¬ 
ny, Italy, and even Russia, can undersell us in our own markets, in 
the products of our own soil, under existing duties. The grain of 
these countries is constantly finding its w r ay to our markets, with a 
fair profit to the importers. Take off the duty, and we shall be 
flooded with it; and the consequences to our agriculture cannot but 
I be extremely disastrous. It is announced in a paper before us, that 
10,000 bushels of wheat have just reached Georgetown, bought at 
I Rotterdam, Holland, at $1.26 per bushel, thus affording an enor¬ 
mous profit to the importer, maugre the duties—Live and let live. 
We cannot send our grain to Europe, when we have an excess, 
without paying heavy duties, which operate as a virtual prohibition. 
In Great Britain, these duties are mitigated when the average price 
of wheat is 80 s. the quarter, which is about equivalent to $2.50 per 
bushel. And why? Because there the interests of agriculture are 
deemed of primary importance, and the Englishman had rather pay 
dear for his bread than to see the agriculture of his country crippled 
by foreign rivalship. And yet, the agriculture of England employs 
but one-third of the population. In France agriculture gives em¬ 
ployment to tivo-thirds of the population, and the same protection is 
thrown round it as we see in Great Britain. How much more for¬ 
cibly do these considerations apply to the agriculture of the United 
States, where a very large proportion of the population subsist by its 
labors. While the farmer has quietly submitted to heavy protect¬ 
ing duties, to sustain other and minor branches of labor, is it not 
just, and even consistent with the best interests of the nation, that 
I he should in return be protected in his labor? Every political and 
i moral consideration unite in the propriety, not only of sustaining, 
but of improving and elevating the condition and the character of 
our yeomanry. To borrow the words of a Rev. Divine, “ Human 
society may be compared to a stupendous column, agriculture 
forming the broad and noble base, manufactures the shaft, com¬ 
merce the capital, while the learned professions, and the fine arts, 
constitute its rich and beautiful ornaments.” We must guard the 
noble base, if we would preserve the unity and beauty of the structure; 
for if that fails, neither the shaft, the capital, nor the ornaments, can 
long escape ruin. 
We cannot but indulge the hope, that the duty upon foreign pro¬ 
visions will be retained. The importations from abroad are very 
large, and are likely to increase, with the prospect of liberal profits, 
notwithstanding existing duties. They are so large as to allay all 
fears of famine; and before the repeal could have much effect upon 
prices, we shall be gathering the fruits of another harvest, which 
will probably be adequate to all our wants. 
THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE LABORING CLASSES. 
No man entertained a more ardent desire to improve the Cbndi- 
tion of the laboring classes of our population, or evinced a more lib¬ 
eral feeling towards the accomplishment of his wish, than the late 
John B. Yates. His zeal was manifested, during many of the last 
years of his life, in devising plans to improve their condition, and to 
enlarge their influence in society. His liberality is placed beyond 
doubt by the tenor of his will. He was among the first to per¬ 
ceive and to advocate, the advantages of associating physical with in¬ 
tellectual improvement—of combining theory and practice—science 
and art—labor and study—in the business of education—and of in¬ 
structing the head and hands, simultaneously, in the duties of so¬ 
cial life. And had he not been deterred, by unforeseen difficulties, 
from executing his plans,—or had his life been prolonged, it seems 
