Am.  Jour,  Pharm. 
Dec,  1921. 
Professional  Training. 
855 
its  greater  susceptibility  to  the  influence  of  propaganda.  Fortun- 
ately, it  is  equally  fickle,  and  the  danger  may  prove  less  instant  than 
it  seems. 
TRAINING  IN  HUSBANDRY. 
The  question  of  training  in  husbandry  differs  from  that  in 
medicine,  because  gardeners  and  farmers  decline  to  accept  the 
medical  view  that  practical  pupilage  is  no  longer  necessary.  But 
the  question  has  given  rise  to  two  schools  of  thought.  Many  are 
still  satisfied  that  practical  pupilage  affords  all  the  training  required. 
Others,  whose  watchword  is  "practice  with  science,"  believe  that  a 
course  of  training  in  pure  science  is  desirable.  But,  unlike  medi- 
cine, husbandry  imagines  that  to  impart  such  a  training  before  pro- 
fessional instruction  begins  is  "to  put  the  cart  before  the  horse." 
Whether  in  this,  husbandry  be  right  or  wrong  does  not  now  con- 
cern us.  Nor  would  it  be  safe  to  deduce  either  that  husbandry  has 
given  less  thought  to  professional  training  than  medicine,  or  that 
medicine  has  reached  conclusions  sounder  than  those  of  husbandry. 
It  is  sufficient  to  remember  that  "circumstances  may  alter  cases." 
THE  METHODS  AND  SCOPE  OF  HUSBANDRY. 
It  was  no  great  merit  on  the  part  of  husbandry  to  have  realised 
in  prehistoric  days  what  medicine  has  only  now  discovered,  that  the 
surest  way  to  prevent  sickness  is  to  abolish  disease.  Husbandry 
could  employ  methods  medicine  might  not  use.  Nor  is  husbandry 
so  conservative  as  early  civilisation  imagined.  She  knows  quite  well 
that  whatever  its  ultimate  benefits  may  be,  the  eradication  policy  is 
not  conducive  to  immediate  economy.  She  now  prefers  those  newer 
modes  of  eliminating  disease  the  medical  institutes  have  devised. 
At  the  instance  of  her  own  institutes,  husbandry  at  times  takes  the 
apparently  retrograde  step  of  attempting  to  treat  where  she  used  to 
destroy.  Where,  however,  husbandry  deserves  credit  is  as  regards 
the  training  she  imparts  to  disciples?  destined  to  serve  the  institutes 
of  husbandry  as  apart  from  its  practice.  These  she  subjects,  as  a 
matter  of  policy,  to  that  intensive  training  in  physics,  chemistry, 
and  biology,  which  in  the  case  of  those  destined  to  serve  the  insti- 
tutes of  medicine  is  left  to  accident. 
Within  husbandry,  however,  horticulture  and  agriculture  hold 
divergent  views  regarding  technological  advice.    Horticulture,  more 
