THE PRESENT STATUS OF AGRICULTURAL

EDUCATION.

BY PROF. C. H. PETTEE.

To fully understand and appreciate the present, it is always necessary and wise to examine the past. Without such examination it would be futile to attempt an explanation of the curious and extraordinary phases of the question of agricultural education, as manifested with singular unanimity in the various States, yet with variations caused by locality.

By act of Congress in 1862 public land was donated to the several States, in proportion to population, for the establishment in each of a college whose "leading object should be, without excluding other scientific and classical studies, and including military tactics, to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts . . in order to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life." Under this act, the New Hampshire Legislature of 1866 received land which sold for $80,000, and established a college at Hanover in connection with Dartmouth College. A bit of history, not generally known, may be interesting here. The money received for the land was loaned to the State at six per cent, at a time when money was worth much more and when the State was anxious to borrow. The State, to her credit be it said, is now returning the favor by paying the college six per cent when money could be obtained at a less rate.

In other States one of two things happened; either, first, the

money was given to an existing institution, an agricultural department being generally added to those already present, or, second, an entirely new college was founded, which in most cases was patterned after existing ones, except, perhaps, that science received more attention than before. It is to be noted that New Hampshire was the only State to locate beside an existing college, thereby obtaining advantages of libraries, apparatus, use of buildings, etc., and yet retain her separate organization complete, not a dollar of her funds being ever diverted to the use of the old college. Massachusetts located in the same town with another institution, but the separation of one mile proved practically as effective as that of several hundred in other cases. In New Hampshire the farmers were very jealous of their rights, and by legislative enactments guarded well the interests of their college. In fact it was only by conceding the entire separation of funds and the retention by the State of a majority vote in the board of trustees that Dartmouth obtained the then coveted prize of the Agricultural College. History has proved the wisdom of these early champions of the people, for in New Hampshire, as in practically all the States, agricultural education was precipitated upon a people totally unprepared for its reception and not even aware of any special need of it. After all these restrictions only a combination of fortunate circumstances, many of which have been popularly condemned, has retained the college with its funds intact to the classes for whom it was founded. Where there was a union with other departments of study (and this was generally the case), whether in cases first or second, those other courses were magnified at the expense of the agriculture. In cases where the fund was very large this did not make so much difference, as there was enough for all, and when the agricultural sentiment was aroused provision was made for the new wants.

In probably no States other than Massachusetts and Michigan has there existed since the early days an institution in which the agricultural course has been made foremost in fact as well as in name, and in these States that course was for years only too primitive as far as pure agriculture was concerned. Maine and New Hampshire, of New England States, might be reckoned

with these two States so far as name and intent go, but in neither was the work of the early years such as could properly be called agricultural education. Very naturally the organization of the colleges fell largely into the hands of educators of the old school, whose one idea was discipline, and to them agricultural education was some cheap form of English study furnishing as much discipline as possible.

Farmers were not slow to express their disapproval of such messes, but having been ordered by the doctors, the patients were a long time in throwing them off. Besides, in most cases it was difficult to find a substitute. Agriculture had not developed into an exact science. Professors of agriculture who were not quacks were rare and commanded high pay. Even to-day the chair of agriculture is more difficult to fill satisfactorily than any other professorship in any college. While public sentiment, therefore, condemned, it offered nothing in exchange, and it was only by the slow process of experiment and elimination that something better appeared. Neither must we overlook the fact that farmers' boys have been brought up with the idea that if they were smart they must leave the farm; if they got an education it was to help them get into some new business or profession. This has been instilled into their minds by superintendents, teachers, and ministers, and when parents at home are told that Johnnie is a bright boy and must be given a chance to become a lawyer, how proud those parents are! Even when the politician on the stump praised farming as the foundation of all business and professional work, the momentary feeling of pride was quickly dispelled by the realization that this foundation was only to be used by the speaker as a stepping-stone to office and power through the favor and votes of the farmers. The feeling, then, among the boys has been that they have been brought up in an honorable calling which would give them many advantages in after life, but that it was a grand good business to get out of. The thought that the farmer needed any special training for his work or that there were positions in the field of agriculture that demanded the highest skill and intelligence of trained minds was scarcely dreamed.

It was not to be expected, under these circumstances, that the

best of agricultural colleges would be largely patronized at first, and as for those that offered a dish-water course in agriculture, that course was either ridiculed or borne for the good that was otherwise present. With a few honorable exceptions, most of these institutions did not pretend to have professors of agriculture till within a few years. Just think of a medical college without a doctor, a theological institution without a minister, a law school without a lawyer, or a West Point without a soldier, and yet the absurdity of the idea has only slowly penetrated the public mind. Where a cheap form of education, parading under the name of agriculture, but with none of the reality, has existed beside other more complete courses of study, it has always labored under a disadvantage. None are quicker than boys to recognize shams, and they are not slow in expressing their views. Hence, has arisen the common idea that agricultural colleges flourish best in a place by themselves. The shams undoubtedly do, but the same argument may not hold good of the reality. Agricultural education has thus been brought into wide-spread disrepute, and much time will be required to repair the loss.

Of the present condition of agricultural colleges much more favorable reports may be given. Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Missouri, Mississippi, and probably several other States, have agricultural courses worthy of the name. Vermont is being forced by public sentiment into line, and offers this winter a short, practical course for farmers' boys. Even Rhode Island, that in the past has been totally indifferent to the wants of the farmers, is being stirred to the necessity of some action, by public clamor. In States where the bulk of the funds in the past have gone for the support of classical and other courses of study, it becomes quite a problem how the new demand may be met without crippling those previously supported. It is plain that these interests will clog the advance of agricultural education in too many cases. It is claimed, indeed, by many practical men that no agricultural college will have any great success until it is located by itself, either for the above reason or because of the influence of the young men engaged in literary pursuits in estranging agricultural

students from the farm. I have always claimed that this influence, when exerted upon a young man taking by choice a bona fide agricultural course, would be stimulative to a higher ambition in his line rather than lead him into another profession. Remove the shams, and he will not be ashamed of his studies, and others will not be ashamed for him. At any rate, we have a fine chance to test the matter here in New Hampshire if a few difficulties can be overcome. None of the Agricultural College money being in the hands of Dartmouth College, there will be no home interest to oppose an extension of the agricultural work. Indeed, the conservative influence of Dartmouth has always resisted in the past, and will doubtless oppose in the future, any extended general course of study that would interfere with her own curriculum. This selfish interest has, without doubt, been a powerful influence for good in keeping for the farmers their inheritance until such time as they were ready to step in and possess it. At the same time there is no reason to suppose that Dartmouth begrudges to the Agricultural College any part of her legitimate field of work. Whatever will make more complete a technical agricultural train. ing and a technical mechanical training must be demanded by our citizens, and no true son of Dartmouth will object.

Again, the mechanical course, which now exists in our college, has never been unduly magnified at the expense of agriculture, and there is no sign that such will be the case in the future. Each can assist and supplement the other. Hence all conditions are favorable for utilizing in full the advantages of libraries, museums, etc., so freely accorded by the old college. On the other hand are some difficulties. The government fund when supplemented by our state appropriation is all too small to enable us to compete with other more favored institutions, but we should be in much worse condition if entirely dependent upon ourselves. If we were not accustomed up here in New Hampshire to make one dollar take the place of two all round, it might seem a hopeless task. The great hope of the future is the experiment station. This, if rightly managed, will gather together a corps of workers in the agricultural line who will be most competent instructors in the college. Their salaries being divided between the station and the college, the latter will obtain the services of a class of men otherwise entirely beyond her reach.