Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

2 THE SOUTHERN WORLD, SEPTEMBER 56, 1882. AGRICULTURAL, EDUCATION. Addreu by Prof. J. If. McBryde, of the Uni- tersity of South Carolina, before the State Agricultural Society and State Orange, of South Carolina, at Anderson, South Carolina, August 10,1882. Gentlemen or the State Agricultural Society asd 8tate Grange.—About three week* ago I received a very kind Invitation from the presiding officers of your respec tive Associations to attend this ’• Joint Sum mer Meeting.” On my arrival in Columbia last week, I learned that my friends were very anxious that I should, at least, say something about Agricultural Education, and finding that I would have two days of leisure at my com mand, I hurriedly threw together a few thoughts in the following paper which I now submit for what it is worth. The subject ef Agricultural Education is, as you know, an exceedingly difficult and vexed one. It has been freely discussed in such gatherings as yours—in the press and on the platform—for at least, a third of a century, and it is almost impossible, in en tering upon the field, to avoid going over ground already hard trampled by hosts of contending disputants. I shall not go out of my way, however, to attempt novelty of treatment, and I will avail myself, wherever necessary, of the experience and wisdom of others, for I appear to-day, for the first time, as a teacher in my native State, and it be hooves me, as such, to gather up facts where- ever I can find them, and to endeavor to set them in orderly arrangement before you. I must say, just here at the outset, that in accepting the chair of agriculture in your State University, I frankly and willingly recognize the farmers of South Carolina as my tribunal of last resort—the one to which I must always give account of my steward ship. To them I must look pot only for judgement, but for assistance and support— without their aid I am powerless. Now, my views on the subject before us are somewhat positive and pronounced, and tiie pertinent question may be at once suggested to such a body of practical men as yours—What right has he to hold them ? What has been bis op portunities for forming them? Fully ad mitting your right, I say, to ask such a question, especially on this, my first en trance upon my stewardship, and knowing your well grounded and just prejudices against mere theories and theorists, I trust you will pardon me a few words of personal allusion. I commenced farming in 18C5 and have been constantly engaged in agricultural pur suits from that day until this. In 1867 I removed from an adjoining county to Albe marle, Virginia, one of the best farming sections of the State. In this county is sit uated the leading educational institution of the 8outb, the University of Virginia. For a number of years I was connected with an agricultural club, composed of upwards of 100 of the best farmers of the county. When the Patrons of Husbandry made their way into Virginia, we changed this club into a Grange. The immediate neighborhood of an agricultural school soon' called the atten tion of our society to the subject of agricul tural education and the proper work and organisation of the Agricultural College. A farmer myself, I very naturally took the farmers’ view of these questions. After wards, I became a member of the Miller Board of Trustees of the Agricultural De partment of the University of Virginia, and one of its Farm Committee. The atten dance upon our school being small, I was appointed, on the part of our Board, to visit and examine into the workings of the vari ous agricultural schools and colleges of the country, and to report the results of my ob servations. These appointments gave me the opportunity of approaching the important subjects mentioned above from an entirely different standpoint—the college side. My report was submitted in 1878. In 18791 was elected to the chair of Agriculture and Bot any in the University' of Tennessee, and preceded at once to put my views and theo ries to the test of actual practice. I may add that they stood the test successfully. With these prefatory remarks, offered by way of explanation, I will briefly summarize the leading points of my report upon these colleges, which stand at the head of the sys tem of agricultural education in thiscountry. The first agricultural school in Europe was established at Celle in Hanover, by the celebrated Thaer in 1797. At the invitation of the king of Russia, he removed this school to Moeglin in the year 1807. I will not consume your time in tracing the his tory of the agricultural schools of Germany and the Continent. From this simple be ginning, by a slow and painful process of evolution and development, they have ex panded into a vast educational system. Mis takes, many and grievous, were committed, but corrected as experience was acquired and fuller knowledge gained, and the best evidence of a healthy and vigorous vitality is afforded by the fact that there are about 500 of these schools now in successful op eration in Europe. I may odd that the weight of opinion there' is in favor of the connection of the schools of the higher grade with the established Universities— the great centres of learning and intellectual progress—and that 99 out of every 100 pos sess land exclusively devoted to experiment al purposes. In this country different plans of or ganization were adopted by the agricultural schools established under the Act of 1862. You doubtless remember the wording of this act—The revenue derived from the sale of the donated lands shall be used “for the support and maintainance of at least one college in each State where the leading ob ject shall be, without excluding other scien tific and classical studies, and including military tactics, to teach such branches of ag riculture as are related to agriculture and the mechanics arts in such manner as the legisla tures of the states may respectively prescribe, in order to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions of life.” Senator Morrill, of Vermont, the author of the bill, offered the following words, explan atory of its meaning and purport: "The bill proposes to establish at least one college in every State upon a sure and perpetual foundation, acceptable to all, especially, to the sons of toil, where all the needful sciences for the practical avocations of life shall be taught; where neither the higher graces of classical studies, nor that military drill our country now so highly appreciates, will be ignored, and where agriculture, the foundation of all present and future pros perity, may look for troops of earnest friends, studying its familiar and recondite economies, and at least elevating it to that higher level where it may fearlessly invoke comparison with the most advanced stand ards of the world.” Such language allows of wide latitude of construction, and two very different plans of organization were, I say adopted. I have neither time nor in clination to go into details. In some States the endowment was given to existing institutions where the sciences more or less nearly related to agriculture were taught The authorities in control of these establishments wore of the opinion that they fully complied with the act by the cre ation of a chair of agriculture, or agricul tural chemistry. The instruction afforded by them was, for the most part, purely the oretical, too often in accordance with the traditions of the past, and intended only for the training of agricultural experts. The demand for such instruction proved to be very slight, and the attendance of students was in consequence, insignificant. The weak point of these institutions was that the student was not offered a thorough practical training. In other states a totally different plan was tried. Distinctively ag ricultural and mechanical colleges, separate and remote from the old literary and classi cal schools were established. In these a close curriculum of study, extending over four years was adopted, and manual labor was made obligatory on all students. In not a few, more hours were devoted to work than to study. As a consequence of so much of the time of the student being de voted to work, from the very nature of the case monotonous and mechanical—for the pitching of manure, grubbing, cutting wood, etc., and other similar employments, which can be thoroughly mastered in a few days time, ceased to be Instructive os soon as learned and if continued simply becomes drudgery—the instruction furnished by such institutions was necessarily of a low grade, but little of anything superior to that of the common high schools of the country. It was not accommodated to the wants of stu dents of ambition and parts, who desired a scientific as well as practical training. The weak point in these schools was their ten dency to favor brawn at the expense of brain. The experience of twenty years and more has been gradually correcting the mis takes and developing the advantages of these opposing systems, and from opposite ex tremes they are now moving towards each other, and more closely approximating the golden mean which lie between them—a thorough scientific and practical training suited to the wants and aspirations of stu dents in every condition of life. It was not to be supposed that these colleges could spring full fledged into existence; it was natural that mistakes should be committed. Their growth has been feeble, but it has been continuous and steady. It is by no means their fault that they have been com paratively neglected by the classes they were expressly intended to benefit. The reasons of this state of things are not far to seek. First and foremost is the prejudice against them excited by the pretentions of Liebig andother agr! cultural chemists. It was dis covered only too soon that soil and plant analysis was not the golden key which would unlock all the secrets of fertility, and revolutionize farming. The new theories, when submitted to the test of practice, failed miserably, and it has to be admitted that no wonderful changes could with rea son be’iromediately expected from the ap plication of science to agriculture. In this, as in every other, department of human enterprise, real progress must be necessarily slow. Again, agriculture has in this coun try at least, been for years in a depressed and languishing condition. It has invited neither speculation nor capital, and there are, consequently, but few inducements to young men to pursue it. I remember that before the panic of 1873, when railroading was being pushed to the utmost, that the class of engineering at the University of Virginia numbered between forty and fifty. Soon after that panic it fell to three and four. Let agriculture only become once again prosperous and remunerative, and there are cheering signs that it speedily will and there will be a rush of students to our agricultural schools. Again, there is but little demand as yet for agricultural knowl edge and skill in a country where land is so cheap and abundant—where it is more profi table to waste and exhaust, than to husband and increase the natural fertility of the soil, and to remove when the destructive process is accomplished, to newer and more fertile fields. But this state of things is also pass ing away—it takes but little time to com plete such work. Between 15 and 20 years ago the wheat fields of Minnesota, one of the youngest states of the great Northwest, gave an aver age yield of from 25 to 30 bushels per acre. Now, according to a report submitted to the present Congress, this average has been re duced to 10 or 12 bushels per acre. The end is not yet, but it is not far distant. It has already been reached in older states and there a genuine demand is springing up for more agricultural knowledge. Every means of improvement is sought for. Science has not been able as yet to make agriculture profitable but it is gradually paving the way for it—when it does, and not until then, our farmers will eagerly seek it. But, perhaps, the most potent influence militating against the success of our agricul tural colleges is the home and school train ing given to farmers’ sons. At home his surroundings are too often, and most neces sarily, unattractive and depressing. I can speak plainly, fori speak to brother farmers. No attention is paid to appearances—no ef fort made to improve or brighten anything. With mud in the barn lot, naked soil and no flowers or trees in tbe yard, no fruit or vegetables in the garden and discomfort and too often discontent in the house, with his observing powers left unnoticed and neglect ed, and his natural curiosity repressed, is it any wonder that the boy prefers the city to the farm, even though, the drudgery of the counter or desk is as severe as that of the plow or the hoe, And how easily could all this be changed 1 If the farmer would ceaso to grumble at his lot, and to degrade it in the eyeB of his son by recommending him, if ambitious and promising, to pursue some other calling or profession, if he would quit harping on the dignity of labor and only endeavor to make it intelligent, for as it has been well remarked; “It is not more digni fied or honest because unintelligent or such as can be performed as well by a steam en gine or a horse.” If he would explain or qualify himself to explain the principles which underlie the various processes and op erations of the farm, and to satisfy the ac tive curiosity of the boy concerning the nat ural objects around him, thereby giving in terest and life to his work. If he would make his premises neat and attractive, and see to it that there were vegetables and fruits in tbe garden, flowers and shrubbery in the yard, and taste, cheerfulness and comfort in the house. I feel sure he would check the migration to the towns, and at tach his children to the old home and the pure and robust life of the country. I be lieve I am safe in affirming that statistics will show no strearfi following citywards from such homes as these. Let us say here, parenthetically, that even flowers and shrub bery will pay the farmers well as an invest ment, for they enhance the value of his property. I once saw a farm of 900 acres, with 2 acres in a beautiful lawn planted and tended solely by the wife of the owner, sell for $50,000, when without the lawn I had reason to know it would not have brought half that amount. Such training and such influences should ever be the first great step in agricultural education. Again, in the vast majority of the public and private schools of the country, not a singlo word about agriculture or the sciences on which it depends, chemistry, botany, physiology, zoology, physics, mechanics and geology, is ever heard by the pupil, and tbe boy naturally concludes that these are of but little, if any importance. His mind is turned from them into other channels at an age when he is most impressible and the mischief done is often irreparable. Per haps, 1 should make here an exception in favor of Tennessee, whose school law re quires that the elements of agriculture and geology shall be taught. Reading, writing, grammar, geography and arithmetic are taught as if they were the sole aim and end of man’s existence. The practice has come down to us irom days when there was noth ing else to teach, and it is continued now under the plea of thoroughness. Thorough ness, indeed! when a life time’s study would not make us thorough in anything; and if it would, we neither wish nor desire all our children to be elocutionists, geographers, or accountants. Eight of the best years of my youth were devoted in part to the study of geography, and from that day to this I can honestly say that I have seldom had occa sion to use tiie knowledge gained with so much difficulty from maps and globes. It has long since escaped me. What use in af ter life will nine boys out of ten, make of alligation alternate, and tare and tret, and many other parts of arithmetic. The same thing might be said of parts of grammar. But it may be replied that the training af forded by such studies is most valuable. Would not the mental discipline furnished by tbe study of the natural sciences—the sciences that tell the boy of the objects which surround him, that underlie his every day life—that tell him how plants and animals grow and of their various parts and the elements composing them; how soils are formed and how exhausted; how agri cultural machines work—that acquaint him with injurious insects and noxious weeds - be as valuable. Would not such studies quicken and develop his observing powers which the others suffer to lie fallow and neglected? Would they not open up to him new worlds of pleasure and research, and invest the fields, woods, rocks and animals of the farm with new interest. When less time—mark me that I do not by any means advise that they should be given up togeth er—is devoted in our common schools to the teaching of the so-called rudiments, and room is thereby made for the study of the elements of t< e natural sciences, the second great step will be taken in agricultural edu cation. 8ueh associations as yours should see to it that such a change is effected. • The third step is already made possible by the more perfect organization of our best Agricultural Colleges. These now combine thorough theoretical and practical instruc tion. The sciences on which agriculture de pends are not taught simply in the lecture room. The student is drilled in the labora tory and field. Enough and no more ap plied work is given to make him familiar with the details of the several operations and proceses described or taught. Skill is not aimed at, this can only be acquired by years of patience and expeiience. In our medical schools the course of clinics is suffi cient to give the student a speaking acquaint ance with the different forms of disease and operations of surgery-it takes years of prac tice to make him a skilled physician or sur geon. More study should not be expected of our Agricultural Colleges. I have said the attendance at these colleges is small, it is, however, gradually increasing. Whenever it becomes sufficiently large, the colleges will find their appropriate work and will do it well. But what shall they do in the mean time? how can they justify their existence and show a healthy vitality ? The little leaven they send out yearly in the shape of graduates is not nearly enough to leaven the mass of the farming community. What can they do to secure the much de served patronage ? I unhesitatingly reply— they must address themselves to the present generation of farmers, must work for and with them, and educate them up to the point of sending their sons to the schools to be taught agriculture. To this end they must give increased attention to one of the most