usually ridiculed the idea of teaching any such thing to children. Such attempts as were made to carry out the law were in most cases wholly futile. In a few years the law was repealed, to the relief of all connected with the schools. In the meantime, however, since the law was on the statute-books, a large number of teachers endeavored to prepare themselves for it. The subject was introduced in the normal schools, and the classes in entomology in the University, which had always been very small, at once began to grow, and were soon large and interesting. When the law was repealed they at once fell back almost to their old numbers. All this shows that it is usually impossible to push reforms much in advance of public sentiment, and yet that, if enacted into law, and kept long enough on the statute-book, such a movement will in the end result in an adequate supply of those competent to carry it on. The California law was repealed just as it was about to become possible to properly execute it. It was very faulty, however, in that it made insect life the main end of study, which should be plant physiology and hygiene.

The foregoing, with a perusal of the documents relating to this subject which will be found in the appendix, will give an idea of the conception of agricultural instruction in the common schools as it exists to-day. Its object is to impart to children such elementary knowledge as is possible of all the natural sciences underlying the operations of the farm. In the present crowded state of our school curriculums, the introduction of a new subject, in which any real progress is expected, must usually involve the displacement of something else. One practical question must be as to what shall be omitted that is now taught. There will be advocates of that subject, whatever may be, who will fight its displacement. In rural schools it is not at all unusual for the teacher to conduct twenty-five or thirty recitations each day. The actual school day, deducting recesses, is about three hundred and twenty minutes. Dividing this number by thirty, the average time that can be devoted to a recitation is but little over ten minutes. If there are but twenty recitations per day, the average time for each is sixteen minutes. Any effective study of natural science will use up several of

it

these periods, and invariably occupy the attention of every pupil in the school as long as it lasts, which should be evidence that it is adapted to their mental attainments. This practical question, with that of the securing of competent teachers, suitable appliances, and the necessary financial support, are the main problems to be dealt with in connection with the study. of agricultural science in common schools. None of them are yet solved, and in fact have hardly yet been seriously considered.

O

CHAPTER VII.

AGRICULTURAL PAPERS AND BOOKS.

NE of the curious things which must be taken account of is the intense prejudice which exists among large masses of farmers against what they call "bookfarmers" and "book-farming." Everything has its cause, and there is, of course, a cause for this prejudice. In part it is accounted for by the very unpractical character of some popular books on farming which were published a half century since. There was good literature on the subject even then, but it did not seem to get into popular form. Allowing for the advance in scientific knowledge since that time, there is very little to which modern science can take exception in the old cyclopedias, for example, which had the widest popular circulation, and in which the agricultural articles, written by the best men of the time, are clear and sensible. The first really popular movement towards scientific agriculture was based on the idea of controlling fertility by the operations of chemistry. There were then few agricultural chemists in this country, and they doubtless had rather exaggerated ideas of the possibilities of agricultural chemistry; and these, as conceived by the people, were still more impossible. There was an abundance of virgin soil to be had for the asking, and more money could be generally made by robbing that than by improving that which had begun to be exhausted. Analysis of his soil in advance was practically impossible to most farmers, who, so far as they used commercial fertilizers at all, used them blindly, and often without much regard to mechanical and climatic conditions, or the special needs of the different plants. The result of these exaggerated notions, usually still farther exaggerated and unintelligently applied, was a great reaction from what at first was a promising movement, and a deep-seated prejudice against "scientific fellers" of all kinds, which has been

transmitted to this day. Agricultural chemistry is even yet one of the least-understood sciences, and while certainly of great importance, is less reliable as a source of profit than almost any other of the applications of science to agriculture. At the same time, so deep-rooted and permanent are these popular impressions, that the general notion of "agricultural science" and "agricultural books" is almost exclusively that of the employment of commercial fertilizers under the direction of chemists.

Another reason for this wide-spread prejudice is the fact that very few farmers ever read the books they condemn. As a matter of fact, with all the shortcomings of the old books on agriculture, they contained a great deal of useful information and sensible discussion. For the most part, what the farmers objected to was not what the books contained, but what they imagined they contained. No prejudice is so bitter as that founded on absolute ignorance. Still another reason is the gradual sapping of the farmer's intellectual vigor by the flood of cheap periodical literature, seldom reliable, largely sensational, and always ephemeral, which now infests the earth. In the old days most farmers had a few well-bound books, handed down from former generations, very solid in character, and which were read and reread of the long evenings until thoroughly mastered. The daily paper he happily knew nothing of. Such training tended to make strong minds and thoughtful men. It is now hardly possible, from sheer intellectual weakness, for a large portion of our farmers to attack and master the intricate agricultural problems which confront them. The majority will yield to the inclination to drop study for the newspaper the moment it comes in. And yet it is seldom that the contents of the daily paper are of any special consequence. The habit of newspaper-reading also begets the habit of superficial, hasty reading of all publications, whereby the real meaning of the author is missed. If it be said that what is said here is by no means true of all farmers, the reply must be that it is in the main true of that portion of them who are most prejudiced against bookfarming.

Another cause of the prejudice is the undoubted fact that comparatively few farms owned by city men, who are usually the devotees of book-farming, are a source of profit to their owners. In some cases these gentlemen, doubtless, make grave mistakes, for a successful farmer is as unlikely to be made by the study of books alone as a successful merchant or manufacturer. All books on farming presuppose their readers to be practical farmers, familiar from boyhood with the details of farm work, and consequently able to apply scientific doctrine in the light of common sense and experience. Whoever, without experience, undertakes to carry on a farm, is as likely to come to grief as he who so undertakes to carry on a factory. Finally, it is as true now as in Ben Franklin's time that

"He who by the plow would thrive

Must either hold himself, or drive."

No farm to which the actual owner does not give his principal attention and thought is likely to be profitable. The "practical farmer" who should undertake to carry on his farm by weekly visits only, would be even less likely to secure profitable results than the city man who adopts the same

course.

As a matter of fact, however, substantially all books on agriculture which are now issued, are the work of intensely practical men who place their experience and observation at the command of mankind. They are compact and complete statements of what the author knows, and are of the utmost value to the practical farmer who will make use of them. It would be difficult, if not impossible, for a poor book to find a publisher, for even the very best books yield hardly any revenue either to publishers or authors, for the reason that farmers do not buy them. In the long run, I suppose those which get published pay for themselves, but I doubt whether Professor King's invaluable book on "Soils," for example, has ever paid its author a dollar a day for the time actually spent in writing it and correcting the proof sheets, to say nothing of pay for the time spent in acquiring the information. I have prepared, as very valuable information, a list of some late books on agriculture, with publishers and price, which will be