the State of Massachusetts lead by sponsoring an institute for farmers in 1853.6 By 1890 such institutes had become established in 26 States. By 1902 the United States Department of Agriculture had secured funds to aid the farmers' institute movement.

As research in agriculture developed in the United States as a result of the provisions of the Hatch and Adams Acts, the extension program grew in importance as a means of carrying the findings of research to the people. It was natural that from the first the farmers' institutes should have been used for this purpose. With both State and Federal agencies active in farmers' institute work these institutes enjoyed a period of rapid development between 1902 and 1914 (see Table 6). Following 1914, however, farmers' institutes declined as a result of the growth of cooperative demonstration work and the passage of the Smith-Lever Act, which changed the methods used in extension work.

TABLE 6.-Number, attendance, and expenditures of farmers' institutes in the United States in selected years, 1902 to 1914 1

1

1 Adapted from A. C. True, A History of Agricultural Extension Work, p. 32. 2 The aggregate number of persons at the several sessions of each institute.

The beginning of modern extension methods in agricultural education has been attributed to Seaman A. Knapp's campaign to restore cotton production. In 1903, Dr. Knapp was assigned the task of teaching Southern farmers how to grow cotton in areas infested by the boll weevil; he immediately proceeded to organize the work by means of demonstrations, a method that proved highly successful. In 1906, Dr. Knapp's work attracted the attention of the General Education Board, which financed an expansion of the

6 Clarence B. Smith and Meredith C. Wilson, The Agricultural Extension System of the United States (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1930), p. 28.

7 Ibid., p. 29.

demonstration work into other Southern States as an educational activity.

The first county extension agent was appointed in 1906 in Smith County, Texas, to conduct demonstrations on a larger scale than the United States Department of Agriculture had carried on in the county.

This movement expanded until in 1914, prior to the enactment of the Smith-Lever Act, 240 counties in 27 Northern and Western States had county agricultural agents, and 42 of the 48 States had approximately 1,350 men and women employed in county extension work."

It was the general plan of the cooperative demonstration work to find a local farmer who would raise his crop according to the methods suggested by the extension agent. If greater success attended this farmer's efforts than those of his neighbors, his results served as a demonstration that the new methods were superior; further, since the methods were employed on a local farm, they constituted demonstrations of what could be applied in that particular community. By imitation of the successful demonstrator, the improved methods spread through the community.10 These methods of showing had greater appeal than the farmers' institute method of telling, and set a precedent for the United States Department of Agriculture for extension work with groups of farmers in the various States.

Federal Legislation

Smith-Lever Act.-In 1908 a committee of the Association of American Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations requested legislation to foster extension work. In response to its recommendations a bill was drafted and introduced by Representative McLaughlin of Michigan in December 1909, and by Senator Dolliver of Iowa in January 1910,11 but the measure was not passed. Meantime, strong backing for Federal aid for vocational education had developed; the chief proponent for this action was Senator Page of Vermont.

After the election of 1912 committee reorganization placed Senator Hoke Smith of Georgia in the chairmanship of the Committee on Education and Labor. He was also retained on the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. Senator Page of Vermont was also on both committees. In the House, Representative Lever of South Carolina was the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture and Representative Hughes of Georgia was chairman of the Committee on Education. By agreement of the several committees it was decided to push the extension and the vocational education bills simultaneously, but to keep them separate so as not to confuse the issues. After several changes in Senate and House, the final draft of the Smith-Lever Act passed these two bodies and was approved by President Wilson on May 8, 1914.12 It should be noted that both the extension (SmithLever) and the vocational education (Smith-Hughes)13 acts had the sponsorship of Senator Smith, who intended that each should supplement the other. This is important in view of some of the developments since the passage of these two acts.

The Smith-Lever Act was intended to foster agricultural extension in the States and to coordinate the extension work of land-grant colleges and the United States Department of Agriculture, both of which had been active in certain parts of the country. The Act provided:

1. That extension work in agriculture and home economies should be carried on by the land-grant colleges in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture.14

2. That extension work should consist of giving instruction and practical demonstrations to persons not attending or resident in a land-grant college.15

3. That each State was to receive $10,000 annually from Federal funds, and the following year additional amounts prorated on the basis of rural population from a Federal fund of $600,000, which should increase by $500,000 an

12 For text of Act see appendix A.

13 Passed in 1917. For a study of vocational education see John Dale Russell and associates, Vocational Education, The Advisory Committee on Education, Staff Study No. 8 (Washing. ton: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1938).

14 Sec. 1.

15 Sec. 2.

nually for 7 years and continue thereafter at a total of $4,100,000.16

4. That the additional amounts of prorated Federal funds must be matched by State or local funds raised or contributed within the State.17

5. That to benefit from this Act a State must assent to its provisions, and designate and certify a treasurer to receive and disburse the funds.18

6. That each college receiving benefits must submit a statement annually to the Secretary of Agriculture covering the amount appropriated for the fiscal year.

19

A States Relation Service was set up in the United States Department of Agriculture to administer the program of the Smith-Lever Act and to coordinate the existing and new extension activities of the Department and of the States. In it was also included the Office of Experiment Stations.20 It was expected that approximately 75 percent of the SmithLever funds would be spent for field demonstrations and the practical instructions immediately connected therewith.21 Not more than 5 percent of the funds was to be expended for the printing and distribution of publications.22 The remainder, approximately 20 percent, might be spent for such enterprises as movable schools, study clubs, or boys' and girls' clubs.23 Farm demonstration work in the South and county advisory work in the North would be continued, although Department and Smith-Lever funds would be kept separate.24 Certain restrictions were also specified. SmithLever funds were not to be expended for college teaching, agricultural trains, and permanent model or demonstration farms.25

Because of the administrative control vested in the office of the Secretary of Agriculture and the policy-making

16 Sec. 3.

17 Sec. 3.

18 Sec. 4.

19 Sec. 4.

20 True, A History of Agricultural Extension Work, p. 117.

21 Ibid. Statement by Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Galloway, March 5, 1914, quoted by True.

22 Smith-Lever Act, sec. 5.

23 See footnote 21 above.

24 lbid.

25 Smith-Lever Act, sec. 5.

responsibility assigned that official by the Smith-Lever Act, the Association of American Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations urged a memorandum of understanding between the United States Department of Agriculture and each State. Such memorandums, setting forth policies to be followed in administering the Act, were drawn up. The memorandums were signed by officials of 46 States, but all States followed the policies outlined in them.26

The Smith-Lever Act began a new type of governmental activity in which the Federal Government was given a larger measure of control over work in the States than had been contemplated in any of the preceding legislation affecting land-grant colleges. A new matching principle of sharing the support of the work with the State, county, and local people was also introduced for the first time in the legislation affecting the land-grant institutions.27

The Smith-Lever Act and the World War stimulated a rapid expansion of agricultural extension work. In 1914 about 30 percent of the agricultural counties had county agricultural agents and about 10 percent had home demonstration agents. By 1919 over 75 percent of the counties had county agricultural agents and 35 percent had county home demonstration agents. The number of farm men actively cooperating increased in the period from 1914 to 1919 from approximately 100,000 to more than 275,000; the number of farm women, from 6,000 to more than 125,000. Enrollment in boys' and girls' club work rose from about 250,000 to about 614,000 during the same interval. Funds spent for agricultural extension work rose from $3,600,000 in 1915 to $14,700,000 in 1919, although the maximum available from Federal Smith-Lever funds in 1919 amounted to only $2,580,000.28

The demands of the War placed added responsibilities and increased pressure on the extension agents to aid in the administration of the food-control and food-production acts,

26 True, History of Agricultural Extension Work, pp. 119-20. For a specimen of these memorandums see appendix C.

27 Smith and Wilson, op. cit., p. 42. See pp. 40-3, 63-4 of the present study for a discussion of the effects of this provision on this and other programs.

28 True. History of Agricultural Extension Work, pp. 151, 197-8.