periments, upon the same vegetable, by the same chemist, and under circumstances as nearly similar as possible, the results are generally different. Changes are continually taking place in the soil from natural causes; and as long periods of time are required to make experiments on a farm, there is little probability of success in attempting to apply to practical farming, the experiments of the laboratory or school room.

The diversity of soils, situations, and even climates, is so great in our “empire State," it is evident that experiments tried upon a “pattern farm," located in any one part of it, cannot be made to indicate the proper system to be pursued on very many other farms in the State. Even if the whole scope of any one county were taken into view, it would be impossible to found any system of farming upon and make it generally applicable to the successful cultivation of farms in other counties. The modes of cultivation in the eastern counties could not be successfully practised in the western parts of the State; nor those of the counties south of the mountains made to apply to the climate and soil of those in the northern, or even the middle parts of the State.

In some of the petitions referred to the committee, it is stated that “the young men educated at an agricultural school, by settling in different portions of the State, would not only diffuse a greater taste for the pursuit of agriculture, but by their practice would impart the information they have collected, to the benefit of a large class of citizens; that we should thereby have better horses, cattle and sheep, and materially increase the quantity and improve the quality of the several kinds of grain.”

The experience and observation of the committee have led them to a different conclusion. Although many young men with whom they were acquainted have attended agricultural schools, they have not known of a single instance where one of them has returned to the “dull pursuits of civil life,” in practical farming. They have invariably turned their attention to and pursued some professional or other business, which they imagined to be an easier if not a more expeditious mode of acquiring wealth and distinction; and the chances of ultimate failure in every pursuit, were much increased from the imperfect manner in which they had been educated; having, from the short period of time devoted the study of each of the numerous branches attempted to be

taught, acquired but a swattering of theoretical, without the practical knowledge necessary to the successful prosecution of any.

The committee, on full consideration of the subject, have come to the conclusion, that no legislative action can be made efficient, or is necessary, in aid of practical farming in this country. But in expressing this opinion, they would not be understood to be opposed to the acquirement of scientific knowledge by our farmers. Much useful information might undoubtedly be obtained, if, during their leisure hours, they were to employ themselves in reading well selected books and papers on agricultural subjects. Those books, and particularly the agricultural papers, contain facts, generally drawn from the experience of practical agriculturists, stated in such plain and clear language as to be easily understood by those for whose benefit they are designed. And although the committee would not recommend the establishment of an “agricultural school,” or “board of agriculture," or any other State or county society, or “institution,” they are of the opinion, that very great benefit would be derived from the introduction of agricultural books and papers (bound up for that purpose,) into our common schools, for reading and class books. They believe that by this means the diffusion of knowledge would be much more general, and it would be applied to the use and benefit of that particular class of our population who stand most in need of it; as nearly all our farmers' sons receive their education entirely at those schools. Thus, the rising generation, while acquiring -elementary scientific knowledge, would at the same time be learning the theory of the art of husbandry; and this too, without being deprived of the advantages of constant practice under parental superintendence; the great expense of attending a course of lectures at a State institution; or the hazard of acquiring indolent and vicious habits at such a school.

a

The petitioners appear to suppose that a State agricultural school would "materially increase the quantity and improve the quality of the several kinds of grain,” &c. The committee believe it will not be necessary to establish one for that purpose. It is well known that nearly (if not quite) all the improved breeds of animals and kinds of grain which have been successfully introduced into our country, were imported by individuals, and not by societies. This fact goes far to prove that no public institutions are necessary to

for improvement in this respect. And heretofore, when a less quantity of produce has been raised by them than their farms were capable of growing, it has not appeared to be from want of knowledge or skill in the farmers, but for want of an outlet or market for their surplus produce. The increase in production has invariably kept pace with the increase of facilities in reaching the markets, or the enhancement of price.

Many comparisons having been made between the farmers of Europe and those of our own country, much to the disadvantage of the latter, a brief sketch of the ancient and modern modes of European agriculture, &c., with a view to vindicate the character of our farmers from these injurious aspersions, will not, the committee trust, be deemed improper.

Nearly all the nations of ancient times appear to have been "tillers of the ground." Little however, is known of their systems of agriculture. For although many volumes are said to have been written on the subject, they were, from the improvements of later times, deemed of no value, and lost, or perhaps destroyed in the general wreck of the empires and nations to which they belonged.

The system of husbandry pursued by the Greeks, appears to have been extremely imperfect. And notwithstanding the advantages they possessed, of a very perfect knowledge of some of the mechanic arts, their implements of agriculture were not only few in number, but very roughly made, and inconvenient in their construction. They do not appear even to have been acquainted with the use of the harrow; for we are informed that the "seed was sown by hand and covered with a rake." They also "pounded their grain in mortars or quern-mills, into meal," for family use.

The Romans do not seem to have merited the extravagant enmiums so liberally bestowed upon them by Virgil, and others, for their superior knowledge on this subject. Their agricultural implements were of the rudest kind; and they appear to have practised no other mode of threshing their grain, than by "throwing it from one side of the floor to the other." They had several kinds of ploughs; some "with one mould-board and some with two, and others with a coulter."

Italy, at the present day, probably exhibits pretty fair specimens of what the Roman implements were. The ploughs of that coun

try are represented as being “rude contrivances, with handles 13 or 14 feet long."

In Germany also, agriculture appears to be in but an imperfect state. Their ploughs and wagons are said to be “unwieldy and inefficient," and although considerable improvement is said to have been made within a few years, it is evident much more must take place before their system will be brought to any great degree of perfection.

In France there seems to have been but little improvement within the last century, although as early as in 1761, there were thirteen principal, and nineteen auxiliary agricultural societies in that country. Many new societies were established by Bonaparte; and “professorships, botanical and economical gardens for the exhibition of different modes of culture," established. But the implements of husbandry are said to be “ generally rude and unwieldy, and the operations of husbandry unskilfully performed.” The French, however, probably excel all other nations in the cultivation of the vine and in making silk.

Of all the nations of Europe, the English appear to have made the greatest progress in improving their system of husbandry. And their agricultural implements, the manner of using them in cultivation, and the modes of culture pursued, are probably the most perfect of any in the old world. The population of this country, being chiefly emigrants from that, introduced the system and implements of husbandry in use there, in the time of “the pilgrims." And being children of the “mother country,” speaking the same language, and having constant communication with that nation, has enabled our agricultural population to avail themselves of all the modern improvements made in that country; and even to excel in the construction and use of their implements, and the modes of cultivating the soil, without the aid of agricultural schools.

The most enterprising part of the population of a country, emigrate. The privations incident to the settlement of a new country, oblige the emigrants, by invention and industry, to supply their wants, and obtain the conveniences enjoyed in the country from whence they came. Their inventive powers, quickened by necessity, push them forward not only to an equal degree of per

it is, that in a few years, we see the condition of the people in a new country, generally better than that of the same class in the old.

The committee have observed that wherever the government has attempted, by rules and regulations, to improve the condition of any class of the people, its interference has only tended to paralize individual enterprize, which, if not left to act as its natural impulse directs, becomes lethargic and inactive. Under our free institutions, this is the more to be deprecated; because in such cases the people are thereby induced to become the mere dependants of the government. And instead of relying upon their own resources to supply their wants, they look up to, and expect to receive, from the bounty of the government, what they ought to obtain for themselves, by their own enterprize and industry.

The European schools have been established under aristocratic or monarchical forms of government. If it were necessary, or possible, to force improvement upon the population of a country, they possess more powers and facilities for that purpose than our own. And yet they have been able to render those institutions only of doubtful utility. The emigrant farmers from Switzerland, France and Prussia, where the most celebrated schools are said to be located, have generally been so ignorant of the art of farming as to require much instruction, before they could be profitably employed. And the rudely constructed vehicles and implements of agriculture, brought to this country by those emigrants, show that they are so far inferior as not to be put in comparison with our own. Even the emigrant farmers from England, (where agricultural science has been carried to a much greater degree of perfection than in any other country in Europe,) instead of being teachers of the art, are obliged to become pupils, and learn the modes pursued by our native agriculturists. And it is believed that not an instance is known where an emigrant was successful, who practised upon the English, or any other European system.

Situated as we are, with a country which, (though but lately a wilderness,) is being improved with unparalleled rapidity, by an agricultural population more capable than that of any other nation of improving its condition, if not prevented by indiscreet legislative interference, where shall we look for instruction? It is