Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1854-02-22


E 4tascifur si0licu1as 8 - ~ 8
| Itis hoped that DR.. Ton,pkins feels better. 4
story is told of surgeon nfthe East Indies who
performed Lthotomy on himself and survived the
operation. But DR.. Tomp kins more daring and
more skilfu after selfinfcted Csesarean rejoiceth
over twins, and s'is as well as could be expected y
But ought any friend of North Carolina to rejoice
With DR.. Tompkins over his two letters in the STAN
dard ?? What are the facts of the case?
Dr. Tompkins. DESTROYS of improving the modes
of farming in North Carolina, labours for four years
as h.rmer, lecturer and an Editor. He analyses
soils for five dollars and gives advice for as many
more, which prices, to be remuneratiye, must be
largely patronized Prof Mapes himself being wits
hess So far his success is good. We must all be
grathed by 1t, and DIR. Tompkins is encouraged to
set up as public teacher of Agricultural Science.
On the other hand We have Prof Hedrick, young
man unknown to fame, of good character of good
education, and of good feelings his fetter in the
Standard must convince one. After distinguishing
himself for his attainments in the exact sences at
our University, and after spending two years in
! the best appointed Analytical Laboratory in the
United States, he appointed by the Trustees
who knew well his early life, his college career,
his natural abilities and his success as a student
to a new professorship in University
professorship that was established to foster the
terest that was arising in North Carolina the SUBJ
Ject of Agriculture, mines and manufactures. Be-
fore he enters the duties of his chair Mr. Hedrck
makes an analysis of his soil for friend. What
explanations or recommendations accompanied the
analysis to this friend no. where appears Another
friend without the prvity of either of the other gen.
tlemen, as far as appears, publishes the analysis
with some comments of his own, confessedly crude
and insufficient, apparently just to call public atten
ton to the objects of Prof Hedrck's labors They
were put forth without parade, without reflections
the seepiness of North Carolina and without I'M
worthy earnings at any previous contemporaneous
labors in the field Now what course would
have been expected from generous and disinteres-
ted toiler for the public veal? Dr. Temp. ms was
already in prominent position before the public
a teacher, lecturer, and an Editor. He had been
working almost alone n
to awaken our farmers to their true interests. One
would have expected him to hail with sincere delight
the appearance OF any co-laborcr-that he would
nave introduced him to the public and secured his
services writer in his journal Such course
would have prevented Mr.. Hedrick from appearing
as a rival, and if he incompetent would most
surely and quickly have resulted in his deposition
from his high and influential position. Even self
interest would have dictated such course. The
more people there are in community who with
their education have received instruction in the
of analyses of soils, the analyses will be re-
quired by them and their neighbors. The more in
formation, exact and scientific there is difuse among
our people, the more readers there will be for Far
mers Journal. But captious criticism is not likely
to advance public Interests to conciate the feel
ings of the intelligent and influential
| Now what course does Dr. Tompkins prefer One
that would have resulted in harmony and increased
our animation in the development of the resources
of our StateT Not at ALL But in one that will breed
| nothing but i'll will and confuson-party strife
! and envious detractions Before Prof Hedrick en-
| written
uttered syllable whereby Dr. Tompkins could
| judge what would be his teachings at the Univcr-
sty, the public is assured that he is incompetent
to teach Agriculture and virtually if not in many
words that the Trustees unfthnl to their trust
Besides his so-caed proof of these allegations, Dr..
Tompkins INDUCES in the irritating and what must
! be ultimately barren sneers of demagogue about
Laboratory theories and the aristocracy of
science. These may have the effect of recommend
( ing him to an instance of democratic and
judcious mixture of the theoretical .nd the practi-
cal in consulting Agricultural Chemist. But in
reply to all such inucnG oes it is enough to suggest
once for all, that examination it may be found
that at the beginning of his education the intelligent
poughboy, and at his graduation the enthusiastic
and careful student, knew much that is valuable
of farming and of Agricultural Chemistry as Dr.
Tonpkins does now.
DIR. Tompkins sets the example of defending the
farmers of North Carolina from the alurements of
incompetent teachers and of putting to flight
come whence it may" 1t may be useful to the pub
lie just to notice few of his qualifications as
they appear in his two letters in the Standard. Dr.
Tonpkins docs not appear to know that the classifi
cation of soil does not depend entirely the IN.
bours of an analyst. Any farmer can decide, with
accuracy enough for all practical purposes whether
his soil is sandy, clayey, loamy, without pay
ing five dollars for an anaiysis-useful this may
be for other purposes. All he wants is pair of
Apothecares scales and a bowl. Let him wash
ounce of his soil-pour off the muddy water and
weigh what is left; Pixies Arithmetic easily help
him to decide the result. One of the blessings of
truly scientific education is that it disspates need
less mysteries while it increases our independence
of mere theorists. Dr. Tompkins does not know
that there are, he docs not know how to
use balances which can detect hundreths of
grain. Why! there balances, made for the
last thirty years, which can infallibly detect the
hundreth- thousandths of grain. AS DIR. Tomp-
kin's laboratory has in it only Fairbanks Platform
Scales, he ought to know that they arc intended to
weigh hogs and hay, not to detect Phosphoric Acid
in merry thought OF course pot knowing of the
instruments of the skill necessary to use them,
taao Thai
practical Analyst, be aware of having lost only
the thirty mine hundredths of one per cent of what
he examined Here he is unfortunate. Dr. Tomp=
kins does not see the OF noticing ingredients
when only "a trace" of them exirts. Well! others
DR. Emmons, for instance-have oftentmes seen
the of such notices. They suggest delicacy in
the Instruments, and intelligence minuteness of
search and fidelity in the analyst, if they
of no other DIR. Tompkins ought to know that
while it is right to "a posse ad esse,"
the posse is very different thing from the non
posse intelltgi. The former difficulty is usually ex-
ternal to us, the other is usually internal To
prove the inacuracy and nsuffciency of Prof. He'd
rick's analyses, and the general ihcompetency Of
their author, Dr. Tompkins compares them with an
analysis made by Sir Humphrey Davy forty years
letter revived the vile and stale SANDER about North
be true son of Wimbledon. He ought to wake up,
neer may sometimes improve that path-that it is
Davy, that later analysts have shown other arrange
no, e