The new dominion. [volume] (Morgantown, W. Va.) 1876-1904, 1879-11-08
AGRICULTURE.


in order to fully utilize its hidden
wealth and productiveness we feel
that we cannot in our feeble earnest
way, too often call the attention of
our readers to the all-important sub
ject heading this article. And at the
Threshold, let us inquire, why should
this important subject be allowed to
occupy a fourth or fifth place in the
scale of livellhoods, instead of the
very first, in that scale, Is it should.
Is it because there il too much man
ual labor in it +? Not that alone. Is
it because there is anything degrad-
ing or Gishonorable about it9 Hard
| ~ That. Is it because it is not and
may not be made as remunerative to
its devotees as any other? No, not
that. Is it less healthful avocation
than the learned professions, or the
mercantile or mechanical pursuits?
We suppose not. Why, then, is it
that our young men are so generally
DESERVING the fields of Agriculture
to these other pursuits, until they
are becoming barren, a waste, for
the want Of scientific cultivation.
The cause Of all this, to our mind, is
obvious. 1t is because that as Agri-
culture is never taught, or rather
practiced; there is too little brain
work in it; too much body and too
little mind put in it; for as now
practiced, in the main, it is all guess
work and experience, instead of all
science and knowledge; as it should
be. Our sons are sent to College,
there to acquire a taste, at least of
scientific knowledge, touching many
things; there the lamp of knowledge
! is lighted to guide their feet in the
path way Of mental researches, as
there taught. But, alas! scientific
agriculture is not there taught, but
is still left to grope its way in the
dark. Consequently the devotee of
philosophy of science and demon
strated knowledge, as taught in the
schools, turns his back upon agri-
culture-not only forsakes it but
in fact learns to loathe it as bust
ness fitted only for the uneducated
and ignorant. What a mistake
Why are not our sons there taught
| and deeply taught, in the science or
philosophy of agricultural chemistry?
Why are they not taught to analyze
and combine or re-compose, our soils,
and other products? Why not learn
them to analyze a handful of soil,
and read and know their properties
and power of production, with the
same scientific certainty that chem
lists analyze water, air, or other mat
ter? And why not also learn them
how to analyze each and all kinds of
cereals and crops, and thereby know
their constituent properties or ele-
ments; and thus by first ascertaining
the properties and power of produc-
ton Of any given acre of soil, as
well as of any and every kind of
crop, may know what kind of crop
any and every given acre will best
produce. Not only so, but in this
way we may know before we plar t
what a barren soil wants to make it
fruitful, and what ingredient any
soil requires, TO best adapt it to any
given kind eof crop. This would be
cultivating the soil in the light of sci
ence instead of in darkness and ig-
norance.
There is no calling or business
where the light of philosophical
chemlstr of scientific knowledge,
is more needed, more absolutely
needed, than in the cultivation of
the soil. None that opens wider
field to science, and to brain labor
and yet none that seems to have so
little of either bestowed upon them.
A farmer must know the proper
ties and power of productiveness
of his field, before he can intelligent
ly SOW or plant-and he must also
know the compound parts or ingre-
dients Of the grain or crop desired
to be produced on that field, and it's
adaptation to that soil, before he can
intelligently expect remunerative
crop or yield; just as the physician
must first accurately know the dag
nosis or character of the disease of
his patient, before he can know what
medicine is best adapted to the care
of that disease; SO must he also
know by chemical analysis the prop
critics of the medicine so admins