Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1881-03-02
The Agricultural Department.

The Agricultural Department.
A leading newspaper, speaking Of the fail
ure to make the commissioner of agriculture
cabinet officer (he proposition barely fell
short of the necessary two-thirds vote), says
" The refusal of the house TO make the COM
missioner of agriculture cabinet secretary
is not probably due to any hostility or inap-
probation Of that interest, but to just sense
of the impropriety of such step. The cab
met is large enough already, and it is an
open question whether the postmaster gen.
eral ought to sit in it as political officer at
all. The commissioner of agriculture ought
not to be political officer, subject to change
with each administration. Nobody objects
to the Office being made important, but the
question is whether the way to make it i'm
portant is to elevate it into the range Of cab
met squabbles, or to give it more and more
to do with the farming interests Of the coun-
try. The chief of the bureau Of agriculture
needs to become, not the political adviser of
The president, but the professional adviser Of
the farmers" 1t seems to us that if any
change is made the postmaster general ought
TO be dropped from the cabinet and minis
ter of agriculture put in his place. Agricul-
ture is the foundation industry of the coun-
try, and if the president needs any advisers
he needs one who would adequately repre-
sent the agricultural requirements Of the ma
ion. As it is, agriculture has practically
no representative anywhere in the national
government, and measures vitality affecting
agricultural interests are almost daily acted
upon without anything approaching due
aud proper understanding of how they do
affect the farmers of the land.
Nevertheless, we are not prepared to urge
the establishment of national ministry of
agriculture as a part of the executive ad-
ministration. The office would, probably,
like most other offices, be filled by lawyer
or politician. We have hundreds of such
representing" agricultural constituencies
in congress now, but what do they know or
care about, or what do they ever do to pro-
mote, agricultural interests ? If they are
honest, they represent commercial, financial
and manufacturing interests. If they are
dishonest, they represent their own private
interests, and the interests of those who will
pay them well for their service. The farm
ers have never, in any part of the country,
so far as we know, even asked candidate
~. OmS~ -i-. L. AI---SLA. ,rhat ha would
do, in regard to any legislation affecting ag-
riculture. They don't seem to think they
have any interests that may be helped or
hindered by the action of the national gov
ernment. They just "go with the party"
"go it blind" so to speak. If congressman
really desired to represent them, where could
they go to learn what the farmers wish 1t
is true that in general way farmers are in
favor of economical administration, and are
opposed to the unrestricted power of corpo-
rations. But what influence do these opin-
ions exert? Any farmer who might read
the Congressional Record would look in vain
for any indication that his representative
feared to vote for extravagant appropria-
tions, or in favor Of liberal grants of money,
land, or power, to corporate organizations,
for fear the farmers might object, or cease
to vote for him. In fact, the mass of the
farmers know nothing about what goes on
in congress, and care less. Our newspapers
give us hardly any information about what
occurs at Washington in the way of business
legislation. Matters affecting the power of
parties, or the prospects of prominent politi-
clans, are printed and these are the things
people most care to read about in connection
with the government. The vast majority
don't know anything about what is being
done to affect their dearest interests, any
more than they do in Russia, until long af
ter it is all over and the mischief done, and
then they don't know whom to hold respon-
,ible.
If the farmers were as a body intelligently
alive to their interests, and If we could have
minister of agriculture taken as a repre-
sentative man from amongst them, to up
hold their interests and lay them intelli-
gently and forcibly before congress,--if w
had even half dozen men of the sam'
stamp in congress to advocate those inter
ests, no doubt millions upon millions Of dol
lars might be save to the people and the ma
tion, which are now lost But as long as W,
are all satisfied, or apparently satisfied, II
leave all these things in the hands Of mel
utterly ignorant and Indifferent long, il
fact, as we are content to remain ignoran
and Indifferent ourselves in regard to suc
matters-what good is it to us that som
politician should hold a place in the pres
dents cabinet as " Secretary of Agricul
ture 2" He would have no real, live consti
uency behind him, and he would only max
agriculture aud farmers laughing stocl
Reform or progress, to be effective, must b.
giu in the minds and purposes of the peopl
themselves. Perhaps it has begun anon
the farmers, but it has made little visibl
progress.