AGRICULTURAL TRAINING

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 7017, 4 January 1910, Page 4

AGRICULTURAL TRAINING

There is a certain amount of humour in the fact that on one day last week tehsgrams appeared in "the newspapers chronicling (1) a statement by the Minister for Agriculture "that it is almost impossible for a young man without means to learn to he a farmer," and (2) a plea by a Maori Congress at Auckland for the instruction of Maoris in agriculture. If wo are to believe the evidence of our senses the more enlightened of Maoris havo a much greater comprehension of the necessity for rural education than their pakeha brethren. The great majority of the latter have not yet survived the notion that ability to plough and sow, and milk and distinguish tiho sex of sheep represents all the equipment it is necessary to'have in order Ito be a farmer. ■ The idea, is, of course, as wildly absu'.d as the idiotic supposition that, farming should be reserved for dullards. The fact of the matter is, of course, tliat the farmer of the future will either be a successful specialist or bankrupt. Rural industries, it is true, have in the main been carried out on rule-of-thumb lines and with less rntaHigenoo than any other form of human effort, but tlie pressure of competition and the increasing pTiee of land and labour make the adoption of improved methods imperative.

Now Zealand, it is sad to say, lags far in the rear in this respect, and has a groat deal of lost ground to make up. Though nine out of ten of out farmers, are not aware of the fact, agriculture is a business calling for as much foresight, close application to detail and enterprise as any commercial undertaking. But this is no reason why tho rising generation of farmers should he allowed to grow up without an adequate knowledge of the possibilities of their . calling. Still, when the Minister for Agriculture tells us that it is almost impossible for a young man without means to learn to ho a- farmer he raises doubts whether New Zealand may not be tho last corner of the earth to which the teachings of science in relation to farming will penetrate. Agriculture is our greatest industry. It must.always remain so. It will always be the calling which holds out to our people the; surest guarantee of comfort and competence. Yet while we go to enormous expense to educate lawyers and mine managers, medical practitioners and graduates in arts, to give plumbers and carpenters and engineers a technical training, a youth who desires to dovote himself to agriculture has to do so by the hazardous expedient of hiring himself out as a drudge, with the almost certain prospect of being nothing more than a labourer—a mere "hand"—at tho end of a few years.

The whole principle of the thing is utterly wrong-headed amd irritatingly futile.' "We are accustomed, to highflying oratory about the manifold advantages of " the higher education " and " instruction of the hand and oye " and those other phases of national obligation for which euphemism is so easy, but until EometMng radical is done to reclaim our education system from the reproach that beyond giving minor object-lessons in gardening it does nothing for tie greatest of our industries, that system will be entitled to only a very qualified respect. Is there any excuse to be made for a country in which no training worthy of the nam© can be obtained in the industry it depends almost wiholly upon? If there is we would like to hear of it. If there is not, the Government should develop its scheme for establishing a school at Ruakura into somethiivt that would be worth acceptance. Th.ve is no more attractive field for quackery than education, we know, but when, after all these years, we find agriculture practically left outside the scheme of training, it seems to us that the faddists who have given us this result should be called off to make room for more practical