THE HUSBANDMAN
The scientific farmer is dependent
upon the world economy. He is the local representative
of agriculture, whose organization is national and
even international. He raises cotton in Georgia,
but he “makes milk” in Orange County,
New York, because the market and the soil and the climate
and other conditions require of him this crop.
He is dependent upon the college of
agriculture for the methods by which he can survive
as a farmer. Tradition, which dominated the agriculture
of a former period, is a disappearing factor in husbandry
of the soil. The changes in market conditions
are such as to impoverish the farmer who learns only
from the past. Tradition could teach the farmer
how to raise the raw materials, under the old economy,
in which the farmhouse and community were sufficient
unto themselves. But in a time when the wool
of the sheep in Australia goes halfway round the world
in its passage from the back of a sheep to the back
of a man, the sheep farmer becomes dependent upon
the scientist. He cannot afford to raise sheep
unless the scientific man assures him that in the production
of wool his land has its highest utility. “The
American farm land is passing into the hands of those
who will use it to the highest advantage."
The dependence of the scientific farmer
or husbandman upon the world market and upon the scientists
who are studying agriculture enlarges the circle of
his life from the rural household to the rural community.
In the rural community agriculture can be taught;
in the household it cannot. The only teaching
of the household is tradition; the teaching of the
community is in terms of science. The country
school and the country church take a greater place
as community institutions just so soon as the farmer
passes out of the period of exploitation into that
of scientific husbandry.
The husbandman is the economist in
agriculture. He is to the farm what the husband
was to the household in old times. One is tempted
to say also that the husbandman is he who marries
the land. American farm land has suffered dishonor
and degradation, but it has known all too little the
affection which could be figuratively expressed in
marriage. The Bible speaks of “marrying
the land.” “Thy land shall be
called Beulah for thy land shall be married.”
Side by side in this country we have the lands which
have been dishonored, degraded, abandoned, dissolute,
and the lands husbanded, fertilized, enriched and
made beautiful.
The husbandman or rural economist
cares more for qualities than for quantity. He
works not merely for intensive cultivation of the soil,
but also for the preservation of the soil and use
of it in its own terms, at its highest values.
The principle at work is not the increase
in the farmer’s material gains or possessions.
The husbandry of the soil is not a mere increase in
market values. It is a deeper and more ethical
welfare than that which can be put in the bank.
“Agriculture is a religious occupation.”
When it sustains a permanent population and extends
from generation to generation the same experiences,
agriculture is productive in the highest degree of
moral and religious values. In the words of Director
L. H. Bailey, of Cornell, “The land is holy.”
This is especially true at the present
time, when the land is limited in amount. Already
the whole nation is dependent upon the farmer in the
degree intimated by the statement of Dean Bailey.
“The census of 1900 showed approximately one-third
of our people on farms or closely connected with farms,
as against something like nine-tenths, a hundred years
previous. It is doubtful whether we have struck
bottom, although the rural exodus may have gone too
far in some regions, and we may not permanently strike
bottom for sometime to come."
The service of the few to the many,
therefore, is the present status of the husbandman.
The very fact that one-third of the people must feed
all the people imposes religious and ethical conditions
upon the farmer. The dependence of the greater
number for their welfare upon those who are to till
the soil brings that obligation, which the farmer is
well constituted to bear and to which his serious
spirit gives response.
This means that with the growing consciousness
of the need of scientific agriculture there will arise,
indeed is now arising, a new ethical and religious
feeling among country people. The church which
is made up of scientific farmers is a new type of
church.
A notable testimony to the influence
of the church in developing husbandry is by Sir Horace
Plunkett, who testifies to the religious influence
that led to the agrarian revolution in Denmark.
“My friends and I have been
deeply impressed by the educational experience of
Denmark, where the people, who are as much dependent
on agriculture as are the Irish, have brought it by
means of organization to a more genuine success than
it has attained anywhere else in Europe. Yet
an inquirer will at once discover that it is to the
‘High School’ founded by Bishop Grundtvig,
and not to the agricultural schools, which are also
excellent, that the extraordinary national progress
is mainly due. A friend of mine who was studying
the Danish system of state aid to agriculture, found
this to be the opinion of the Danes of all classes,
and was astounded at the achievements of the associations
of farmers not only in the manufacture of butter,
but in a far more difficult undertaking, the manufacture
of bacon in large factories equipped with all the
most modern machinery and appliances which science
had devised for the production of the finished article.
He at first concluded that this success in a highly
technical industry by bodies of farmers indicated
a very perfect system of technical education.
But he soon found another cause. As one of the
leading educators and agriculturists of the country
put it to him: ’It’s not technical
instruction, it’s the humanities.’
I would like to add that it is also, if I may coin
a term, the ‘nationalities,’ for nothing
is more evident to the student of Danish education
or, I might add, of the excellent system of the Christian
Brothers in Ireland, than that one of the secrets of
their success is to be found in their national basis
and their foundation upon the history and literature
of the country.”
Every observer of these Danish Folk
High Schools testifies to their religious enthusiasm,
their patriotism and above all to the songs with which
their lecture hours are begun and ended. A graduate
of these schools living for years in America, the
mother of children then entering college, said, “Those
songs helped me over the hardest period of my life.
I can always sing myself happy with them.”
The spirit which pervades the schools was influential
in Danish agriculture, as expressed in the title of
Grundtvig’s best known hymn, “The Country
Church Bells.” Under such an influence as
this has the agricultural life of Denmark taken the
lead over its urban and manufacturing life.
The modifying influence of husbandry
upon the church and its teaching is illustrated in
the following incident. A farmer in Missouri had
a good stand of corn which promised all through the
summer to produce an excellent crop. Abundance
of sun and rain favored the farmer’s hope that
his returns would be large, but in the fall the crop
proved a failure. The farmer at once cast about
for the cause of this disappointment. He had
his soil analyzed by a scientist and discovered that
it was deficient in nitrogen. The next year he
devoted to supplying this lack in the soil and in
the year following had an abundant return in corn.
“Now that experience turned me away,” said
he, “from the country church, because the teaching
of the country church as I had been accustomed to
it was out of harmony with the study of the situation
and the conquest over nature. I had been taught
in the country church to surrender under such conditions
to the will of Providence.” The country
church of the husbandman must therefore be a church
in harmony with the tillage of the soil by science.
Like the farm households about it, the church will
possess a large wealth of tradition, but the church
of the scientific farmer must be open to the teachings
of science and must be responsive, intelligent and
alert in the intellectual leadership of the people.
A church of this sort is at West Nottingham,
Maryland. The minister Rev. Samuel Polk, had
been discouraged by the inattention of his people to
his message. He had come to feel that this is
an unbelieving age and had surrendered himself to
the steadfast performance of his duties, the preaching
of the truth faithfully and the ministry to his people
so far as they would receive it. In addition
he had the task of tilling forty acres of land which
belongs to the church. This he was doing faithfully,
but without much intelligent interest.
An address on the country church in
an agricultural college sent him home with new ideas.
He saw that his life as a farmer and as a preacher
had to be made one. He determined to preach to
farmers and to till his land as an example of Christian
husbandry. He began as a scholar by studying
the scientific use of his land. He found at once
that the farmers about him were forced to study the
tillage of their soil, because it had been exhausted
of fertility by methods of farming no longer profitable.
In the first year the preacher raised, by means of
a dust mulch through a dry summer, a crop of one hundred
and seventy-five bushels of potatoes. Meantime
his preaching had been enlivened with new illustrations
and he was enabled to enforce, to the amazement of
his hearers, new impressions with old truths.
The Scripture teaching which had become dull and scholastic
became live and modern, as he preached the Old Testament
to a people who were recognizing the sacredness of
land. His audiences began to increase. His
influence on his people very shortly passed bounds
and reserves. When at the end of the season his
potato crop came in, the farmers gave sign of recognizing
his leadership as a farmer and as a preacher.
Within a year this man had taken a place as a first
citizen, which no one else in the community could hold.
Because he was a preacher he could become the leading
authority upon farming and because he must needs be
a farmer he found it possible to preach with greater
acceptance.
This pastor gave up the methods of
bookish preparation for preaching. He preached
as the Old Testament men did, to the occasion and to
the event. He spoke to the community as being
a man himself immersed in the same life as theirs.
On a recent occasion when a woman was very sick in
one of the farm houses and had suffered from the neglect
of her neighbors, his sermon consisted of an appeal
to visit the sick. That afternoon the invalid
was called on by thirty-eight people and sent a message
before night, begging the minister to hold the people
back.
There are a few ministers throughout
the country who are successful farmers. Many
ministers are speculators in farm land. They belong
in the exploiter class. One more instance should
be given of the preacher who promotes agriculture.
In a recent discussion the writer was asked, “Do
you then believe that the minister should attend the
agricultural college,” and he replied, “No.
The agricultural college should be brought to the
country church.”
At Bellona, New York, the ministers
of two churches, Methodist and Presbyterian, united
with their officers in a farmers’ club, to which
others were admitted. This club under the leadership
of Rev. T. Maxwell Morrison, makes the nucleus of
its work the study of the agriculture of the neighborhood
and the improvement of it. Lecturers from Cornell
University are brought throughout the year into the
country community to take up in succession the various
aspects of farming which may be improved. The
market is studied, by chemical analysis the nature
of the soil is determined, and the possibilities of
the community are raised to their highest value by
careful investigation.
This farmers’ club has social
features as well. Other topics besides farming
are occasionally studied but the business of the club
is economic promotion of the well-being of the community.
Incidentally, it has furnished a social center for
the countryside. The churches which have had
to do with it have been enlarged, their membership
extended and even their gifts to foreign missions
have been increased in the period of growth of the
farmers’ club.
The elements of permanent cultivation
of the soil are found in greater numbers among the
Mormons, Scotch Irish Presbyterians, Pennsylvania
Germans, who are the best American agriculturists,
than among the more unstable populations of farmers.
Those elements, however, are, simply speaking, the
following.
A certain austerity of life always
accompanies successful and permanent agriculture.
By this is meant a fixed relation between production
and consumption. Successful tillers of the soil
labor to produce an abundant harvest. They live
at the same time in a meager and sparing manner.
Production is with them raised to its highest power
and consumption is reduced to its lowest. This
means austere living. Such communities are found
among the Scotch Irish farmers. Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania, is peopled with them and their tillage
of the soil has continued through two centuries.
A notable illustration is in Illinois.
The permanence of the conditions of country life in
this community is indicated by the long pastorate of
the minister who has just retired. Coming to the
church at forty-eight years of age, after other men
have ceased from zealous service, he ministered forty-two
years to this parish of farmers, and has recently
retired at the age of ninety, leaving the church in
ideal condition. “The Middle Creek Church
is distinctly a country charge, located in the Southwest
corner of Winnebago Township, of the County of Winnebago.
“The church was organized in
June, 1855, in a stone schoolhouse. The present
house of worship was erected and dedicated in 1861.
Five ministers served the church as supplies until
1865, when the Rev. J. S. Braddock, D. D., became
the pastor and carried on a splendid work for forty-two
years, when he laid down his pastorate in 1907, at
the age of ninety.”
“This community was settled
by homesteaders and pioneers in the early days of
the West. Many of them came from Pennsylvania
and some of them were of Scotch descent. The
history of the community has been but the history
of the development of a fertile Western Prairie country.
It was settled by strong Presbyterian men, and their
descendants are now the backbone of the community.
There has been little change, but steady growth.”
The second element in the community
of husbandmen is mutual support. Professor Gillin
of the University of Iowa has described to me the
community of Dunkers whom he has studied, being
deeply impressed with their communal solidarity.
Whenever a farm is for sale these farmers at the meeting-house
confer and decide at once upon a buyer within their
own religious fellowship. In the week following
the minister or a church member writes back to Pennsylvania
and the correspondence is pressed, until a family
comes out from the older settlements in the Keystone
State to purchase this farm in Iowa and to extend
the colony of his fellow Dunkers. Reference is
made elsewhere to the communal support given to their
own members who suffer economic hardship. The
serious tillage of the soil necessarily involves mutual
support and the husbandman’s life is in his community.
The third factor in communal husbandry
is progress. Everyone testifies to the leadership
of the “best families” in the transformation
of the older modes of the tillage of the soil to the
newer. It is impossible for the scientific agriculturist
to make much improvement upon a country community
until the more progressive spirits and the more open
minds have been enlisted. Thereafter the better
farming problem is solved. There can be no modern
agriculture in a community in which all are equal.
The communities of husbandmen will be as sharply differenced
from one another, so far as I can see, as men are
in the great cities. Leadership is the essential
of progress. Gabriel Tarde has clearly
demonstrated that only those who are at the top of
the social scale can initiate social and economic
enterprises. The cultivation of the soil for
generations to come must be highly progressive.
To recover what we have lost and to restore what has
been wasted will exhaust the resources of science
and will tax the intelligence of the leaders among
husbandmen.
For this reason the ministers, teachers,
and social workers in the country should be not discouraged,
but hopeful, when confronted with rural landlords
and capitalists. The business of the community
leader is to enlist in the common task those persons
whose privileges are superior and inspire them with
a progressive spirit. Without their leadership
the community cannot progress. Without their
privileges, wealth and superior education, no progress
is possible in the country.
If these pages tell the truth, then
agriculture is a mode of life fertile in religious
and ethical values. But it must be husbandry,
not exploitation. Religious farming is a lifelong
agriculture, indeed it involves generations, and its
serious, devoted spirit waits for the reward, which
was planted by the diligent father or grandfather,
to be reaped by the son or grandson. Men will
not so consecrate themselves to their children’s
good without the steadying influence of religion.
So that agriculture and religion are each the cause,
and each the effect, of the other.
If this is true, then the country
church should promote the husbandry of the soil.
The agricultural college should be brought into the
country parish, for the church’s sake.
Indeed the minister would do well if his scholarship
be the learning of the husbandman. No other science
has such religious values. No other books have
such immediate relation to the well-being of the people.
The minister is not ashamed to teach Greek, or Latin, dead
languages. Why should he think it beneath him
“to teach the farmer how to farm,” provided
he can teach the farmer anything? If he be a
true scholar, the farmer, who is a practical man, needs
his learned co-operation in the most religious of
occupations, that the land may be holy.