Page:Everywoman's World, Volume 7, Number 7.djvu/20

 PAGE 18

''J. W. Hyatt, Picton, Ont. Note the strong nose and chin, and the width of the head at the ears, all indications of physical strength, energy, and endurance. The forehead, prominent at the base, and the rather deep-set eyes show the keen observer who says little.''

''P. O. Vansickle; a graduate of the Ontario Agricultural College. Mr. Vansickle has made a success of Dairy Farming. The dark hair, forehead, full back head and general refinement form a splendid example of the farmer who specilizes in one branch of farming.''

''The late Hon. J. S. Duff, an excellent type of farmer. Note the strong nose, long head, and especially the fullnes behind the ears; indicating love of animals. The hifh forehead shows tact, sympathy, and generosity.''

''This a composite picture mad from the photgfraphs of four very succesful farmers. We intented to secure a picture of the ideal farmer, but what we did get is a picture of a succesful business man.''

''E. C. Drury is the dark type: note the width between the ears showing energy and love of the soil; width of temples give inventive ability. Fullnes and breadth at lower part of the forehead indicates a philsophical bent of mind.''

T no time in the history of the world has such an impetus been given to the "Back-to-the-land" movement—an impetus so great, so urgent, that we have entirely lost sight of the old cry in the vital necessity, the world-wide need of increased production.

"Back-to-the-land" once meant back to the farms that are idle, or run down and going to waste for want of sufficient workers but this, needful as it was, is swallowed up in the absolute necessity for more and yet more production without which the Empire must suffer hunger and famine: increased loss of men and a lengthened war followed by famine more terrible than the War itself.

The stream that has for years been from the farm to the city must now turn backward and carry its thousands of workers to the soil to wrest from it, not a living, but life.

Many causes were, each in part, responsible for the general migration of the farmers' sons and daughters to the town and city, The ambition of the mother was one. How few mothers on the farm really desire, down in their hearts, that their children should stay at home and work as they and their fathers have? Is it not true that when the boy shows signs of unusual ability the mother hopes and works that he may have advantages, and do better than his father did? A mother sees her children as she wants them to be, not as they are, and the number who give promise of being able to "do something" is large. The three dollars a week that Tommy earns clerking look big—they are real, hard dollars that can be converted into store clothes and amusement. Dollars are tangible things, their value is easily seen; but wi the farm and the children lose is not so easily calculated and the day of reckoning is put off.

Perhaps Thomas is sent to college; Thomas is clever and one of the professions is none too good for him. But that a first-class farmer is spoilt in the making of a tenth-rate doctor or lawyer never dawns on his fond mother's mind, although Thomas may have an inkling that such is the case. The novelty of the different life appeals to him and he hates to disappoint the "Mater"—he once said "Ma." The suspicion that he is a misfit is pressed home to him in later years when he ekes out a bare living as do so many professional men.

HE first colleges and universities were founded with the simple intention of preparing men for the professions, for the ministry, for medicine, and for law; and our whole educational system was built up to prepare boys for the college and the university. Consequently the whole tendency of education was to take the sons of ambitious mothers, the very best product of the farm, and direct them into professional life.

It was natural, therefore, that the exodus should have been viewed with alarm, and as a counteraction to the movement from the land, the agricultural college was established. At first it was regarded with suspicion by practical, hard-headed farmers. Conservative people are always shy of new ideas and institutions, and from the very nature of his work the farmer is compelled to be conservative and to adopt new ideas slowly. He cannot afford to make mistakes or to experiment rashly.

Then, too, many of the earlier students at the Agricultural Colleges felt that their education placed them above the need to do the rough work of the farm, they thought themselves prepared to teach agriculture, but far too educated to practise it.

By degrees, however, the Agricultural College came to be an accepted institution. The students soon discovered that the best place in the world to apply scientific knowledge of agriculture is on the farm, and, with the development of the Continuation Schools in the rural districts came the opportunity for the boys trained in the Agricultural Colleges to exercise their attainments, in the spread of modern ideas and methods.

CHOOLS and colleges were not all to blame, however, for taking boys from the farms. There were other conditions.

One, a cause which, to my mind, has been overrated, was the introduction of machinery. While modern equipment tended to reduce the number of people on the farms, it has been cause for wonder that it has not enabled a family to make as good a living from fifty acres as the family could formerly make from one hundred acres. This, coupled with closer and better markets, has tended to decrease the number of people gaining a livelihood from the farms, for when we come near to the borders of the great cities, instead of a remarkably thrifty and prosperous farm population, such as one should expect in proximity to a splendid home market, we find hundreds and, in fact, thousands of acres lying idle. and growing weed-seed to hamper the efforts of farmers farther away, as though, in some strange way, the presence of the city cast a blight on the surrounding country.

Many farmers, finding that the land they purchased ten years ago had doubled in value, apart from the value of any improvements they have made on it, feel that the right place to put their savings is in the purchase of more land, with the result that they came to measure their prosperity by the number of acres owned rather than by the amount of crops raised or the number of hands profitably employed. This leads to extensive rather than intensive cultivation and a thinning out of the rural population making still more difficult of solution the problems of education and social life, the lack of which have been a serious obstacle to happy country living.

Further, the amount of capital needed for the purchase of land to start the farmer's son on a farm of his own is twice or more than twice what it was ten or twenty years ago. As a consequence, the young man is forced either to go to the far borders of civilization where free or cheap land is still available, and where he must face the hardships of the ploncer, or become the resident of some city or town.

The higher price of land does not increase the value of crops; it does not enable the farmer to pay higher wages to his help; but it does increase the capital involved in his business, and increases the opportunities for those who have acquired large holdings to retire and lease or sell their holdings, thus placing on the shoulders of others the financial burdens involved in the increased land price. It encourages the holding of idle land. So long as taxes penalize farm buildings and improvements, and enable a man to hold unused or half-used land with little or no taxes, just so long will this tendency continue to force the boys away from the farms; increase the amount of unused or half-used farm land, promote extensive rather than intensive farming, increase the proportion of tenant farmers, and reduce the rural population and intensify all the social problems that involve.

ET, let it not be forgotten, that if economic forces are working to make farm life difficult, the real rewards of labour on the farm can never be far below the rewards of equal labour in the cities.

IF the farmer work longer hours than the city man, the work of the city man is far less varied. If the farmer must use his muscles, fresh air and muscular exercise are far better for the health than confinement in shop, factory, or office. If the farmer sees fewer real dollars in year, his land produces most of the necessities of life which in the city cost more dollars in a year than many a farmer really needs. If the city man can enjoy more opportunities for recreation and education, the farmer enjoys a far greater degree of independence, and the long winter evenings afford him, too, an opportunity of the improvement of his mind.

If the young man in the city has before him many opportunities for advancement, that advancement comes only to the man who has the vision to see his opportunities and the industry to improve them, while in the country every acre, every variety of soil and plant and animal is an opportunity, and no man yet has exhausted the productive possibilities of a single acre.

The man who would advance in the city must be a student, a constant student of the work in which he is eugaged, and likewise to the moan, who loves his work on the farm and who studies the science behind his work and applies his knowledge with judgment and industry, the opportunites for independence and comfort, and ever for compatative wealth are as greatv as in the city. With proper training, with the aid of machinery and scientific methods, the farmer can cut down his working hours, increase his profits, and make the onditions of living as good, or better, than those of the city.

N the matter of education, the farm boy is, usually, thought to be at a disadvantage, for he can go to school for a limited time only, because of distance, weather, and work. But the coming remedies for this are the consolidated schools and improved methods of transportation.

eside school learning, there is an education which the boy on the farm gets, of far more value than anything he can learn from books—a foundation knowledge which makes more available and useful all that he learns in later life. The boy on the farm does not meet so many people as the city boy meets but he sees more of the people he does know and comes to know them better.

The greatest asset any man can have in the business world is an understanding of people, and it is because of his early opportunities that the boy from the farm so often excels in the world of business.

Another opportunity the farm boy has is to observe animals.

(Continued on page 36)

''This boy is neat, orderly, practical, and shows first-class ability to handle figures and money, but does not love hard work. He will make a better office man than former.''

''J. M. Gardhouse, Weston, Ont., a suceessful cattle breeder. Note the wide head, prominent features, long upper lip. A good example of the man who will succeed in trading as well as in raising cattle.''

Excellent type for farm—low broad forehead, wide head at the ears, long upper lip—should be especially successful in grain growing.

''A splendid type for farming; energetic, thorough, practical, and with a love for getting at the cause of things. He would make a really scientific farmer.''

''M. L. Haley; dexterous, ingeniou, with love of machinery; kindness and generosity. A good type for farming; dark enough to sland any amount of sunshine and to spend his life in one place.''

''If this boy grew on the farm, he would slay there. He has energy and self-reliance, but he would stickto the old methods and be rather slow in adopting new ideas.''