By C. G. T. MORISON, M.A., President of the Agriculture Section.

(Before the British Association for the Advancement of Science.)

When the Council of this Association did me the honour to invite me to become the President of the Agricultural Section for this year, I was filled with some consternation and alarm, as I recalled the long line of distinguished men who have filled this position in previous years and the high standard and excellence of their addresses. One of the difficulties that I felt most strongly was that, like many of my predecessors, I was originally a chemist who had fallen under the spell of agriculture,

and whose fancy had led him, in the intervals of an otherwise busy life, to work at problems of the soil. Now, engrossing as those problems are, and fundamentally important to the business of agriculture as the results of such investigations can be, I observe that no one, at any rate in the last ten years, who has been President of this section has been brave enough to discuss them in his Presidential Address. The reason of this is perhaps not far to seek. There was a period in the history of agricultural science when chemistry seemed to offer all that was needed for a successful soil study, and when the chemists of the time appeared as the magicians of the piece, at the touch of whose magic wand all secrets were laid bare. Then with increasing knowledge, my colleagues fell under a cloud and a host of other scientists began each to play his part, and to add each his fragment to our simple theme, until, at the beginning of this century, there was collected so vast a body of data about the soils of the world that any orderly thinking about the subject became almost impossible. Order is, however, coming again, and coming once more at the hands of chemists, and before many years are past, perhaps one of my successors may be bold enough to try to present our knowledge of soil conditions to this audience in a suitable form. It is a task, however, for the future and not for to-day. What then was there left about which a soil chemist might venture to speak? It has been my fortune to spend most of my life at one of the old Universities, where, like many people at Oxford, much of my time and energy has been devoted to teaching, and it is because of the experience that I have had in teaching agricultural subjects and in organising agricultural curricula, and of my great interest and belief in agricultural education, that I venture to make it the subject of my address to-day.

It is not so very long ago that research and education in agriculture began to be seriously developed in this country, first, on a physical basis which is, and must remain, fundamental, dealing with the technique of manufacture and with the elimination of waste in the manufacturing process; second, from the business side, so that the producer may have his business carried out successfully and at a profit. From the point of view of vocational training these two aspects are so closely interwoven that any attempt to magnify one at the expense of the other can only lead to disaster, whereas from the purely educational point

of view the two are quite distinct, and are better treated as stages in development, leading up gradually from the purely scientific subject of the growth of the plant and animal, through the application of this science to practical requirements, to the business organisation of the fundamental producing units.

The objects of vocational education in Agriculture have been recently described by Sir Daniel Hall, and further by Mr. Dale in his paper to this section last year, and may be summarised as improvement of farming technique by making the results of recent research more readily and more rapidly available, and improvement in business management resulting from more intimate knowledge of the economic details of the particular farming business and wider acquaintance with the economic position of the whole industry.

The development of technical education in this country has had for one of its aims the improvement of farming methods by creating a class of farmers who have had the benefit of a training at either a Farm Institute, an Agricultural College, or a University, according as he could spare time and money to pursue his studies. At the conclusion of these studies the presump-tion is that he will spread the light of his knowledge and his skill in his neighbourhood and, by the strong force of his example, cause an improvement in the methods of his neighbours. Thus would the country benefit from the greater yields per acre which would be grown, and the farmers themselves from their more satisfactory economic position.

Unfortunately for the industry things do not work out quite so simply. The number of those who, on leaving the Universities and Colleges, engage in farming and set the shining example I have mentioned are none too many, and the effect in this way upon farming practice has not been as great as might have been expected. The great landlords, too, with certain notable exceptions, have hardly lived up to their eighteenth-century tradition in taking the place which is theirs naturally as leaders of the countryside in agricultural and farming affairs. Even the country clergy, who seem in the eighteenth century to have been knowledgeable in these matters, have apparently lost heart. Thus it appears that, despite all the money which is annually spent on higher education, there is not going forth into the countryside from

our Universities and Colleges that stream of well-informed and well-educated young men and young women whose influence would so greatly modify farming practice up and down the land. For let us be quite candid about the situation: British farming at its best as it is carried out by certain individuals and in certain districts-and that there is a greater concentration of these individuals in some districts no one will deny is second to none all the world over. There are, however, a large number of farmers whose technique is poor, whose methods are slovenly, and whose general standard falls very far below that of the best. I cannot but believe that even in the pre sent difficult and harassing economic situation their position would be better were their standards somewhat higher, and their aim to increase rather than decrease their output.

The improvement in farming technique has been sought by the methods described by Mr. Dale, which consist in affording in all parts of the country access to three types of education, provided by means of University departments and Colleges, by Farm Institutes, and by local classes and lectures. Each of these types has a separate function in the whole scheme and, while the part played by local classes and by the Farm Institutes seems clear enough, the policy of the Colleges and the Universities is often rather vague and indefinite. If it is possible to make a criticism against these bodies in the last years it is this, that, while they one and all would, I imagine, claim that their function was to train their students in the technique of the agricultural business, so that as managers and occupiers of land, land agents, teachers, experts or officials, they could raise the standard and status of the industry, they appear to think that the different educational requirements of these various classes can be obtained under the same general scheme of instruction. There are, of course, great difficulties in the way of any one of these institutes definitely adopting a course designed to give the maximum benefit to any one of those classes which I have enumerated, but I think that in some cases at any rate the beaten track has been preferred, and the old methods have been considered good enough to suit conditions that have largely altered. I am donvinced that only by taking careful stock of the whole situation, and by being perfectly clear about the result aimed at, can the money which is to-day expended

upon agricultural education have the desired effect.

It was pointed out by Mr. Dale in the paper already referred to that, if the case of wage-earners be excluded, the facilities in Universities, Colleges, and Farm Institutes were equal to the demands made, but that if these demands were as great as they should be, then the existing institutions would be overwhelmed. According to Mr. Dale's figures, the Colleges are only twothirds full, and of this number only onethird are the sons and daughters of farmers. Something is wrong here, and until this is put right, excellent as is the work done by these institutions, it has not the effect upon industry in this country which its excellence deserves. No doubt a fairly large proportion of these students learning agriculture will have some influence upon the industry in the future, but it is within my own knowledge that there a considerable number of agricultural students in a University such as Oxford whose connection with agriculture subsequent to their leaving the University is very slight. I do not propose to traverse here already well-trodden ground in attempting to explain why there is not a greater demand for technical training in times of stress like the present. I believe that, while many factors contribute, it is mainly an economic question, and that the ordinary tenant-farmer is to-day in a position in which he can ill afford to spend money, even were he sufficiently farseeing to realise the ultimate benefit that would result. Such then is the main direction in which it appears to me that improvement in higher education is required, and this improvement must be achieved by a greater vision and clearer purpose on the part of these institutions, and by a greater apppreciation on the part of those whom they are designed to serve.

So far this scheme of vocational training only the actual farmers has been considered; nothing has been done to meet the needs of the manual labourer, and not very much to give the landlord a training suitable to his position as one of the partners in the industry.

The case of the manual worker is one of most urgent need; little or nothing is done to give him or her any kind of vocational training, and this in spite of the fact that the whole position of the industry at the present time, more than ever before, depends upon the efficiency of the labour unit. This aspect of agricultural education was

dealt with by Mr. Duncan both at the Oxford Meeting and subsequently in an article contributed to the Scottish Journal of Agriculture, and it appears from this that no educational effort is being made to make the manual worker more efficient or to enable him to increase the value of his output. Mr. Orwin has recently stated that the lad who remains on farm work definitely occupies a lower social position than those of his own age and district who seek the more highly remunerated work that can be obtained in the towns. Wireless and the motor-'bus have done much to enliven rural conditions, but they really only succeed in emphasising the superficial undesirability of country life; country wages, and a country cutlock. As Mr. Duncan has pointed out, until wages are higher, and until the skill of the worker enables him to earn those higher wages, agriculture will always be left with the more inefficient and the less active-minded of the countryside. The difficulties in the way of rendering labour more efficient are very great; the tasks to be carried out are so various, the possibilities of the use of machinery so limited, and the effective overseeing, which is responsible for much of the success in other industries, is almost impossible. The comparative failure of agricultural trade unions means that there is not the continual pressure for improvement that there is elsewhere. If labour became more efficient the result would be either that the same amount of work could be done in the same time by a smaller number of men, or a larger amount of work done in the same time by the same or a smaller number of

men.

The

Now extensive agriculture in the newer countries is characterised by a large production per man engaged in the work, while in more intensive agriculture in the more settled countries a lower production per man is obtained, although the production per acre may be more than double. urgent practical problem is to increase production per man while at the same time maintaining or increasing production per acre. All this implies technical skill of no mean order on the part not only of the manager but also of the manual worker, and to my mind it requires something more, something which makes the acquiring of technical skill a comparatively easy matter, and that something consists in a good general and continued cultural education. There is no doubt, I think, that education, cultural education apart from

280

vocational training, is held in greater respects in all those parts of the British Isles which are not English. It is certainly true of Ireland and of Scotland, and, I understand, of Wales. England alone stands unconvinced. It is of course difficult to measure the extent to which general educa tion contributes to mental alertness in later years, but there is often among farmers, and among the rural population generally, a certain lack of elasticity, a certain dullness of outlook, which will have to disappear if agriculture is to take its rightful place among the other great industries of the country. The skilled manager, the skilled man, the educated manager, the educated man-if it pays to employ these, and it does appear to do in other industries, then much more should be remunerative in agriculture, where the calls on the management are so multifarious, the task so difficult, and the skill demanded of the manual worker so very varied.

Let us now examine how a development of this kind affects the three partners in we know it the agricultural business as to-day-the landlord, the farmer, and the manual worker.

(To be Continued Next Week.)

SCIENTIFIC TREATMENT OF COAL. IMPORTANT NEW CONTRACT.

By A WELL-KNOWN ENGINEER.

It is now becoming obvious beyond doubt, even to the non-technical man, that scientific methods will have to be adopted in Great Britain in connection with coal. The trend of events is illustrated in significant fashion by an agreement that has just been signed in the United States between the Public Service Electric and Gas Co., of New Jersey, and International Combustion Engineering Corporation, New York, to put down a low temperature carbonisation plant which will be much the largest in the world. This is to be commenced at once and consists of 8 "K.S.G." (KohlenscheidungsGesellschaft) process retorts each with throughput of 80 tons of coal per day, that is 640 tons for the complete installation. include The output will 2,500,000 3,000,000 cubic feet of very rich gas per day, 800 B.Th.U. per cubic foot, and is to be mixed with carburetted water gas to bring up the total to 4,000,000 cubic feet of towns gas, 530 B.Th. U. per cubic foot, while there

a

to

is also to be provided a very large carburetted water gas plant, using raw coal, capable of giving in an emergency 3,000,000 cubic feet of gas per day.

the The whole equipment is to be on Iatest principles, and the 8 retorts will also turn out 450 tons of smokeless fuel a day (10-12 per cent. volatile matter) and 14,000 gallons of low temperature oils, that is just over 20 gallons per ton, of which about 50 per cent. is available for Diesel engines.

66

99

the

The Public Service Electric and Gas Co., is one of the largest firms in the United States and already has in operation gas on the average plants turning out 80,000,000 cubic feet of gas a day with a maximum capacity of 110,000,000 cubic feet. is a well-known proAlso, the K.S.G. cess of low temperature carbonisation controlled by the International Combustion Engineering Corporation, of "Lopulco " pulverised fuel fame, who also own "McEwen-Runge" process of the low temperature carbonisation of pulverised coal, the invention of McEwen, of London. In the "K.S.G." process, long horizontal, rotary cylinderical retorts of steel plate are used, externally heated to a maximum temperature of about 950° F. (510° C.), and a years plant has been operated for several the Matthias Stinnes I/II Colliery, Karnap, near Essen. The process is handled in Great Britain, along with the " McEwen-Runge process, by Coal Oil Extraction, Ltd., an associated company, of which S. McEwen, of London, is managing director, and having also on its board directors of International Combustion Ltd., and Messrs. Brunner Mond and Co., Ltd.

66

at

THE NERNST EQUATION II: THE
IONISATION OF SODIUM ACETATE.
By MARTIN MEYER.
(Brooklyn Laboratories, The College of
New York.)

It can easily be shown that the concentration of hydroxyl or hydrogen ion in a solution of a weak base or acid which has been exactly half neutralised by a strong acid or base should be numerically equal to the ionisation constant of the substance. This is obviously true in this simple form, only of a 1: 1 acid or base. Since the salt formed is not completel yionised this relationship will even then be only approxi

99

ionisation obtained in this way plotted against the concentration of the solutions yield a very interesting curve. This gives a very simple method of measuring the degree of ionisation of the salts of weak acids or bases for which the ionisation constant is known with high precision. It is also evident that what is really being measured is the activity coefficient, and this is strongly emphasised in the case of more concentrated solutions. It is further evident from these experiments that the value of the concentration of hydrogen ion obtained from the Nernst Equation is too highly in error in solutions stronger than 0.1 normal for many of the uses to which it is put. The writer has also established this fact in other unpublished work.