Free Distribution Of Seeds By The Government

There is a groivinfi agitatiou agaínst what is known as the free distribution ofseeds by the government. Thesystein is toowell known to the majority of our readers to need any explanation ; but for the benefit of city residents it may be saiil tliat the government bas been in the habit of giving out annually to congressmen for distribution atnong their constituents about $140,000. worth of seeds. This lias been done with the expressed object of securing reporta i'rom the users as tothe results obtained. Whatever theoretical advantage there inauy have been in the proposal, it has failed utterly to produce any practical results, and according to all reporte the experiment has degenerated into a positive f race. ïhe United States Agricultural Department, in its report on this subject, says: "While one purpose of the law was to secure reports from the receiyers as to the results of actual experiment, the reports actually received did not amount to one-hundredth of 1 per cent of the persons supplied. A careful review of the department reports, especial[y those of the chiefs of the seed división during the past decade, in which over 11, 000,000 was expended for f ree seec distribution, fails to reveal a single in stance of benefit to agriculture attribu table to this distribution." In the face of this official statement, one asks witl no small amount of bewilderment, whj did the last agricultural bill, which recently passed both houses of coiigress, contain an appropriation of $150,000 for carrying on this palpable folly ? If congressmen can see any sound ethical or political reasons for a paternal distribu, tion of seeds, why should they stop just ïere? Wliy not appropriate another S150.000 for spades, plows and fertilzers? As a matter of fact, the system s wrong in principie as well a failure n practice, and it is to be hoped that